n13.gif (5952 bytes)

[Start Page] [facts and things that arise archives] [facts after gwb election but before 9-11-01] [facts before gwb election after 5-18-00] [wasted vote?]
[facts after 9-11 thru 2002]


Most current facts and things that arise (since 2003)

January 22, 2008

Ok, alright, we now have some information on the fast moving Democratic and Republican primaries as things begin to sort out.  Surprisingly, Sen. Thompson who had everything going for him to win the Republican nomination, chose to drag his feet and gave up what was his to lose.  At the same time, others have left including Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter.  We now are left with Sen. John McCain, Gov. Mike Huckabee, Gov. Mitt Romney, Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Rep. Ron Paul, and Ambassador Alan Keyes.

It is disgusting watching FoxNews (supposedly fair and balanced) and others falling all over themselves to ignore Ron Paul.  The one candidate gaining more contributors and took in $1.8 million yesterday.  The same candidate who had nearly twice the number of votes than Giuliani and Thompson combined.  Yet, the press ignores the most incredible rise in popularity than we have seen in years.  Ron Paul understands limited government and constitutional limitation. 

FoxNews is propping up Giuliani even though he is in terrible shape.  If they gave equal time to Paul who is way ahead of Giuliani, the foundations of the Washington powerbrokers and the press would crumble.  And they know that.  They are shameful.

Alan Keyes is also ignored but perhaps this reflects poor planning or unrelenting, recurring marginalization by those who control the Republican party and the press.  He stands alone understanding the importance of our nation's morality and the scourge and destruction of our nation through abortion.    


June 6, 2007

A short note.  This site will be updated with more frequency as the 2008 elections get closer.  There simply has not been sufficient reason to deal with the 2008 presidential election as the probable Republican nominee, Fred Thompson, has not even officially entered the race.  This may also be true of the Democrats, perhaps Al Gore will run.  Currently, we have been abandoned by both parties.  Immigration 'reform' is a great example of the people lacking representation.  There is a simple answer, enforce the law against employers who hire illegals and they will stop that practice.  The illegal aliens will go home and perhaps reform their corrupt government.

It is wonderful to see what may be the dawn of a revival in our floundering nation.  Dr. John MacArthur's recent message "When God Abandons a Nation" (http://www.lightsource.com/ministry/grace_to_you/20070527/) is a must

Dr. Dobson's Focus on the Family has picked it up as well.  We must turn back.  MacArthur through the Holy Spirit is powerful in this message.  Additionally, there is a return to a biblical form of evangelizing that is getting some exposure.  Consider what is proposed by this ministry-  The Way of the Master (http://www.wayofthemaster.com)

Banner 453 x 72a

Is it bleak out there?  Yes.  Is there hope?  Absolutely.  Perhaps more than in a long time.  We must repent, pray and seek God's guidance.  Time is extremely short. 

October 8, 2006

Addendum on school shootings:

As much as the Amish are a great example of Christian love, consider the other side of the same coin that is neglected by the pulpits today.

Matthew 6: 14  For if you  forgive  men when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also  forgive  you.  15  But if you do not  forgive  men their sins, your Father will not  forgive  your sins. 

The Amish did right.  They are awesome examples of Christian forgiveness.  They were right to forgive.  Yet, our purpose is to portray God to others in order to save some and disciple followers.  In the above scripture, it makes it clear that the Amish, by forgiving the scum bag that did that, will also be forgiven by Almighty God. 

How many will believe that the man is now forgiven and therefore may be in heaven?  In all their faults, the Pharisees did get a few things right.  This is one example. 

Mark 2:7  "Why does this fellow talk like that? He's blaspheming! Who can  forgive  sins but God alone?"  8  Immediately Jesus knew in his spirit that this was what they were thinking in their hearts, and he said to them, "Why are you thinking these things?  9  Which is easier: to say to the paralytic, `Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, `Get up, take your mat and walk'?  10  But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to  forgive  sins . . . ." He said to the paralytic, 

Only God can give the ultimate forgiveness and determine the man's place after life.   Spoken as to how we can affect others around us through love, there must be another component.

We must warn of hell.  The man is in hell.  He wrote notes discussing his hatred, his hatred of God, and his last act was of incredible evil.  Was this brought up in many pulpits after this deviant, hateful action?  No.  What about copy-cats who are contemplating similar deeds?  Are they not missing the eternal picture of damnation for such an act?  Have we instilled an appropriate fear of God?  Who lovingly and unwaveringly warned them that forever they will be in torment?   No one. 

Indeed, we comfortably sit when we should not be comfortable.  We have no understanding of the true God and therefore many will be condemned.  Copy cats have no concern.  Why?  Pulpits are silent regarding the truth.  Some may even think this twisted man can be forgiven as he died announcing his hatred for God, yet not even the Amish are righteous enough to forgive such unrepentant evil.

Although I am the last one capable of deciding who should be in heaven or not, according to the scriptures, this guy is in hell.  When we leave that out, we cause others to be emboldened to perpetrate further evil.  We do not salt the population, we sugar coat the Gospel. 

Yet, more school shootings will happen until individuals realize the nature of hell and God's righteous wrath.  The pulpits therefore, by ignoring this truth of great significance, actually bring on more school shootings that are in fact, judgment on our nation, judgment on our churches as our own children are at risk and evil triumphs for a period.  The Church's failure is therefore causing judgment on our nation! 

The Pope and others have trouble saying that Christ is the only way.  As much as they say it, Hindus, Muslims, etc., are not going to heaven.  If you want to lift up love, you point out that people are perishing and warn of the danger ahead, even at the risk of being unpopular or classified as hateful.  Remember that greater love has no man but to give his life for his brother.  That means even if it is unpopular and offensive to the brother.  The only true love is with truth.  The whole truth.

Just trying a little balance.  We need it.  May God direct us.



October 3, 2006

Pastors.  Are you shocked by the evil all around us?  The great evil portrayed by the scum bag who killed the Amish girls?  What a coward.  What a loser.  He will spend forever in torment in hell.  Can  you see that even you will answer to God for the coward's horrible actions. 

Could you have prevented this?  Believe it or not, quite possibly.  Pastors could have been teaching the fear of God and the truth of eternity in hell for those not trusting Christ.  Not all but some would respond to such a message.  The message that God will be angry with people who hate His righteous laws and serve themselves.  God will avenge the evil.  He has guaranteed this in the scriptures with the meting out of true justice in our afterlife.

Pastors have chosen to ignore this part of the scripture to emphasize the love of God.  Love is preeminent yet in our setting, out of balance.  There are a myriad of definitions of love and this term means too many different things in our society for us to comprehend even a part of His love for us. 

Yet we have forgotten that the fear of God will keep us from sinning.  That hell is real and many are going there.  That without this scriptural teaching we will be further judged by despicable sorts like the worst sort of person such as a cowardly school shooter, picking on little kids and pretending to be a tough guy when he is nothing more than a mealy mouthed insect.  Thank God for His righteous judgment to come. 

The Amish speak of forgiveness to this man.  This is excellence in Christian charity and they will avoid self-destructive growing hatred and bitterness with time.  Yet, God will call for justice. 

Christians are to blame for failing to warn child predators they are going to hell.  Christians are to blame for failing to warn each of us we are going to hell, unless we repent.  Hell forever, without end.  But, no, without this teaching people will continue to be copy cats and will foolishly think they are smart, getting a little notoriety.  It is the Christian's fault for not telling them the truth. 

Why are school shootings increasing?  Men's lack of love, lack of the fear of God.  Going out with a bang, but not considering the horrible place they will find themselves.  It is more torment than the momentary pain and suffering of the darling little girls the monster shot like he was some kind of gangster.  What a wimp.  Picking on babies. 

Most people are going to hell.  Are you one who can escape the wrath of God?  Only with Christ, seeking righteousness, and forgiveness can any be saved.  Seek Him and He will save you.


August 28, 2006

"Plan B" they call it. 

It is another betrayal by a supposedly "pro-life" president.  But, then again, he never promised he would protect life exactly in this way as we were led to believe by those who said 'trust us'.  Plan B represents a 'morning after' abortifacient birth control pill.  These were President Bush's words when questioned in a press conference August 21, 2006:

Q Thank you very much. Mr. President, some pro-life groups are worried that your choice of FDA Commissioner will approve over the counter sales of Plan B, a pill that, they say, essentially can cause early-term abortions. Do you stand by this choice, and how do you feel about Plan B in general?

THE PRESIDENT: I believe that Plan B ought to be -- ought to require a prescription for minors, is what I believe. And I support Andy's decision. (Dr. Andrew von Eschenbach, Acting FDA Commissioner)

  The FDA's news release on August 24, 2006 said this:

The agency remains committed to a careful and rigorous scientific process for resolving novel issues in order to fulfill its responsibility to protect the health of all Americans.

von Eschenbach's reasoning claims that the age of majority is 18 years old so he has decided that a prescription needs to be used for females under that age.  He does this despite the untoward results from some who have had prescriptions for this medicine.  This is political pandering at its worse.  It is quelling the obnoxious noise from those who want to kill off the preborn when it is inconvenient at the cost of the lives of Americans.  The news release above claims to 'protect the health of all Americans". 

What about protecting the one you destroy?  What about the health of the mothers who choose to take the pills incorrectly?  What about exposing America to God's anger for our arrogant, self centered nature above His own plan?  This becomes another costly decision.  Our society is already damaged through years of abortion.  People have more anger and violence as the value of life is denied.  Nurturing offspring is forgotten.  God will be satisfied in His own time, however, perhaps soon.  


August 11, 2006

There have not been any updates on this page for some time.  Much has happened.  Much more to come.  These pages have not been silent, however.  Current events are also handled in some of the most recent pages (see these here). 

This afternoon, the UN Security Council agreed to a plan to end the conflict in Lebanon and Israel's leader agreed to it.  This is to be confirmed by the Parliament of both nations in a couple of days.  Reportedly, the Lebanese army and a United Nations' force will be in the buffer zone on the Israeli border, theoretically protecting Israel from Hezbollah. 

(If this UN plan starts) What will Israel do when Hezbollah fires missles over the 'peacekeeping' forces and into Israel? Reinvasion embroils the Lebanese and UN forces to be between the Israel and Hezbollah fighters. Israel would legitimately attack this group who was there to end the violence yet find themselves in the middle of a mess.  The Lebanese and UN troops are most friendly to Hezbollah.  If this happens, it will merely postpone greater bloodshed. 

Pray for the peace in Jerusalem. 

April 24, 2006

South Dakota!  Thank you.  (overdue) 

Our “pro-life” president hasn’t saved babies.  Stacking Congress with Republicans has saved no babies.  Christians campaigning hard for unworthy individuals have wasted well- meaning efforts.  President Bush’s Press Secretary commenting on the South Dakota law making abortions illegal except for the life of the mother made it clear that President Bush disagrees.  Scott McClelland reiterated that Bush still believes in the additional (irrational) exceptions of abortions after rape and incest.  Our “pro-life” president wants to punish the child for the sins of the father. 

Instead of welcoming the bold South Dakota law, well known, entrenched “pro-life” groups are mealy mouthing their own discontent with the first true assault against abortion on demand we have seen in many years.  President Bush plays this game with even more fervor.  He has distanced himself from ending abortion.  He is not ‘like us’.  He uses us. 

The courts will do their best to eviscerate this law.  They have no such jurisdiction.

Black's Law Dictionary, 4th Edition says:

“The doctrine that a state, in the exercise of its sovereignty, may reject a mandate of the federal government deemed to be unconstitutional or to exceed the powers delegated to the federal government… Implementation of this doctrine may be peaceable, as by resolution, remonstrance or legislation, or may proceed ultimately to nullification with forcible resistance.”

Sir William Blackstone in his Commentaries on the Laws of England wrote:

 “[Judges are] not delegated to pronounce new law, but to maintain and expound the old one.  Yet this rule admits of exception, where the former determination is most evidently contrary to reason; much more, if it be clearly contrary to the Divine law.  But, even in such cases, the subsequent judges do not pretend to make a new law, but to vindicate the old one from misrepresentation.  For, if it be found that the former decision is manifestly absurd or unjust, it is declared not that such a sentence was bad law, but that it was not law;…”


Dr. Alan Keyes said it right.  “You only keep the rights you stand on.  If you don’t defend them by refusing to surrender them when they are unlawfully wrested from you, then you won’t have them.”

As this plays out, let us pray for success and that each of us will stand firm and not be like our president who gives away our rights for lack of fortitude and conviction.  Only then will babies be saved. 


February 2, 2006

Samuel Alito took Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's seat on the court yesterday.  His first ruling, today, was flawed.  He sided with the majority and broke with the 'conservative' justices, Roberts, Scalia and Thomas.

Missouri was to execute inmate Michael Taylor at midnight tonight but an appeals court placed a stay on the execution.  The Supreme Court failed to lift the stay.  The report above says: 

"The victim, 15-year-old Ann Harrison, was waiting for a school bus when Taylor and an accomplice kidnapped her in 1989. Taylor, speaking from his holding cell at the state prison in Bonne Terre, said Tuesday that he was high on crack cocaine at the time.

“I pled guilty, and I told the victim’s family. I let them know how sorry I was,” Taylor said."

Now, for the more thorough version from FindLaw:

"Roderick Nunley and Michael Taylor abducted a fifteen-year-old girl waiting for her school bus. Taylor raped her, and Nunley facilitated the rape. They stabbed her and left her to die in a car trunk."
In State v. Nunley"

Let's look at some of those who had a seat in the East Room of the White House table last night to celebrate Justice Samuel Alito's new position.  They had a seat at the table (one of hundreds), thanks to all of us who support their efforts for the Bush administration.  The Christians trusting them have another reason not to trust them. 

WA06B05_NORMAL.jpg (30224 bytes)
(Family Research Council)

                        020206_andrea_bush_letters.jpg (23883 bytes)           
Traditional Values Coalition Executive Director Andrea Lafferty holds binders of letters to President Bush thanking him for keeping his promise to appoint judicial conservatives to the Supreme Court.

020206_andrea_alito.jpg (21049 bytes)

Mrs. Lafferty is shown with Associate Justice of the Supreme Court Samuel Alito. (above)

jansupremes2.gif (46807 bytes)        Supreme Gathering -Jan LaRue, CWA's Chief Counsel, was present at the White House for the Swearing-In Ceremony of Associate Justice Samuel Alito. CWA was honored to be part of this great celebration after months of hard work in support of this great Justice.  (Concerned Women for America)

Habbakuk 1:2 How long, O LORD, must I call for help, but you do not listen? Or cry out to you, "Violence!" but you do not save? 3 Why do you make me look at injustice? Why do you tolerate wrong? Destruction and violence are before me; there is strife, and conflict abounds. 4 Therefore the law is paralyzed, and justice never prevails. The wicked hem in the righteous, so that justice is perverted.

Judicial restraint, as Dr. James Dobson was fully expecting from Alito?  Ha.   Not very funny.  Wasn't this a state issue?  Strict constructionist?   Give me a break.  How gullible do you think Christians are?

There is hope, however.  Dr. John MacArthur is continuing to preach the Biblical Fear of God.  Only with true repentance may we possibly avoid God's wrath against our nation.  We need more pastors like him.   Thank God for his work.  Listen to this:  The Furnace of Fire, Part 1, today's broadcast.

It didn't take long to see our failure again.  Fifteen year old Ann Harrison's blood is crying out for justice.  When will we learn?


January 18, 2006

The Alito hearing has ended, a new page is pending.  The simplest conclusion is that precedence (stare decisis) is again considered more important than truly following the Constitution, which all justices have sworn to uphold.  Therefore the people suffer.  Christians suffer.  The name of Christ is secondary to precedence in the erroneous name of separation of church and state.

There is a great scandal brewing.  The Jack Abramoff illegal lobbying scandal is brewing and about to boil some Republicans.  Unfortunately, Christians and Christian political groups are mired in the dirt.  This will undoubtedly grow deeper with time and further revelations emerge.  This article (House of Cards by Jamie Dean in World Magazine, January 14, 2006) is a must read, exposing exactly the sort of Christian followers' duping that makes our Lord's Name look foolish to those we are supposed to reach.  In this article:

"While Mr. Reed worked to rally Christians for campaigns that benefited Mr. Abramoff's clients, Mr. Abramoff's partner, Michael Scanlon, wrote an e-mail to Kathryn Van Hoof, a former lawyer for the Coushatta Tribe, describing the plan to use Christians: "Simply put we want to bring out the wackos to vote against something and make sure the rest of the public lets the whole thing slip past them. The wackos get their information [from] the Christian right, Christian radio, mail, the internet, and telephone."

We must hold firm to Christ's values.  Do away with trusting Republicans and 'Christian' groups and hold everyone accountable.  Ralph Reed has now sullied Dobson, Bauer, Schlafly and others including, of course, the Christian Coalition.  Worse, by making Christians appear stupid, he has implicated faith in Christ as nothing more than a fairy tale.  When will we learn?


October 27, 2005

Wilma.  Twenty-two named storms this season, so far. 

Is it coincidence that Katrina hit New Orleans on August 29, 2005, one day prior to the "Southern Decadence XXXV" or known as the "Gay Mardi Gras" (August 30- September 4)?

August 2005

Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday
   1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 Katrina 30
Southern Decadence

September 1-4

Or, in their own words:

"Southern Decadence started thirty-five years ago as a simple going-away party. As a top gay Labor Day Weekend destination, it has evolved into one of our world's major annual events. One of the largest annual celebrations in New Orleans, it has become known as the "Gay Mardi Gras." People begin to arrive on the Wednesday before Labor Day, and generally don't even think about stopping or going home until the following Tuesday. With over 100,000 gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender participants last year, the economic impact on the city was estimated to be in excess of $95 million. Mayor Ray Nagin has recognized its importance with an Official Proclamation to welcome the event.

The city's wildest neighborhood gets even crazier as the French Quarter is packed for the entire event; however, the big day is Sunday. That's when the Grand Marshal leads the annual parade through the streets. Tradition dictates that the previous year's Grand Marshal choose their successor, a well guarded secret until the annual coronation ceremony in July. Grand Marshal honors for 2005 were shared by Lisa Beaumann and Regina Adams. The theme was "Jazz and Jezebels" and the colors were red and purple."      http://www.southerndecadence.net/

How about Wilma hitting Key West on October 24, 2005, at the scheduled time of "Fantasy Fest", October 21-30, an event dominated by homosexuals in gala revelry?

October 2005

Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20  21 FantasyFest 22FFest
23FFest 24 Hurricane Wilma
25FFest 26FFest 27FFest 28FFest 29FFest
30FFest 31FFest

In their own words:

"The famous frivolty that embodies our island insanity once again beckons to all devilishly dorky and dazzlingly devine beings with ten days of tantalizing temptations. Happiness and hilarity abound in this freakish world of fantasy where nature's nerdiest, outlandishly abnormal and gorgeous goddesses gather to star in their own fanciful festival! Slip away from the day-to-day and grab a front row seat as we hit play on the bewitching blockbuster that is Fantasy Fest® 2005!"   http://www.fantasyfest.net/index.htm

Even more salacious details elsewhere in the web sites.  Twenty-two named storms.   Two large homosexual, in your face, events.  Three hundred sixty-five days in a year.  Is it coincidence that God prevented both from going off at the given times?   Could this be a wake up call? 

As you can see from the above, it isn't just the homosexual community.  All who condone, ignore and sit back quietly are also at fault, if this isn't a coincidence.   The Mayor Nagin quoted above officially proclaimed the event our God considers offensive.  Where have Christians been for the last 35 years as this has been going on?   Yes, we may have been on the gambling barges on the Mississippi coast or partaking in our own favorite sins. 

Ezekial 16: 46 Your older sister was Samaria, who lived to the north of you with her daughters; and your younger sister, who lived to the south of you with her daughters, was Sodom. 47 You not only walked in their ways and copied their detestable practices, but in all your ways you soon became more depraved than they. 48 As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD, your sister Sodom and her daughters never did what you and your daughters have done. 49 "`Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. 50 They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen. ..56 You would not even mention your sister Sodom in the day of your pride , 57 before your wickedness was uncovered. Even so, you are now scorned by the daughters of Edom and all her neighbors and the daughters of the Philistines--all those around you who despise you. 58 You will bear the consequences of your lewdness and your detestable practices, declares the LORD. 59 "`This is what the Sovereign LORD says: I will deal with you as you deserve, because you have despised my oath by breaking the covenant.

On March 4, 1805, President Thomas Jefferson offered a National Prayer for Peace:

Almighty God, Who has given us this good land for our heritage; We humbly beseech Thee that we may always prove ourselves a people mindful of Thy favor and glad to do Thy will. Bless our land with honorable ministry, sound learning, and pure manners. Save us from violence, discord,and confusion, from pride and arrogance, and from every evil way. Defend our liberties, and fashion into one united people the multitude brought hither out of many kindreds and tongues.

Endow with Thy spirit of wisdom those to whom in Thy Name we entrust the authority of government, that there may be justice and peace at home, and that through obedience to Thy law, we may show forth Thy praise among the nations of the earth. In time of prosperity fill our hearts with thankfulness, and in the day of trouble, suffer not our trust in Thee to fail; all of which we ask through Jesus Christ our Lord, Amen.

United States Congress (March 3, 1863), passed a resolution in the U.S. Senate calling upon the President to proclaim a National Day of Prayer and Humiliation :

Resolved, That devoutly recognizing the supreme authority and just government of Almighty God in all the affairs of men and nations, and sincerely believing that no people, however great in numbers and resources, or however strong in the justness of their cause, can prosper without His favor, and at the same time deploring the national offenses which have provoked His righteous judgment, yet encouraged in this day of trouble by the assurance of His Word, to seek Him for succor according to His appointed way, through Jesus Christ, the Senate of the United States does hereby request the President of the United States, by his proclamation, to designate and set apart a day for national prayer and humiliation.


Abraham Lincoln wrote (calling for a National Day of Prayer and Fasting in 1863):

...We have been the recipients of the choicest bounties of Heaven. We have been preserved these many years in peace and prosperity. We have grown in numbers, wealth and power as not other nation has ever grown.

But we have forgotten God. We have forgotten the gracious Hand which preserved us in peace, and multiplied and enriched and strengthened us; and we have vainly imagined, in the deceitfulness of our hearts, that all these blessings were produced by some superior wisdom and virtue of our own.

Intoxicated with unbroken success, we have become too self-sufficient to feel the necessity of redeeming and preserving grace, too proud to pray to the God that made us!

It behooves us then to humble ourselves before the offended Power, to confess our national sins and to pray for clemency and forgiveness....


We all need a fear of God.  He is speaking.  Instead of "gay pride", where is our brokenness and humility?  Where have the churches been?   Unfortunately, either embracing the homosexual sin despite clear Biblical teaching not to or passively allowing it to move forward.  We are burdened down in our own set of our preferred sins! 

Will we listen or will we suffer more?  Now we see more suffering with oil prices.   Even though we 'control' the 2nd largest oil producing country in the world, we find ourselves supplying them with gasoline while our own citizens are wallowing in the greed of oil companies and high prices.  A form of judgment?  Sure. 

Aired October 8, 2005 - 13:00 ET


CAFFERTY: What happened to all this oil we were supposed to be using to pay for the war by now? Where is it?

IBRAHIM: Well regardless of whether you're pro war in Iraq or anti-war in Iraq, one of the major things that happened is that we -- the insurgents have destroyed the oil facilities. Before the war, Saddam Hussein was exporting and smuggling three and a half million barrels of oil a day. Today, Iraq will be lucky if they don't blow pipelines here and there, would be lucky on any day to export 1.5. So we've lost 2 million barrels of oil a day from Iraq at a time when China and India alone are requiring another 2 million barrels of oil a day.

So the hands -- the $70 price we're seeing. There is another consequence of what is happening in Iraq, though. The insurgents who are coming from several countries are using -- have discovered that the sabotage of oil facilities is the way to bring down a government to create chaos and fight the United States. I am very worried that this concept, the novel concept of fusing, attacking oil facilities is going to travel, because we have Saudi insurgents and these guys are going back home to Saudi Arabia.

SERWER: Youssef let me jump in here, I think it's terrible ironic or a terrible irony I guess I should say that there is less law and order in Iraq today than under Saddam Hussein. What can we do about these insurgencies, though? Pipelines are virtually impossible to protect, aren't they?

IBRAHIM: Totally. The northern pipeline, which is -- was shipping a million and a half to Turkey, hasn't operated, practically speaking a single day. They keep blowing it up every day. We've discovered one thing from this war, that we cannot secure oil by military power so when trouble starts happening in Saudi Arabia, our troops in the region will not be able to protect Saudi supplies.

LISOVICZ: So you said we're paying more for oil because we're not able to get the three and a half million barrels that Saddam was pumping out. But also, we, Americans, are paying for the rebuilding -- we shoulder more of that responsibility because the oil can facilitate that, yes?

IBRAHIM: The big irony is this is the country that has the second largest oil reserves in the world after Saudi Arabia. And we are supplying them with gasoline. Because all their refineries have been destroyed during the -- during the invasion while our troops were sitting there watching insurgents burning them down. The other reason of course for the high oil prices, is we are entering a new paradigm on oil. There simply isn't enough oil to go around and the big oil lakes like the North Sea are peaking. Alaska is practically dry. So really it's a new oil tsunami heading our way.

I don't mean to be an alarmist, but I think in the winter, we're going to be seeing prices that are closer to $90. And this is not going away. We just don't have enough oil in the world.


How about this for judgment?  In multiple examples in the scriptures, God has thrown people into 'confusion' when it suits His purposes.  Shut down terminals translate into suffering for folks wanting or needing to go somewhere.  God is warning us.

Toy, Cookie Are Mistaken for Bomb Parts
Oct 25 1:36 PM US/Eastern
Email this story    

A terminal at San Diego International Airport was evacuated Tuesday after luggage screeners mistook a child's toy and a cookie for bomb- making components, officials said...



October 4, 2005

It is past time.  For those of you who have "W" stickers on your cars, remove them, turn them upside down and reattach so you can make a point that we have been "M"islead. 


October 3, 2005

Pat Buchanan said it well.  'President Bush punted on first down' with his nomination of Harriet Miers for Justice of the Supreme Court today, or so it seems, caving in to the Democrats.  The assumption is that President Bush cares about abortion and judicial tyranny as other Christians. 

Incorrect.  He simply cannot.

No one who cares so much about the slaughter of the unborn would play that game.  Bush asks for trust.  He has proven untrustworthy.  He is like other Republicans such as portrayed by Senator Charles Grassley on Hardball, September 29,2005, seen here.  They don't care very much.  And as Grassley points out, we don't care much. 

God knows we care less about His principles than do the ungodly for their own.  We continue to support such Republicans time and time again.  We are pitiful as Christians.  What will we say on the other side when we see folks who have been martyred for their faith and we fold without a stand.  We have been used. Christian 'leaders' have led us to slaughter.  Oh, yeah, we are under judgment.

Check out other recent pages:

Justice Roberts
A Shining City on a Hill

Former Chief Justice Roy Moore (illegally removed) announced today his intention to run for Governor of Alabama.  A man of principle.  What a novel idea!  God speed Chief!


September 9, 2005

We must repent. 

We offend God. 

How much longer?

We have heard much praise for John Roberts from the Republicans.  We hear similar (if not identical) praise from Christian organizations.  Is this appropriate?

Why would Christian 'leaders' support this decision without reservations when it is a candidate who we know so little about?  Do we really want Christ's name associated with someone who said:

"If confirmed as a circuit judge, I would be bound by Supreme Court precedent recognizing the constitutional right to privacy. Nothing in my personal views or beliefs would prevent me from applying that precedent fully and faithfully."  (2003 testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee)

"Now, that’s not judging, I understand that, but it is the same skill, setting aside personal views, taking the precedents and applying them either as an advocate or as a judge."  (April 30, 2003)

"My practice has not been ideological in any sense. My clients and their positions are liberal and conservative across the board. I have argued in favor of environmental restrictions and against takings claims. I have argued in favor of affirmative action. I’ve argued in favor of prisoners’ rights under the 8th Amendment. I’ve argued in favor of antitrust enforcement."  (April 30, 2003)

This is evidence that Roberts cares less about what he is arguing than that he can argue effectively.  Are there not people who care enough to make a strong statement on that subject?  How can a 50 year old man high in the government be so quiet about his beliefs?  Isn't that part of witnessing?

Coulter continues: It means nothing that Roberts wrote briefs arguing for the repeal of Roe v. Wade when he worked for Republican administrations. He was arguing on behalf of his client, the United States of America. Roberts has specifically disassociated himself from those cases, dropping a footnote to a 1994 law review article that said:

“In the interest of full disclosure, the author would like to point out that as Deputy Solicitor General for a portion of the 1992-93 Term, he was involved in many of the cases discussed below. In the interest of even fuller disclosure, he would also like to point out that his views as a commentator on those cases do not necessarily reflect his views as an advocate for his former client, the United States.”

This would have been the legal equivalent, after O.J.'s acquittal, of Johnnie Cochran saying, "hey, I never said the guy was innocent. I was just doing my job."

Drudge Report 7/20/05, quotation from Ann Coulter


Now, is this in the interest of God's will for us?  Shouldn't we follow Biblical examples and be BOLD?  Do we really believe we are on the right side?  If so, then there is absolutely no reason to be stealthy.  The 'evil' Democrats ask the tough questions when Roberts was nominated to the U.S. Court of Appeals in D.C., the Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee did not.   Shouldn't they do the same? 

There is no, absolutely no, legitimate reason a candidate cannot be asked and no reason they should be allowed not to answer just what are their personal beliefs and disqualify them if they are seriously out of sink with those charged with that role of consent.  We cannot change the hearts of our countrymen without leading them through an unwavering strength in belief in our faith in Christ and His will.  This will only occur when Christians' witness is genuine, not stealthy.  When people must hear why we believe what we believe.  Not to trick our adversaries.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg did not hide her views on abortion.  Republicans are embarassed for their belief, if they really do believe it.  So far, Roberts is no different.
       "It’s a woman’s body and a woman’s choice." (Jul 1993)

Roberts, like Bush, is likely a nice fellow.  Similarly, they both want to please too many people.  They show the fear of man when a true leader should show the fear of God.  Any of us who support them demonstrate the same failure.  Too many of us are in similar shoes.  May God have mercy on us.

On another note, Senator Bill Frist has made headlines regarding his speech on embryonic stem cell research.  An analogy that may be useful is this:

Suppose I was a taxi driver. I pick up a man who just robbed a bank and I knew that he had just committed the crime. I had nothing to do with
the original robbery but yet I chose to pick him up and to profit from his fare to donate to a needy charity to do great good with the money.
I have become an accomplice and now I too can be punished for the crime.

Similarly, President Bush's plan for limited embryonic stem cell research took known ill gotten embryonic stem cell lines and chose to use them for supposedly the greater good that could be derived from research. Of course, he has become an accomplice, as is anyone who supports this action.  There is a penalty for posession of stolen property.

Senator Frist's speech increases the guilt for additional failures. After reading your thoughtful reasoning for your recent decision, I find that I have a couple of concerns. The assumption of ethical conduct by the donors of the egg and sperm is mistaken. As parents, their morality is as flawed as other individuals, not necessarily better, and perhaps their understanding is less than those of us who have studied such things.

  • the 'parents' do not make life. The physicians do not make life.
    Only God makes life. Ultimately, He is the maker of the sperm and
    the egg. He made the parents. Only He has the right to dispose
    of it. The parents are merely trustees or custodians of the new
    life that they had a part in. Could they take the chemicals and
    make a human life denovo? No. Their role is limited.
  • the idea that the ethical decision should be left to the parents
    is mistaken, since using this reasoning the same error could be
    obvious in someone who chooses to rob a bank, in which the state
    has a legitimate interest to deter and to punish.
  • if God is the ultimate judge of morality, why don't we remember
    George Washington's words:
    "The propitious smiles of Heaven can never be expected on a
    nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right
    which Heaven itself has ordained
    Such a decision will affect the entire nation beyond simply the
    blastocysts that are to be 'discarded'.
  • the ends do not justify the means which is the ultimate conclusion
    from your recent stand.
  • that same money (even though arguably it is illegitimate for the
    government to spend it on these things) could have been earmarked
    for more promising stem cell research.
  • such frozen embryos should never be "discarded"

July 6, 2005

Filibusters.  No nuclear option.  "Moderate" Senators 'compromising'.  The U.S. Supreme Court, largely appointed by Republicans, refuse to protect the Ten Commandments and remove all property rights of all citizens.  Sandra Day O'Connor retires, thank goodness, or so it seems.

President Bush will appoint a "conservative, strict constructionist" nominee, using his own useful, expedient definition.  The Democrats will jump up and down and holler about how this is an awful nominee.  There may be an extended battle in the Senate and we will be foolishly believing that the nominee will make a difference, especially since the Democrats clearly hated him or her.  If this one is allowed on the bench by the Senate, we will find ourselves watching poor decisions continue, by this new nominee as well.   It is merely a fantasy to imagine that things will improve without the fear of God in our leaders (and in ourselves). 

Christianity is being more equated with the Republican party, and more particularly President Bush.  This brings on unexpected consequences.  At the same time those who consider Christianity as foolishness see our nation marching toward less and less freedom and toward increasing governmental control, as we see additional deaths and serious injuries and ambiguous reasons for the war in Iraq, and as we find our financial situation deteriorate, we find Christians will be blamed for the failures of this episode in our nation's history.  Even the current 'conservative' Supreme Court (according to Democrats who still say Bush stole the election from Gore because of the 'conservative' court)  largely appointed by Republicans, has trampled on everyone's property rights.   Christians will be blamed.  Christianity shold not be equated with decisions outside the strict moral issues as laid out in the Bible.   Despite this, Christian leaders proudly claim that we were the ones who put President Bush in the presidency.  We will be blamed for their decisions, many of which are not Christian concepts.

Our supposed increase in power in the government will lead to increased persecution in the future.   Increasing economic difficulties with increasing unrest will help turn those who do not understand Christianity toward hatred for us because of the failed economic policies of the Bush administration.  We will find ourselves hated for what neoconservatives have done in the name of Christianity and 'conservatism'.  Yet, for many Christians, he (Bush) is 'our man'.

Billy Graham, as great a man as he is, has another failed approach.  Instead of taking the opportunity to make a statement against the agenda of evil perpetrated by the Clintons, similar to that of Mother Teresa refusing to shake President Clinton's hand, Graham, at his last evangelistic preaching event, chose to tell ex-President Clinton he 'should be an evangelist' and he should 'leave running the country to his wife'.   Have we anyone in protestant Christianity who has the guts to stand as the prophets did in the past?  As the Disciples did?  As John the Baptist?  The impact of exposing the twice vetoed partial birth abortion ban by the ex-President in such a setting would be therapeutic to a nation dying for a lack of strong medicine. 

March 31, 2005

Now the discussion begins to call out for euthanasia.  Wouldn't it have been 'better' if Terri wasn't starved to death but to be put down after they took her organs that were obviously in great shape?  Wow!  We could have made her death something of great value to 2 dialysis patients, transplant the heart and the liver too!   The evil continues and worsens.  This is the worst kind of evil.  She wasn't dead.  She is now.  She is either in heaven or hell, depending on her relationship with God.  Our selfishness has killed her.   

What happened to her and happens to others treated this way is unconscionable.   Terri is dead.  Shame on us.  How many of us will pay for this foolishness in the future?


March 29, 2005

See Terri Schiavo pages:


The determined interest in cremation is troubling. 

The Florida statute (XI. CREMATION APPROVAL (Florida Statutes 406.11(1)(c)) says:

A. All requests for cremation must be approved by the Medical Examiner prior to the actual cremation.

1. Before authorizing the irretrievable disposal of a body by cremation, the Medical Examiner must be assured that no future question will arise about the cause or circumstances of the death of the individual.

The medical examiner has the authority.  A complete, thorough autopsy is needed to answer the inevitable questions, perhaps clearing the husband from wrongdoing. 

How could we end up at this point in the discussion?  May God have mercy on Terri and most importantly, us. 


January 19, 2005

Tomorrow is the Inauguration.  Already, President Bush said Sunday that he will not press the Senate to pass a constitutional amendment to ban sodomites from getting married. The change in position comes just days after Democrats called on the President to abandon his push for an amendment (see second story below). 

Does he not fear God?  Unfortunately, about as much as the rest of most well-meaning American Christians today who elected him to pass such an amendment.  We should have predicted this stance by his call in favor for homosexual civil unions prior to the election.    

By Jim VandeHei And Michael A. Fletcher


Posted on Sun, Jan. 16, 2005

WASHINGTON - President Bush said the public's decision to re-elect him was a ratification of his approach toward Iraq and that there was no reason to hold any administration officials accountable for
mistakes or misjudgments in pre-war planning or managing the violent aftermath.

"We had an accountability moment, and that's called the 2004 elections," Bush said in an interview with The Washington Post. "The American people listened to different assessments made about what was
taking place in Iraq, and they looked at the two candidates and chose me."

With the Iraq elections two weeks away and no signs of the deadly insurgency abating, Bush set no timetable for withdrawing U.S. troops and twice declined to endorse Secretary of State Colin Powell's
recent statement that the number of Americans serving in Iraq could be reduced by year's end. Bush said he will not ask Congress to expand the size of the National Guard or regular Army, as some lawmakers and military experts propose.

In a wide-ranging, 35-minute interview aboard Air Force One on Friday, Bush also laid out new details of his second-term plans for both foreign and domestic policy. For the first time, Bush said he will not press senators to pass a Constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, the top priority for many social conservative groups.

And he said he has no plans to cut benefits for the roughly 40percent of Social Security recipients who collect monthly disability and survivors payments as he prepares his plan for partial privatization.

But it will be Iraq that dominates White House deliberations offstage. Over the next few weeks, Bush will be monitoring closely Iraq's plan to hold elections for a 275-member national assembly. He must deliver his State of the Union address with a message of resolve on Iraq, and he will need to seek congressional approval for roughly $100 billion in emergency spending, much of it for the war.

In the interview, the president urged Americans to show patience in coming months as Iraq moves slowly toward creating a democratic nation where a brutal dictatorship once stood.

© 2005 Lexington Herald-Leader and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved.


Dems Tell Bush To Lay Off Gays
by Doreen Brandt 365Gay.com Washington Bureau

Posted: January 14, 2005 2:08 pm. ET

(Washington) The Democratic Party launched a petition Friday telling the White House not to push for a Constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.

The DNC in its Pride at the Polls newsletter to more than 100,000 party supporters calls on President Bush to abandon his call for the amendment and to tell House Majority Leader Tom Delay to " stop discriminating against Americans."

DeLay (R-Texas) has made it clear that it's at the top of the Republican legislative agenda, warning, "We will come back and come back until this is passed." (story)

In an interview on Good Morning America one week before the election, (story) Bush said that he didn't think "we should deny people rights to a civil union [or] a legal arrangement if that's what a state chooses to do." Bush then went on to call "wrong" and disagree with the portion of the Republican platform that opposed extending to gay and lesbian families "legal recognition and the accompanying benefits."

"But Bush can't have it both ways, supporting an amendment that takes away our rights while saying he wants to leave it up to the states," the DNC newsletter says.

"It is time for Bush to move America forward and come out publicly against this amendment."

Eric Stern, Director of GLBT Outreach told 365Gay.com that the petition will be delivered to the White House just before the State of the Union Address.

"We are not going to stand by and let the Republicans in Washington discriminate against GLBT Americans, who have always been an integral part of our party and our country," Stern said.

"Democrats are ready to fight back for the rights of GLBT Americans."   "The American people are overwhelmingly opposed to the Republican's Federal Marriage Amendment and this petition is an opportunity for us to make sure our voices are heard in Washington and across the country."

The petition is available online at http://www.democrats.org/glbt/
©365Gay.com 2005

(Thanks to Ricardo Davis of the Constitution Party for part of this information- check out the link below!) 


October 26, 2004

One week before the election, here we go.  We have thousands (tens of thousands, reportedly) of attorneys who will be at the polling places carefully monitoring for any irregularities.    Wow!  How irregular is that!  Do you think they might find something?  Maybe a couple of irregularities?  The DNC has instructed their representatives in this matter to at least claim 'voter intimidation', even if they do not witness it. 


Secretary of State, Colin Powell also, unconstitutionally, to his shame, has invited in international monitors to make sure our elections are fair.  This is in absolute violation of our Constitution.  In a nutshell, 13 Democratic Representatives asked Kofi Annan of the U.N. to monitor our election (this violation of the Constitution begs for the removal of each).  He would not without State Department backing.  Colin Powell was then asked to invite the U.N. observers.  His response is 'no' but he has invited the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) to oversee our election process. 

The OSCE has a definite leftist political agenda with the effort here to be headed up by Alcee Hastings, an impeached federal justice for accepting a $150,000 bribe, impeached overwhelmingly by a Democratic House of Representatives some time ago.  He is from Florida, Broward County, no less.  He is on record claiming that George Bush is going to steal the election.  See this most important article!       

Additionally, Colorado has a ballot initiative that a federal judge will rule on today that would allow Colorado to split its 9 electoral votes proportionally for the candidates.  This changes rules in the middle of the game.


Here are other links to warn of the impending troubles:


Well, one week to go.  The good news is that God is in control and He appoints and deposes our rulers. 

Daniel 2:21 He changes times and seasons; he sets up kings and deposes them. He gives wisdom to the wise and knowledge to the discerning.

The outcome is in the hands of God, ultimately in the best interest of the elect.   Our job is to be faithful in how we vote and conduct our lives.  A vote for Peroutka, is a faithful decision, not that we expect God to necessarily perform a miracle for us but rather that we stand firm for Him.   Pray, ask for forgiveness.

October 14, 2004

We are closing in on the election.  Debates are ridiculous.  Thank goodness they are over.  Who would really vote for a fellow who voted in favor of partial birth abortion and wants marriage for homosexuals?  Who would vote for a treasonous fellow who caused additional torture to fellow soldiers who were POW's because of Kerry's self-serving, libelous testimony against the Vietnam war to Congress?  

President Bush has put other gods before God.  He came out in favor of homosexual unions.  Would a Christian really vote for him?  (see http://dutyisours.com/whosside.htm)  Thank God we have a great choice, though.   

New pages are up.  Please consider them.  Thanks.


wasted vote 2004
who's side-very important information, a must read.
restore our nation


August 31, 2004

Interesting but quite disappointing.  The first morning invocation at the Republican National Convention on Monday, August 30, 2004 was given by Sheri Dew of Salt Lake City, UT,  The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Director of Publishing.  The evening invocation was given by a Muslim chaplin to the New York Fire Department, Imam Pasha, New York, NY. 

Now, just who are we praying to at this time of need?  Should Christians still support Republicans?  We will answer to God for our failure.  Are we so blind?

Jeremiah 10: 5 Like a scarecrow in a melon patch, their idols cannot speak; they must be carried because they cannot walk. Do not fear them; they can do no harm nor can they do any good." 6 No one is like you , O LORD; you are great, and your name is mighty in power. 7 Who should not revere you , O King of the nations? This is your due. Among all the wise men of the nations and in all their kingdoms, there is no one like you.

August 30, 2004

We now have both a president and a vice-president (see August 25 below) that are officially supporting the homosexual agenda without fear of reprisal.  In other words, they are openly offending Almighty God.  So is anyone who chooses to vote for someone who does just this. God told us not to do this sort of thing and we ask for His punishment.  The American pseudochurch deserves His judgment as much, if not more, than those who are lost.   Why are we testing God?  If you really care, consider Michael Peroutka, at least you will not have to answer to God for having been complicit against Him.

The current Republican Convention in New York will highlight (primetime) keynote speakers who are almost all pro-abortion. 

Romans 1: 32 Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

This convention requires 2 policemen for every delegate.  Doesn't this say something about the cost of not following God's direction?  His direction is to stand firm and not to compromise, in love.  We must wake up.

Larry King Live     http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0408/28/lkl.00.html
Aug, 28, 2004

On the topic of "gay" marriage...

KING: Why? Why do you need an amendment?

G. BUSH: Well, because I'm worried that the laws on the books that basically define marriage as between a man -- not basically, do define marriage between a man and a woman will be ruled unconstitutional, and then judges will make the decision as to the definition of marriage. And I think it's too important an issue for judges to make that decision. And I think that one way to guarantee that traditional marriage is defined as between a man and a woman is through the constitutional process...

KING: What about the union of gays? G. BUSH: Well, that's up to states, you know. If states choose to do that, in other words, if they want to provide legal protections for gays, that's great. That's fine. But I do not want to change the definition of marriage. I don't think our country should, from the traditional definition of marriage that's between a man or a woman.

The other thing about the constitutional process, it will get states involved. In other words, the people ought to be involved in this decision. And so that's why I took the stand I took.

KING: You do think...


G. BUSH: Well, listen, I...

KING: You don't amend easily.

G. BUSH: Yeah.

L. BUSH: That's right. It's a debate. I mean...

G. BUSH: Absolutely. But it's an important debate, Larry, and it's a debate that the people need to be involved with, and not courts. And that's what you're beginning to see. There was a decision here in California, it was a court decision. In other words, it's -- and it ruled that marriages in San Francisco were illegal according to California law. But the point is that this ought to be decided by people, and I just happen to believe and know that if you believe that traditional marriage ought to be the law of the land, that the way to guarantee that is through the constitutional process.

And I want to say something about this debate. It is a debate that must be conducted with the greatest respect for people. And that my judgment, I think our society is great because people are able to live their lifestyles, you know, as they choose or as they're oriented.

KING: Gay people would honestly say they want the benefits of a marriage.

G. BUSH: Well, you can do that through the legal process. You know, people have said to me, well, if you're gay, you can't inherit because -- and you don't get the exemption from income tax. Well, my answer there is get rid of the inheritance tax forever, the death tax, which I'm trying to do. And there are ways to make sure gays have got rights. And you can do so in the law.

KING: Back with our remaining moments. Don't go away.



August 25, 2004

We find ourselves marginalized as we hold fast to the truth of God's Word.   Compromise, pragmatism, and consensus are the esteemed characteristics of the day.   The Swift Boat veterans have attacked the leadership ability of Sen. John Kerry.   Despite the exposure of clear lies brought forth when he was protesting (such as committing atrocities and entering Cambodia), too many are giving him a pass.    Could we possibly expect such a man to appropriately lead our country? 

We hear our Vice President Cheney, when asked by a woman in a rally- "What do you think about homosexual marriage?", reply:

"Lynne and I have a gay daughter, so it's an issue our family is very familiar with. With the respect to the question of relationships, my general view is freedom means freedom for everyone... People ought to be free to enter into any kind of relationship they want to."

"The question that comes up with the issue of marriage is what kind of official sanction or approval is going to be granted by government? Historically, that's been a relationship that has been handled by the states. The states have made that fundamental decision of what constitutes a marriage."

He is a heart beat away from President.  How can a Christian use their vote for such a man (or one who chose him), knowing that it displeases God and that our acceptance of such thinking only leads to the further moral demise of our country.  The moral issues are most important to our well being as a nation and as individuals.  We must show love to those who make these wrong decisions yet we must stand firm.  We will be accountable to Almighty God for our choices.  May He show us mercy and not give us what we deserve.


July 15, 2004

On June 25, 2004, Michael A. Peroutka was named the official Presidential candidate of the Constitution Party and the next day, Dr. Chuck Baldwin (Pastor of Crossroads Baptist Church in Pensacola, FL) accepted the nomination for Vice-President.  These are both quality men who have great conviction, vision and persevering spirits.  Both consider the Constitution as composed by the founders as the rule of law.  Both place God first. 

It is inconceivable that any Christian could vote for a lesser candidate when it comes to God's issues.  Consider Michael Peroutka's acceptance speech here.   Chuck Baldwin's acceptance speech is here.  

baldwin_peroutka.jpg (37665 bytes)

Michael A. Peroutka (left) and Dr. Chuck Baldwin (right)

There will be additional pages added to this site soon.  Once more echoing the same reasoning and faithfulness promoted during the last presidential election.

On another note, the Federal Marriage Amendment failed to receive enough Senator's votes yesterday to gain cloture and therefore it is currently dead, likely to be revived at some opportune time in the future for further political gain.     It is reminiscent of grade school tactics.  Remember when one child would dare another to 'cross that line' in the dirt?  After he would cross the line the first child then draws another line, and so on, always threatening but never pulling through with his threats of physical harm.

The Republican and Christian organizations have been drawing line after line in the dirt which the tyrannical justices keep stepping over. 

Suppose we had enough decent Senators to claim that marriage is only between a man and a woman?  If they, the House and the President all passed the Federal Marriage Amendment and also enough states signed on to the measure to make it part of the Constitution, what should we expect?  Judging simply from past actions, the justices would find a way to interpret the Amendment to suit their whims or perhaps other ways to destroy the intent of the people.  This has happened with the First Amendment, and multiple others.  We would still have the original problem.

No, the Federal Marriage Amendment is nothing more than another line in the sand.  The only way to fix the problem is by the Constitutional means of ridding ourselves of activist judges with their own agendas.  We already have the means to absolutely, positively, stop these judges if our elected representatives would use the Constitution.  They refuse.  That would be too strong a step, to either limit their jurisdiction or to impeach the scoundrels.  Why do we keep putting these people back in there?  

We are most likely going to see President Bush's choice for Chairman of the Judicial Committee in the Senate to be pro-abortion, Senator Arlen Specter, if Bush is re-elected.  Christians should never be part of this evil.  Indeed, we were to be 'wise as serpents' when we have shown ourselves to be co-opted by a party that will never stand for what we believe.  The last 4 years have proven it beyond question.   We make God look bad, as His representatives here on earth, when we are so foolish.   

June 11, 2004

President Ronald Reagan was laid to rest today.  His sense of conviction was strange to elites at that time as it is today when a leader dares to say something that defies those who see right and wrong as gray and leadership as compromise.   In Reagan's greatest moments, he is best known for doing that which drew great criticism by the press, college faculty, and those who have determined that there is no absolute truth and good and evil are anything but opposites in a continuum.    The elites, even the elites in the Republican party who lobbied hard that he should not make the speech at the Berlin wall, the most defining moment of his presidency, stand in the way of true progress.

Romans 1: 21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise , they became fools .

G.W. Bush will be known for some strong statements that also irks the liberal elites but unfortunately, these are generally not followed up by equally bold actions.  He, too, will be known for leadership against the grain, when it occurs.  One thing of utmost importance and quite troubling came up in President Bush's speech, identifying the root problem with our thinking today.  President Bush positivily claims that President Reagan believed (like he does):  "He believed that people were basically good... ". 

Although this sounds good, it is 180 degrees from Biblical teaching.  From this simple statement, we find those who see things in this fashion having a world view which condemns us to making many mistakes as we deal with evil.  Mistakes mean people perish.  Evil exists, as became even more obvious,  September 11,1991.  It lurks in all of us, kept in check by the power of the law and by the goodness and direction of the Holy Spirit.  Neither were feared by the terrorists, allowing them to hurt us, yet believing they are good.  Unfortunately, our lack of clear thinking has other great dangers with virtually every issue in which the government is involved.

With the idea that man is essentially good, we raise man up to be capable of saving himself.  A 'good person' would never be condemned by a Holy God to Hell.   Therefore, if we are "basically good", we have no need of a Savior.  Many would be welcomed into heaven.   This mindset allows for foolish ideas of rehabilitation of certain criminals, treaties with pagan governments and the idea that democracy will eventually thrive in an Islamic nation.   If, however, the leader realizes that man is inherently sinful and in desperate need for a Savior, the choices become clearer and do great good for the people.  The people have greater protection.   The world would be safer.              


May 17, 2004

Today, thanks to the courts in Massachusetts and the refusal of the Supreme Court to hear the appeal, for the first time the state issued marriage licenses to same sex couples.  Much will be written about this and this will be discussed ad nauseum.  

The problem no one discusses, on either side, is that this is an offensive affront to Almighty God and that when his children stray, He says He will punish them (because He loves them).  Many of us claim to be His children yet we choose poorly, considering this issue merely a difference of opinion and not another straw weighing down the already bent camel's back of God's wrath.  Christians who have been silent deserve blame too.

Congratulations all ye who are proud of this new opportunity.  Your new found joy will be turned into great disappointment as we find ourselves under increasing pain and suffering as has occurred over and over again in the Scriptures.  Yes, when we ignore God, He knows how to get our attention.  Are we so foolish that we refuse His power?   It is simply a matter of when, not if.

How long do you think we will enjoy this new 'right'?  Coupled with our myriad of other sinful offenses to God, we are on very thin ice.  We are struggling in virtually everything we do with war, oil prices, sexually transmitted diseases, broken marriages, costs rising with decreasing pay, and suicidal children, to name a few.   Is this judgment? 

What was so wrong with the days when we didn't need to worry about locking our doors or children being abducted?  It seems we are progressing, right? 

Pray for the pulpits to once again teach the fear of God.  Pray He will send the Spirit, convict us and forgive us soon.       

Remember, our President GW Bush has (late in the game) called for a Constitutional Amendment against homosexual marriage.  Unfortunately, he has also invited the states to choose civil unions.  With marriage, the sinful act becomes more likely to be performed among the same pair.  With a civil union, the sinful act is less likely (less commitment) among a pair.  From a public health standpoint, boy that is foolish.  Is Bush's choice appropriate from God's standpoint?

Michael Peroutka has chosen a running mate, Dr. Chuck Baldwin, pastor of Crossroads Baptist Church in Pensacola, FL.  Both refuse such foolhardy decisions as made by our president.  How could we ignore this ticket?  How could anyone vote for President Bush or Sen. John Kerry?


peroutka4president.gif (20010 bytes)http://peroutka2004.com


March 12, 2004

It isn't reasonable to simply complain. We have a personal need for repentance and to call our nation to do the same.  As before, we need depend on the Republicans and the Democrats to choose our president.  We have a candidate from the Constitution Party, Michael Peroutka, whose web site has the right values from the start.  In this order, God, Family, Republic.  peroutka4president.gif (20010 bytes)Check it out.  Also check out the Constitution Party's site as well.



CP468x60.jpeg (9774 bytes)

Addendum:  March 13, 2004

It is early in the election cycle but things are on a fast pace.   More will come in the future.

Compare and contrast the above web sites with the Official Bush reelection web site

GWB_logo_200.gif (6965 bytes)

Take a nice stroll through President Bush's agenda items here.  Where is the life of the unborn?   Where are the moral stands?  The sad truth is, he has chosen things that would best get him elected.  That means we accept his values on the moral issues, considered less important than the other items.  What we must ask ourselves is- 'what does this say to our God?'.  If we are honest and know scripture at all, it is obvious that we are wrong by supporting the wrong agenda.  We are offending Almighty God when we put anything ahead of Him.  How many more sins must we commit before we taste his punishment?  We must repent. 

March 4, 2004

Many Christian groups have chosen to support the constitutional amendment against gay marriage. To quote from our rather deified president on this subject:

"The amendment should fully protect marriage, while leaving the state legislatures free to make their own choices in defining legal arrangements other than marriage."

From God's eyes, we have condoned the homosexual sin whether it is encased in the marriage folder or any other label we may want to call it.

We are fools to try to reason with the gay activists regarding the effect on society, etc. Why am I against it? One reason. It is an offense to Almighty God. We will not win at saving souls or fixing our nation if we do not witness to those who are perishing. How? Level with them. When we choose to spit in God's eye, since He loves us, He will chastise us.  Pain, suffering and death.

Our president through the statement above has taken the homosexual agenda further than any president has ever gone. Even Bill Clinton. By such an amendment we inadvertently condone, encourage and legalize gay relationships. So, if we foolishly fight for this amendment that still allows for great offense against our Creator, in the name of doing His will, we become complicit in this great sin and we will be included in His correction. How could you support Bush's call for an amendment like this?

We are at a "red" level for homeland security since God Himself, our great protector, is not on our side. Do we have to go through God's punishment? Tell President Bush and other Christians that this so-called fix is wrong. God is the one to fear.

Pull your support from Bush's call for such an amendment. Someone must stand against this or we will receive our deserved punishment as God has shown over and over again to do in the past, to ultimately draw us back to Him.

Leviticus 26:1 "`Do not make idols or set up an image or a sacred stone for yourselves, and do not place a carved stone in your land to bow down before it. I am the LORD your God. 2 "`Observe my Sabbaths and have reverence for my sanctuary. I am the LORD. 3 "`If you follow my decrees and are careful to obey my commands, 4 I will send you rain in its season, and the ground will yield its crops and the trees of the field their fruit. 5 Your threshing will continue until grape harvest and the grape harvest will continue until planting, and you will eat all the food you want and live in safety in your land. 6 "`I will grant peace in the land, and you will lie down and no one will make you afraid. I will remove savage beasts from the land, and the sword will not pass through your country. 7 You will pursue your enemies, and they will fall by the sword before you. 8 Five of you will chase a hundred, and a hundred of you will chase ten thousand, and your enemies will fall by the sword before you. 9 "`I will look on you with favor and make you fruitful and increase your numbers, and I will keep my covenant with you. 10 You will still be eating last year's harvest when you will have to move it out to make room for the new...14 "`But if you will not listen to me and carry out all these commands, 15 and if you reject my decrees and abhor my laws and fail to carry out all my commands and so violate my covenant, 16 then I will do this to you: I will bring upon you sudden terror, wasting diseases and fever that will destroy your sight and drain away your life. You will plant seed in vain, because your enemies will eat it. 17 I will set my face against you so that you will be defeated by your enemies; those who hate you will rule over you, and you will flee even when no one is pursuing you. 18 "`If after all this you will not listen to me, I will punish you for your sins seven times over. 19 I will break down your stubborn pride and make the sky above you like iron and the ground beneath you like bronze. 20 Your strength will be spent in vain, because your soil will not yield its crops, nor will the trees of the land yield their fruit. 21 "`If you remain hostile toward me and refuse to listen to me, I will multiply your afflictions seven times over, as your sins deserve...

On Friday, March 23, 1798, President John Adams issued a Proclamation of a National Day of Humiliation, Fasting, and Prayer:

As the safety and prosperity of nations ultimately and essentially depend on the protection and the blessing of Almighty God, and the national acknowledgement of this truth is not only an indispensable duty which the people owe to Him, but a duty whose natural influence is favorable to the promotion of that morality and piety without which social happiness can not exist nor the blessings of a free government be enjoyed;

And as this duty, at all times incumbent, is so especially in seasons of difficulty or of danger, when existing or threatening calamities, the just judgements of God against prevalent iniquity, are a loud call to repentance and reformation;

President George Washington in his Inaugural Address to both Houses of Congress:

We ought to be no less persuaded that the propitious smiles of Heaven can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right which Heaven itself has ordained; and since the preservation of the sacred fire of liberty and the destiny of the republican model of government are justly considered as deeply, perhaps finally, staked of the experiment intrusted to the hands of the American people....


February 27, 2004

President Bush's back is up against the wall.  He has courted the log cabin Republicans.  He has refused to support a constitutional amendment to define marriage (although this is admittedly worthless - just another attempt to fix immorality without a change of the hearts- Congress continues to fail to put the courts in their right place, again Republicans) until the pressure by largely Christian groups have pushed with illegal marriages being offered in San Francisco.  Ask yourself, if it is illegal, as it is, why is it that the mayor and whoever else deserves to be arrested, are not?   Why is it the judges refuse to stop what is patently illegal?  As with the Super Bowl, the streaker at halftime got arrested but Janet Jackson did not.

So, how well did President Bush do with calling for such an amendment?  Terrible.   May I quote his press release?  

"Today I call upon the Congress to promptly pass, and to send to the states for ratification, an amendment to our Constitution defining and protecting marriage as a union of man and woman as husband and wife. The amendment should fully protect marriage, while leaving the state legislatures free to make their own choices in defining legal arrangements other than marriage. "

From God's standpoint, does it really matter whether homosexual acts are performed with the name "marriage" or "civil union" or whatever?  Bush misses another chance to do right.  Remember, even Bill Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act.  This shows that the 'Christian's choice', GW Bush has once again taken all of us down further than even Bill Clinton.  Shame on us.  Christian 'leaders' will ballyhoo Bush's great stand for marriage when in fact he has solidified the pro-homosexual agenda, spitting in the eye of Almighty God.  

In addition, President Bush's release makes the case for Chief Justice Roy Moore's reason to do what he has done yet he failed to support Moore as he should.   Republicans are good at complaining and at the same time refuse to fix the problems.  To borrow from Martin Luther, 'circumstances should be carrying us beyond the confines of moderation'.  Yet we still support those who are a large part of the problem, we are accountable. 

If we were outraged enough, like with the Super Bowl fiasco, our representatives would be forced into action, otherwise it will not happen.  Take away their vote to help wake them up, the Constitution Party deserves support. 

Here is a great synopsis of President Bush's term.



February 21, 2004

President Bush appointed Attorney General Bill Pryor of Alabama to the 11th Circuit Court in a recess appointment yesterday.  His official statement is found here- http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/02/20040220-6.html  

Attorney General Pryor was one of just a handful of federal justice nominees 'filibustered' by the Democrats.  There has been great consternation by the pro-life community leaders implying that nearly all of our president's nominees are being blocked by the '(evil) Democrats' when in fact over 150 other nominees flew right through the Senate process, each meeting the 'litmus tests' of the Democrats. 

That isn't the only sad news.  Attorney General Pryor, when being grilled by the Senate Judiciary Committee many months ago, was incredibly forthright regarding the wrong of Roe vs. Wade.  Sad news?  Of course not.  It was welcome, excellent, and needed comments by what appeared to be a courageous individual.   Incredible words, especially in that setting:

Sen. Arlen Specter, of Pennsylvania, asked Pryor if a quote attributed to Pryor having him saying "the worst abomination in the history of constitutional law" was accurate.

Yes, Pryor said, the quote was accurate. 

"I stand by that comment," Pryor said. "I believe that not only is [Roe] unsupported by the text and structure of the Constitution, but it has led to a morally wrong result. It has led to the slaughter of millions of innocent unborn children."

Here is the sad part.  According to the Ex-Governor of Alabama, Fob James, when he was initially appointing Bill Pryor to the Attorney General (to fill the vacated office from a newly elected senator from Alabama, once Attorney General Jeff Sessions), James discussed the Judge Roy Moore situation.  At that time, Bill Pryor said he agreed with Judge Moore regarding the Ten Commandments and the monument and would do everything in his power (if appointed Atty. General) to stand fully with Judge Moore.  After that, two important things happened.  Pryor was nominated by President Bush for this federal court position and the lawsuit against Chief Justice Roy Moore was playing through the courts. 

Atty. General Pryor became a blocked nominee after his great stand above.  After this, 11th Circuit Judge Myron Thompson ordered the removal of the Ten Commandments monument from the State of Alabama courthouse for the Supreme Court.  Rallys occurred in Montgomery on the steps of the Capitol and the Supreme Court building.  Before the monument was removed, in August of 2003, Howard Phillips predicted that Atty. General Pryor would remove the monument.  Pryor held the power to remove the monument at the behest of the federal court, or he could follow the Constitution and refuse to follow such orders (as he had guaranteed to Gov. James some years before, and had agreed to the constitutionality of such a decision to the governor). 

Despite the great stand in the Senate, Atty. Gen. Pryor, according to Phillips, was taking care of this problem and in return, would get a recess appointment to the job he sought.  Could this be right?  At first, I didn't believe Phillips was giving Pryor enough credit but because Phillips is generally right, I witheld judgment.   That is until Pryor removed the monument ( an act he said would be wrong to do in the past and that he would have no part of).  He followed that up by prosecuting Chief Justice Moore in the Court of the Judiciary and showed his true colors as he questioned Moore. 

Here is an exchange between Pryor and Moore taken from
the official transcript of the trial (November 12, 2003):

Pryor: Mr. Chief Justice? And your understanding is that the
Federal court ordered that you could not acknowledge God; isn't
that right?

Moore: Yes.

Pryor: And if you resume your duties as Chief Justice after this
proceeding, you will continue to acknowledge God as you have
testified that you would today---

Moore: That's right.

Pryor: ---no matter what any other official says?

Moore: Absolutely. (Chief Justice Moore then elaborated.)

Pryor: The only point I am trying to clarify, Mr. Chief Justice, is
not why, but only that, in fact, if you do resume your duties as
Chief Justice, you will continue to do that [acknowledge God]
without regard to what any other official says; isn't that right?

Moore: (He responds by listing numerous examples of the public
acknowledgement of God, and concluded answering the question.)
I think you must.

Pryor was demanding that Chief Justice Roy Moore not acknowledge God! Since when is that unconstitutional?  Pryor did not even refer to the Ten Commandments. He repeatedly asked Moore if he would continue to acknowledge God. To acknowledge God was deemed an impermissible activity and for this Roy Moore was removed as Alabama Chief Justice.

Having said this, it is past time we wake up.  If arguably the best of President Bush's nominees is one who puts his own political agenda ahead of the Constitution, what about the others?  Are we really better off with Bush in the presidency?  That is exactly why the 'Christian leaders' claimed he should be made president, to put good people on the bench.  Folks, as sorry as he turned out to be, Atty Gen. Bill Pryor is the cream of the crop.  The Constitution is trashed.  Rights are trampled on.   We will only get worse.  He will continue to misinterpret the Constitution for the rest of his life on the bench, or so it seems.  

If Howard Phillips is right, as he has been so much of the time and was ahead of the curve here as well, Pryor's choice of where to take a stand was influenced by none other than President Bush whose interests were to make the Ten Commandments disappear as an issue.  This is a cognizant political ploy.  He therefore has no criticism for supporting such a nominee as Pryor (since Pryor showed how 'reasonable' he can be by prosecuting the demonized Chief Justice or gets bogged down in the fray with former Chief Justice Moore rightfully fighting the judicial tyranny.  Pragmatism and politics over principle.  In an election year, the timing of a recess appointment is a bone thrown to the Christian community.  Many well-meaning Christians fall victims to Bush's plans at the same time we pat ourselves on the back believing he is the man for the hour and we are helping save America. 

In fact, our nation is worse off morally than when he took office.  We have both the House and the Senate under Republican control.  The best thing on the moral front Bush can claim in the past 3 1/2 years in office is a recess appointment of Bill Pryor.   And he will claim it.  It makes Christians and therefore the One we worship, look foolish as we continue to be stooges of the Republicans.

Are we better off with Bush?  No.  We lost our witness and we would have opposed Gore's poor legislation.  Remember the poor choice Bush made regarding fetal stem cell research?  President Clinton refused to touch that issue because he knew he would have been jumped on by the Christian community.  Now, we support Bush, no matter what.  Shame on us.  Judge Moore, sir, we are unworthy of your sacrifice.   We must wake up.


January 23, 2004

The Iowa caucus is over, so what.  New Hampshire is soon, big deal.  The rest is coming quickly, yawn. 

There is a very simple fact for any Christian.  Any of the Democrats who embrace abortion 'rights' and homosexual marriage or 'domestic partnerships' are absolutely offending Almighty God.  This is true of anyone who willingly votes for one of them.   If you are a Christian, you have become a bond servant of Christ who expects us to want to please Him by standing boldly for His values, putting His values ahead of our own.  The Democrats just don't get it.  Their choices make them totally unacceptable, if you are to try to please God.

On the other hand, we have the nice President Bush.  He drapes himself in Christian rhetoric and convincingly shows us that he seems to love God.  Some things he gets right.  Unfortunately, not many and not the most important.  To many Christians, what was just said seems almost blasphemous.  It simply takes a little objective thinking to consider this possibility.  The inevitable, the greatly disappointing conclusion, is that President Bush is not the best choice for our vote.

How can such a statement be made?  As of today, if you go to the official Bush reelection web site, under "Agenda", you will be hard pressed to find ending abortion on demand anywhere on the site.   Since the United States will be judged by Almighty God for our sin, the butchering of ~50,000,000 babies seems to cry out, begging God's judgment!  The activist homosexual agenda seems to be off the list as well.  Protect marriage?  Naw.  Didn't make it.

Now, if we assume that President Bush would absolutely list the most important things to be considered for winning our votes on the web site, we have a problem.  It could be he cares deeply for the 2 great moral issues of the day but he left them off trying not to offend anyone.  Therefore, since government is currently complicit in these evils, we have no hope of a change.  In fact, since Bush became our President in 2000, has any babies been saved?  No.  How has marriage been protected?  Not at all.   We are worse off than we were when he took office 3.5 years ago.  Please go to his web site and look at his goals. 

This time around it looks like, again, we will be left with the most qualified candidate for president coming from the Constitution Party, Michael Peroutka.  At the top of his page, what comes first?  God. (and this is not an all-inclusive god of what our president calls 'another great world religion, Islam')  Second?   Family.  Third?  American Republic.  No bones about it, Peroutka got it right.

Protection of America?  All our homeland security can be covered by one word, God.   If we please Him, repent of our personal and national sins and change our ways, we trust that He will protect us.  If we don't, we should expect punishment for these sins.  Al-Qaeda?  Not nearly as dangerous as the One who has the power to send us to Hell.  Who should we fear?  God, when we are unrepentant.  He could just use Al-Qaeda, Iraqi dissidents and further American bloodshed, runaway government spending and/or other mechanisms to bring us to our knees.  If we wake up and tell the Republicans and the Democrats how dangerous a game they are playing with many lives at stake, we may have a chance to abate His anger for daring to claim Him and living otherwise. 

If we vote for either Democrats or Republicans, that is a wasted vote.  We gave up an opportunity to take a stand for God and His values.  May God have mercy on us.  



November 18, 2003

Please see the exchange between Attorney General Bill Pryor and Chief Justice Roy Moore during the Court of the Judiciary which found Judge Moore violated "ethics" charges.  Remember, Bill Pryor is one of the best that President Bush has nominated for the federal bench and who spits on the Constitution.   Why would the Democrats oppose him?

One other case of judicial tyranny occurred today.  "Court Strikes Down "gay" marriage ban"  from WorldNetDaily.  How much more should we take?


November 13, 2003

This is a sad day in America but most folks simply don't realize it.  Judicial tyranny is running rampant.   Chief Justice Roy Moore has stayed the course and has been removed from the bench by the Judicial Court in Montgomery by a 9-0 vote on ethics violations.  He acknowledged God as the source of our law in his questioning by Attorney General Bill Pryor who has chosen the path of least resistance and now has prosecuted the honorable Judge Moore. 

The Senate is in a 30+ hour session to push for 4 of President Bush's judicial nominees to be allowed an up or down vote.  Among these is Bill Pryor.  This could explain his 180 degree turn around and hypocritical reverse of previous guarantees that he agrees with and would support Judge Moore to the end.  Of some 170 + nominees by President Bush, to date 168 have been confirmed by the Senate.  There are currently 4 exceptions.  These are such bad justices that the Democrats have fought hard to keep them from being confirmed.  Pryor is one?  Does this make sense?  

The Republicans rally their Christian base by implications that the Democrats are blocking all these good Bush nominees when the vast majority are sailing through without a hitch.  One of the best has just proven that he has no interest in the Constitution as written. 

If these are the best, then we have no hope.  If the 168 or so who have been confirmed, how could they possibly be any better than Clinton appointees if they were not opposed by the Democrats as they have, to date, successfully done.  We are being mislead.  President Bush's appointees, by an overwhelming margin, are acceptable to the Democrats, meaning they are friendly to their agenda.  The 39 hour session is to help both of the parties to firm up their base to gain support for the upcoming campaigns.  

Why do we wait for God's overwhelming judgment against our having left Him?   Repentance is our only hope.


Bush cheers 'gay' church after 'Marriage Week'
Attempts to please family advocates, homosexuals baffle both groups
Posted: November 12, 2003
1:00 a.m. Eastern

© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com

Not long after he endorsed "Marriage Protection Week," President Bush sent a letter of congratulations to a denomination founded by homosexual activists that performs more than 6,000 same-sex "weddings" each year.

The president wrote to the founding congregation in Los Angeles of the Metropolitan Community Churches, led by leading homosexual activist Rev. Troy D. Perry, on the occasion of its 35th anniversary.

Rev. Troy Perry, left, and partner Phillip De Blieck were granted a marriage license in Toronto in July (Photo: Toronto Star)

"By encouraging the celebration of faith and sharing of God's love and boundless mercy, churches like yours put hope in people's hearts and a sense of purpose in their lives," Bush said in his Oct. 14 missive. "This milestone provides an opportunity to reflect on your years of service and to rejoice in God's faithfulness to your congregation."

Just prior to sending that letter, however, Bush issued a proclamation endorsing an effort to defend the traditional family in response to an increasingly powerful homosexual lobby intent on establishing a right to same-sex "marriage."

The president wrote in his proclamation, "Marriage is a sacred institution, and its protection is essential to the continued strength of our society. Marriage Protection Week provides an opportunity to focus our efforts on preserving the sanctity of marriage and on building strong and healthy marriages in America."

President Bush at forum yesterday in Greer, S.C. (White House photo)

The president further stated: "Marriage is a union between a man and a woman. …"

Marriage Protection Week was promoted by groups such as the Southern Baptist Convention, Focus on the Family and the American Family Association.

The Metropolitan Community Churches' Perry said he was alarmed at Bush's proclamation.

"President Bush was wrong in his endorsement of a week dedicated to denying equal rights to gays and lesbians," he said, according to the website 365gay.com. "And while we appreciate the sentiments he expressed on MCC's anniversary, the president has sent a very mixed message that makes his effusive praise of MCC's 35th anniversary all the more puzzling."

As WorldNetDaily reported, Perry is challenging U.S. courts to recognize his same-sex "marriage," which was granted in Ontario in July after a provincial court ruled Canada's ban is unconstitutional.

He has launched a campaign to ensure the bond is recognized in his home country.

"I don't care what the U.S. government says. My partner, Phillip, and I are legally married under Canadian law," Perry said after his ceremony.

"We've put our nation on notice: We're coming home and we are legally married," he added.

Rev. Troy Perry, left, and Rev. Neil Thomas with letter from President Bush (Photo: 365gay.com)

Perry, who says he and his partner are "missionaries for marriage equality," is encouraging thousands of same-sex couples to follow their lead and head to Canada.

The president's marriage proclamation also was rebuked by the leading homosexual-advocacy group, the Human Rights Campaign.

"It is reprehensible for a president who claims to be compassionate to pander to a coalition of extremist groups by joining their assault on gay families," said Elizabeth Birch, HRC's executive director.

"The American people want to see politicians in Washington concentrating on the real threats to our families – an unstable economy, high unemployment rates and uncertainty in Iraq – not guaranteeing that same-sex couples are left without more than 1,000 rights, responsibilities and protections under federal law."

Rev. Neil Thomas, senior pastor of Metropolitan Community Church of Los Angeles, said the president's letter baffled him.

"How does one denounce the right of gays and lesbians to marry in their churches and suggest they are incapable of having healthy marriages in one moment, and in the next rejoice in God's faithfulness to a gay and lesbian congregation that performs such same-sex marriages?" Thomas asked.

Ed Vitagliano, spokesman for the American Family Association, had the same question.

"I'm disappointed, because this is politics as usual," he told WorldNetDaily. "This is speaking out of both sides of your mouth. This is playing to two groups at the same time who are really after two different things – who uphold two completely different worldviews."

Vitagliano said he understands the pressure President Bush is under, recognizing he has to be the president for everybody, but believes he could fulfill his responsibilities without sanctioning a church like Perry's.

"The MCC is evidence of a growing apostasy within Christianity and our culture and Western civilization, and to applaud what is essentially an apostate denomination is disappointing from a Christian standpoint," he said.

"It may be something we would expect from a politician," Vitagliano added, "but I guess there were some of us who would hope the president was not simply a politician."

The White House did not respond to calls from WND seeking comment.

The Advocate (gay publication)-

Bush congratulated MCC while endorsing Marriage Protection Week
In an ironic juxtaposition, aletter revealed Monday by the predominantly gay Metropolitan Community Church shows that President Bush congratulated MCC on its 35th anniversary during the same week he designated as Marriage Protection Week. MCC performs more than 6,000 gay weddings annually.

In the letter dated October 14, 2003, to MCC Los Angeles, the founding congregation of Metropolitan Community Church, President Bush wrote: "By encouraging the celebration of faith and sharing of God's love and boundless mercy, churches like yours put hope in people's hearts and a sense of purpose in their lives. This milestone provides an opportunity to reflect on your years of service and to rejoice in God's faithfulness to your congregation." The letter was received during the antigay Marriage Protection Week, an effort endorsed by Bush and organized by antigay religious leaders and groups, including Jerry Falwell, James Dobson, the Southern Baptist Convention, and the American Family Association. Many activists claimed their aim was solely to firm up opposition to same-sex marriage. In his proclamation endorsing Marriage Protection Week, President Bush wrote, "Marriage is a sacred institution, and its protection is essential to the continued strength of our society. Marriage Protection Week provides an opportunity to focus our efforts on preserving the sanctity of marriage and on building strong and healthy marriages in America." The Reverend Troy Perry, founder of Metropolitan Community Church, expressed alarm at Bush's proclamation in support of Marriage Protection Week, which he said was designed "to preserve the sacred institution of marriage" by denying the right to marry to gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgendered people. "President Bush was wrong in his endorsement of a week dedicated to denying equal rights to gays and lesbians," Perry said. "And while we appreciate the sentiments he expressed on MCC's anniversary, the president has sent a very mixed message that makes his effusive praise of MCC's 35th anniversary all the more puzzling."

"How does one denounce the right of gays and lesbians to marry in their churches and suggest they are incapable of having healthy marriages in one moment, and in the next rejoice in God's faithfulness to a gay and lesbian congregation that performs such same-sex marriages?" asked the Reverend Neil Thomas, senior pastor of Metropolitan Community Church of Los Angeles.

August 27, 2003

God is glorious.  He is working in our midst.  We need to pray, though.   More soldiers are dying, as of yesterday more than were lost in the 'war'.  We need to repent and then beg God for His protection. 

In Montgomery, AL, what may be a 'watershed' event is occurring with a courageous stand by Chief Justice Roy Moore who was elected as the 'Ten Commandments Judge' by Alabama voters.  His choice to place a monument to this effect is Constitutional by both the United States Constitution and the Alabama Constitution as can be seen by articles linked to below. 

Article X of the United States Constitution says:
    The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Federal Justices have no jurisdiction in this matter and their arbitrary, oligarchy is an affront to all of our freedoms, whether Christian or not.


n 1819, Thomas Jefferson wrote:
The Constitution is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they please.

In 1804, Jefferson wrote:
Nothing in the Constitution has given them [the federal judges] a right to decide for the Executive, more than to the Executive to decide for them... But the opinion which gives to the judges the right to decide what laws are constitutional, and what not, not only for themselves in their own sphere of action, but for the legislature and executive also, in their spheres, would make the judiciary a despotic branch.

Thomas Jefferson on April 21, 1803 wrote:
My views... are the result of a life of inquiry and reflection, and very different from the anti-christian system imputed to me by those who know nothing of my opinions. To the corruptions of Christianity I am, indeed, opposed; but not to the genuine precepts of Jesus himself. I am a Christian in the only sense in which he wished any one to be; sincerely attached to his doctrines in preference to all others...

September 28, 1820 Thomas Jefferson wrote:
You seem... to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions; a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men, and not more so ... and their power [is] the more dangerous, as they are in office for life and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots.

In 1821, Jefferson wrote:
The germ of dissolution of our federal government is in...the federal judiciary; and irresponsible body (for impeachment is scarcely a scare-crow) working like gravity by night and by day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing its noiseless step like a thief, over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall be usurped from the States.


http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=34270   Dr. Alan Keyes

http://opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110003926   Chief Justice Roy Moore

http://www.visionforumministries.org/sections/hotcon/news/2003-08-20_howard_phillips.asp   Howard Phillips


John Eidsmoe
Lt. Colonel, USAFR(Ret.) Colonel, Alabama State Defense Force
Professor, Thomas Goode Jones School of Law
2648 Pine Acres, Pike Road, AL 36064
(334) 270-1789 fax (334) 386-7223 EidsmoeJA@juno.com

The storm of moral crisis has descended upon Alabama. Among the most vital issues facing American jurisprudence are (1) whether our legal system may acknowledge the Higher Law of God as the source and measure of our laws; (2) whether the establishment clause of the First Amendment prohibits the State of Alabama from acknowledging God and His law as the moral foundation of law; (3) whether the State of Alabama (and the 49 other states) are distinctive and viable entities in the American constitutional system or whether they are merely closely supervised subdivisions of a national government; and (4) whether it is ever appropriate to disobey the order of a federal judge.

All of these issues come together in the Alabama Ten Commandments case, often cited as Glassroth v. Moore.

The symbolic portrayal could not be more graphic. In the rotunda of the Alabama Judicial Building in Montgomery stands a 5,280 lb granite monument depicting the Ten Commandments, with various quotations from America's founding fathers on the monument's four sides. Just a few blocks away, in front of the Federal Court House, stands a sculpture of Themis, the Greek goddess of law and justice. The Ten Commandments monument was financed entirely with private donations; Themis was paid for by federal funds. And yet, Themis is guarded by federal officers, while U.S. District Court Myron Thompson has ruled that the Ten Commandments monument must be removed from the Judicial Building rotunda.

Recently I have noticed a shift in the debate. A few weeks ago the debate centered between those who say Judge Thompson is right and those who say Judge Thompson is wrong. Today, the debate seems to be between those who say Judge Thompson is wrong but his order must be obeyed, and those who say Judge Thompson is wrong and we must resist his order.

I have written at great length to articulate my belief that the Ten Commandments may properly be displayed in court houses and other public buildings; the most complete exposition of my position may be found in my article "The Alabama Ten Commandments Case: Is the Pendulum of Establishment Clause Jurisprudence Swinging Back to Nonpreferentialism?" Jones Law Review II:1 December 1998 pp. 39-97.

Today I am writing to declare my belief that Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore is justified in disobeying Federal Judge Myron Thompson's order to remove the Ten Commandments monument, and that public officials, pastors, and other citizens of Alabama and across the nation should come to Chief Justice Moore's defense.

I do not treat disobedience lightly. As a former prosecutor, a retired Air Force Lt. Colonel and Judge Advocate, and a Colonel and Chaplain in the Alabama State Defense Force, I strongly believe in the rule of law. The rule of law means we submit to lawful authority. But just as strongly, the rule of law means we resist unlawful authority. For the rule of law restrains both the people and their rulers. Where law does not restrain the people, the result is anarchy. Where law does not restrain the rulers, there is tyranny. Those who believe in the rule of law must be equally opposed to both.

It is often said that a public official, especially a State Supreme Court Chief Justice, has a higher duty than others to obey the orders of a federal court, that civil disobedience may be an option for a private citizen but not for Chief Justice Moore. The exact opposite is true. State officials have a heightened duty to resist unlawful federal authority, and when they do so it is called interposition.

Black's Law Dictionary, Fourth Edition offers the following definition:

" Interposition. The doctrine that a state, in the exercise of its sovereignty, may reject a mandate of the federal government deemed to be unconstitutional or to exceed the powers delegated to the federal government.

The concept is based on the 10th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States reserving to the states powers not delegated to the United States. Historically, the doctrine emanated from Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 Dallas 419, wherein the state of Georgia, when sued in the Supreme Court by a private citizen of another state, entered a remonstrance and declined to recognize the court's jurisdiction. Amendment 11 validated Georgia's position.

Implementation of the doctrine may be peaceable, as by resolution, remonstrance or legislation, or may proceed ultimately to nullification with forcible resistance.

The Constitution does contemplate and provide for the contingency of adverse state interposition or legislation to annul or defeat the execution of national laws." In Re Charge to Grand Jury, Fed. Case No. 18,274 [2 Spr. 292].

Far from a radical doctrine, interposition is actually a middle ground position. Absolute submission to unlawful authority leads to and sanctions tyranny and oppression. Popular rebellion can lead to chaos and bloodshed. Interposition -- lesser magistrates, state and local authorities, placing themselves between their people and the higher magistrates or federal authorities -- is a moderate course that is less likely to result in either extreme.

Interposition has a long tradition in Western law and has led to some of the greatest advances in constitutional liberty. Medieval theologians and philosophers who addressed and endorsed interposition include John of Salisbury (1030-85 AD), James of Viterbo (circa 1300 AD), and Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274 AD). Aquinas believed that

"...the duty of obedience is, for the Christian, a consequence of this derivation of authority from God, and ceases when that ceases. But, as we have already said, authority may fail to derive from God for two reasons: either because of the way in which authority has been obtained, or in consequence of the use which is made of it." (Book 2, Commentary on the Sentences of Peter Lombard)

When a ruler becomes a tyrant, his authority no longer comes from God and he becomes an illegitimate ruler. While it may be better to bear with moderate degrees of tyranny, Christians must stand against the ruler when his tyranny becomes excessive. But popular rebellion may have disastrous consequences: the ruler may suppress the rebellion and become more tyrannical than before, or those who overthrow him, fearing that others may do the same, become just as tyrannical as their predecessors. So what is the solution? Aquinas says,

"...it seems that to proceed against the cruelty of tyrants is an action to be undertaken, not through the private presumption of a few, but rather by public authority." (Book 1, On Kingship)

While continental theologians wrote about interposition, English theologians and nobles put interposition into practice. Since 890 AD England had been governed under the legal code of Alfred the Great, which began with a recitation of the Ten Commandments. But after the Norman Conquest of 1066 AD, Anglo-Saxons and Celts felt themselves oppressed under the more centralized Norman rule. Finally in the 1200s, chafing under the autocratic measures of King John, English leaders decided it was time to act.

On August 25, 1213, a group of barons and bishops met at St. Paul's Cathedral in London. Stephen Langton, the Archbishop of Canterbury (also known for having divided the Bible into chapters), read to them the old Charter of King Henry, expounded to them the doctrine of interposition, and administered to them an oath that they would conquer or die in defense of their liberties and those of their subjects.

Two years later, the barons and bishops commissioned Robert Fitz Walter as Marshall of the Army of God and Holy Church. On June 15, 1215, they met King John at Runneymeade and compelled him to either sign the Magna Charta or abdicate the throne. John signed, and the 63 articles of the Magna Charta constitute a founding document of English liberty. Its main significance, however, is not the rights it contains, which are simply the reassertion of the ancient rights of Englishmen against the encroachments of a Norman king, but rather the fact that the king was forced to sign against his will on threat of being overthrown.

This was a constitutional crisis of the first order. It was handled by interposition -- and we have been blessed with the results for nearly eight hundred years.

A century later the Scots practiced interposition against English rule under King Alexander, Malcolm Wallace, William Wallace, Robert the Bruce, and others. In April 1320 Robert the Bruce gathered the Parliament of Scotland at Arbroath Abbey, where they drafted and adopted the Declaration of Arbroath, in which they set forth their history as a free people until the usurpation of King Edward of England, and vowed that

"...for, as long as but a hundred of us remain alive, never will we under any conditions be brought under English rule. It is in truth not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom -- for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself."

(Scottish history and thought have greatly influenced America, especially Alabama where our state flag bears the St. Andrew's Cross. When the Scots again fought for independence in the 1740s under Bonnie Prince Charles and were brutally suppressed, thousands of them fled to America. A century later, the next generation of Scottish-Americans became leaders in the American War for Independence. The Mecklenburg Declaration, drafted in 1775 by a group of Scottish Presbyterian elders in North Carolina, bears striking parallels to the Declaration of Independence.)

Reformation leaders followed and further developed the Catholic teaching on interposition. John Calvin declared that private individuals normally should not undertake the curbing of tyrants but should follow "popular magistrates" in doing so:

"For when popular magistrates have been appointed to curb the tyranny of kings (as the Ephori, who were opposed to kings among the Spartans, or Tribunes of the people to consuls among the Romans, or Demarchs to the senate among the Athenians; and perhaps there is something similar to this in the power exercised in each kingdom by the three orders, when they hold their primary diets), so far am I from forbidding these officially to check the undue license of kings, that if they connive at kings when they tyrannize and insult over the humbler of the people, I affirm that their dissimulation is not free from nefarious perfidy; because they fraudulently betray the liberty of the people, while knowing that, by the ordinance of God, they are its appointed guardians." (Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book 4, Chapter 20, 1559 AD)

Other Reformation leaders who articulated the doctrine of interposition were John Knox, father of the Presbyterian Church (1505-72 AD), the French Huguenot author of Vindicae Contra Tyrannos (1579 AD) who used the surname Junius Brutus, and Scottish theologian Samuel Rutherford in Lex Rex (1644 AD). Among Catholic and Protestant theologians alike, I am just barely skimming the surface because of time and space constraints.

In the 1600s, while the English colonies of North America were being planted and populated, England herself was locked in a struggle between the Puritans in Parliament and the Stuart kings. The common perception that the Stuarts believed in the "divine right of kings" is simplistic. Both sides believed governmental authority comes from God; the issue was lines of governmental authority. The Stuart kings believed God gives authority directly to the king. The Parliamentarians contended that God gives governmental authority to the people, who delegate that authority to lesser magistrates (local earls, sheriffs, barons, members of Parliament), and they in turn delegate authority to the king. That being so, they insisted, the king is answerable to the parliament, and the parliament in turn is answerable to the people.

Through decades of struggle, the Parliament practiced various forms of interposition: negotiation, legislation, litigation agitation. Twice they took interposition further, trying and convicting King Charles I of treason and executing him in 1649, and deposing James II in the bloodless Glorious Revolution of 1688 and forcing him to flee to France. The following year the English Parliament reaffirmed the ancient God-given rights of Englishmen in the English Bill of Rights of 1689.

And as the struggle for liberty waged in England, the American colonists looked on with approval. Nathaniel Hawthorne captured their spirit in his short story, The Gray Champion.

Less than a century later it was America's turn. Believing the English king and parliament were usurping their rights and the autonomy their colonial charters had guaranteed to them, the colonists came together in the first Continental Congress of 1774. On October 14 they issued their Declaration and Resolves that

"...The good people of the several colonies...justly alarmed at these arbitrary proceedings of parliament and administration, have severally elected, constituted, and appointed deputies to meet, and sit in general Congress...in order to obtain such establishment, as that their religion, laws, and liberties, may not be subverted."

After two years of futile attempts to practice moderate forms of interposition and resolve their differences with England, in 1776 the Continental Congress adopted the Declaration of Independence. Perhaps the best-known document of interposition in history, the Declaration proclaims that the American colonies are entitled to independence by "the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God." It sets forth the basic "unalienable rights" endowed "by their Creator," proclaims that "to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed." The Declaration then claims:

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

The Declaration cautions that established governments should not be changed for light and transient reasons:

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them to absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

The Declaration then sets forth a list of grievances that, taken together, establish that George III has exercised tyranny over the colonies and concludes that "A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people."

The Declaration proclaims that "these United Colonies, are and of Right ought to be free and independent States,." appeals to "the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions," rests "a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence," and the signers close by pledging "our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor."

Think for a moment. Suppose liberty's champions of the past had believed that one should never resist higher authority. Archbishop Langton would never have forced King John to sign the Magna Charta, the Scots would not have fought for independence, the Glorious Revolution would hever have taken place, the English Bill of Rights would never have been drafted, and we today would still be subject to the English king.

But they did believe in interposition. Aren't you glad they did?

The Founding Fathers did not renounce their belief in interposition once America became independent. They fought to preserve their independence, and that independence was finally secured and recognized by the Treaty of Paris of 1873, which begins with the words,

"In the Name of the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity."

Four years later they drafted a Constitution which was designed to, among other things, "secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity;" note that "blessings must come from a Higher Source.

The Constitution was intended to ensure that government had enough power to govern effectively, but also to ensure that government did not become tyrannical and oppressive. Washington wrote that

"Government is not reason; it is not eloquence; it is force! Like fire, it is a dangerous servant, and a fearful master."

Jefferson echoed that sentiment in the Kentucky Resolutions:

"In questions of power, then, let no more be said of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution."

Knowing the tendency of power to corrupt and aggrandize, they designed a Constitution that would chain down that dangerous servant and keep it from becoming a fearful master. They accomplished this end by carefully limiting the powers of government; by separating the powers vertically among federal, state and local levels and horizontally among legislative, executive and judicial branches; and by providing checks and balances whereby each branch and level, guarding its own powers against encroachments by the others, would check and balance the other branches and levels and force them to adhere to their constitutional limitations. This constitutional system has made the United States of America a great and free nation for over two centuries.

But in recent decades the system has become unbalanced. Federal power has expanded exponentially, at the expense of state and local authority and individual freedom. And the judicial branch of the federal government has become nearly absolute in its authority. Checks and balances against the judiciary still exist, but the other branches and levels of government seem unwilling to employ them. The result is that, as Professor Graglia of the University of Texas School of Law has stated,

"...judicial usurpation of legislative power has become so common and complete that the Supreme Court has become our most powerful and important instrument of government in terms of determining the nature and quality of American life. Questions literally of life and death (abortion and capital punishment), of public morality (control of pornography, prayer in the schools, and government aid to religious schools), and of public safety (criminal procedure and street demonstrations), are all, now, in the hands of judges under the guise of questions of constitutional law. The fact that the Constitution says nothing of, say, abortion, and indeed, explicitly and repeatedly recognizes the capital punishment the Court has come close to prohibiting, has made no difference.

The result is that the central truth of constitutional law today is that it has nothing to do with the Constitution except that the words 'due process' or 'equal protection' are almost always used by the judges in stating their conclusions. Not to put too fine a point on it, constitutional law has become a fraud, a cover for a system of government by the majority vote of a nine-person committee of lawyers, unelected and holding office for life."

A further problem with judicial review is that many judges no longer feel bound by the plain wording of the Constitution and the intent of those who wrote it. The result, as Chancellor Kent once wrote, is that judges feel free to "roam at large in the trackless fields of their own imaginations." And if they are not bound by the plain letter of the Constitution as intended by its Framers, their power is virtually unlimited.

Good arguments can be made for judicial review, at least in a limited form. But does judicial review really mean that every time a federal judge issues an order, every other branch and every other level of government must salute, say "Yes Sir!" and march in lockstep to the beat of a federal judge's drum. As a Professor of Constitutional Law for 20 years, I challenge anyone to show me any language in the Constitution that gives federal judges such absolute power. Such a notion would fly in the face of the Framers' basic belief that no one branch or level should have such absolute power. Many leading Americans have emphatically rejected this notion. For example, Thomas Jefferson wrote in an 1820 letter,

"You seem...to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions -- a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. ... Our judges are as honest as other men, and not more so... . They have, with others, the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps.

... The Constitution has erected no such tribunal, knowing that, to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots."

President Andrew Jackson refused to enforce orders of the Supreme Court with which he disagreed. Abraham Lincoln declared that

"...if the policy of the Government upon vital questions affecting the whole people is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court the instant they are made in ordinary litigation between parties to personal actions, the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned their Government into the hands of that eminent tribunal."

And Theodore Roosevelt wrote,

"It is the people, and not the judges, who are entitled to say what their constitution means, for the constitution is theirs, it belongs to them and not to their servants in office -- any other theory is incompatible with the foundation principles of our government."

University of South Carolina Law Professors William J. Quirk and R. Randall Birdwell, in their book Judicial Dictatorship (New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, 1997), note that

"The philosophical assumptions of judicial review are so inconsistent with democratic theory that there is along tradition of resistance to it. The resistance, today, is a largely underground movement that exists outside the normal academic and law school curriculum. Historically, the members of the resistance are an impressive group. The include the great democratic presidents: Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Andrew Jackson, Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, and Franklin D. Roosevelt. They include the great constitutional scholars: James Bradley Thayer, The Origin and Scope of the American Doctrine of Constitutional Law (1893) and John Marshall [a 1920 book by Thayer]; Louis Boudin, Government by Judiciary (1932); Edward S. Corwin, Court over Constitution (1938); Henry Steele Commager, Majority Rule and Minority Rights (1943); and Learned Hand, The Bill of Rights (1958). Who made the Court, as Learned Hand asks: 'the arbiters of all political authority in the nation with a discretion to act or not, as they please?'"

Chief Justice John Marshall firmly entrenched the principle of judicial review in Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803). In that opinion he declared that a law repugnant to the Constitution is null and void. But if an Act of Congress is null and void if inconsistent with the Constitution, does not follow that the order of an unelected federal judge is also null and void if inconsistent with the Constitution?

At some point we must stand up and say to the federal judiciary, "Enough is enough! You have usurped powers that the Constitution has not delegated to you. You have imposed upon the rightful authority of the states." But when do we reach that point?

I believe we have reached that point when a federal judge tells the people of Alabama that they may not place the Ten Commandments, the moral foundation of law, in the Judicial Building of the State of Alabama -- and when, to add insult to injury, they vaunt their sculpture of the Greek goddess Themis at the federal court house just a few blocks away.

The issue is more than a monument. The issue is whether a judge may acknowledge the existence of transcendent moral absolutes and use those absolutes as he interprets and applies the law.

Many pastors have criticized the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to legalize abortion in Roe v. Wade (1973) and to legalize sodomy in Lawrence v. Texas (2003). But what is wrong with a court legalizing abortion and sodomy, if God's Law has no place in American courts?

I have known Chief Justice Roy Moore for many years. In this case, and in the earlier Etowah County litigation, I have traveled with him, worked with him, dined with him, worshipped with him, prayed with him, argued with him, and I know him to be a man of unquestionable sincerity and impeccable integrity. He has taken a stand, and risked the ruination of his career on that stand, because he is firmly convinced this is the only honorable course to follow. He believes he has a duty to God and to the people of Alabama, under the oaths he has taken to uphold the United States Constitution and the Alabama Constitution, to restore the moral foundation of our law.

Alabama has an unprecedented opportunity to stand in the gap with Chief Justice Moore and resist this federal usurpation of state authority and federal dismantling of America's Biblical heritage. If the Governor, the Attorney General, and the eight Associate Justices had stood with Chief Justice Moore, if Governor Riley had issued the call on statewide television for Alabamians to come to the Judiciary Building by the thousands to stand against the removal of the Ten Commandments, if the pastors of Alabama had joined in calling upon their parishioners to respond with a massive but peaceful protest, Judge Thompson could not have enforced his order, and the federal judiciary would have had to retreat.

I regret that the eight associate justices did not join with Chief Justice Moore as did the Justices of the Supreme Court of Utah in 1968. In Dyett v. Turner, 439 P.2d 266, the Utah Supreme Court stood against the usurpations of the Warren Court, stating:

"The United States Supreme Court, as at present constituted, has departed from the Constitution as it has been interpreted from its inception and has followed the urgings of social reformers in foisting upon this Nation laws which even Congress could not constitutionally pass. It has amended the Constitution in a manner unknown to the document itself. While it takes three-fourths of the states of the Union to change the Constitution legally, yet as few as five men who have never been elected to office can by judicial fiat accomplish a change just as radical as could three-fourths of the states of this Nation. As a result of the recent holdings of that Court, the sovereignty of the states is practically abolished, and the erstwhile free and independent states are now in effect and purpose merely closely supervised units in the federal system.

We do not believe that justices of once free and independent states should surrender their constitutional powers without being heard from. We would betray the trust of our people if we sat supinely by and permitted the great bulk of our powers to be taken over by the federal courts without at lest stating reasons why it should not be so. By attempting to save the dual relationship which has heretofore existed between state and federal authority, and which is clearly set out in the Constitution, we think we act in the best interest of our country.

We feel like galley slaves chained to our oars by a power from which we cannot free ourselves, but like the slaves of old we think we must cry out when we can see the boat heading into the maelstrom directly ahead of us; and by doing so, we hope the master of the craft will heed the call and avert the dangers which confront us all.

But by raising our voices in protest we, like the galley slaves of old, expect to be lashed for doing so. We are confident that we will not be struck by 90 percent of the people of this Nation who long for the return to the days when the Constitution was a document plain enough to be understood by all who read it, the meaning of which was set firmly like a jewel in the matrix of common sense and wise judicial decisions.

... When we bare our backs to receive the verbal lashes, we will try to be brave; and should the great court of these United States decide that in our thinking we have been in error, then we shall indeed feel honored, for we will then be placed on an equal footing with all those great justices who at this late date are also said to have been in error for so many years."

I deeply regret that the other Justices have not seen fit to join with Chief Justice Moore in resisting this federal judge's attempt to prohibit us from acknowledging the Ten Commandments as the moral foundation of law. But other judges, legislators and public officials have stood with Chief Justice Moore, and it is therefore of crucial importance that the people of Alabama rally to the Chief Justice's defense.

In the crisis that is upon Alabama today, pastors have a special responsibility to inform their people and inspire them to action. Lord Acton observed,

"...when Christ said 'Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's and unto God the things that are God's,' He gave to the State a legitimacy it had never before enjoyed, and set bounds to it that had never yet been acknowledged. And He not only delivered the precept but He also forged the instrument to execute it. To limit the power of the State ceased to be the hope of patient, ineffectual philosophers and became the perpetual charge of a universal Church."

During the American War for Independence, America's clergy led the way for their people to become involved. In Boston the "Father of the American Revolution," Sam Adams, proclaimed independence, and he was echoed by the "Black Regiment," the black-robed New England clergy who preached independence in pulpits throughout New England. Throughout the colonies, clergy of many faiths called upon their parishioners to answer their country's call.

Today Alabama faces a constitutional crisis of similar proportions: Are we subject to the higher Law of God? Or is law simply what the government says it is? Are human rights unalienable because they are the gift of our Creator, or are they simply negotiable privileges that government can give or take away at will?

Is Chief Justice Moore's battle for the Ten Commandments a "lost cause?" There is no such thing as a lost cause until the last chapter of history has been written. Various new legal moves are underway, and the Spirit of God is at work. But regardless of the outcome of this case, we must take a stand for what is right. A century from now, as Americans seek to put the pieces together and rediscover the moral foundation of law, they will remember what we did in Montgomery in that hot summer of 2003. And as my wife reminds me, God will remember even if no one else does.

And in the evening of your life, when your grandchildren ask what you did during the constitutional crisis over the Ten Commandments, what will you tell them?

"For if thou altogether holdest thy peace at this time, then shall there enlargement and deliverance arise to the Jews from another place; but thou and thy father's house shall be destroyed: and who knoweth whether thou art come to the kingdom for such a time as this?" Esther 4:14


John Eidsmoe


July 28, 2003

Long overdue update. 

The web pages have been updated some time ago with a major addition - the highly recommended  Joseph and Jesus pages.  These have been an enormous undertaking and yet the truth they bring out easily justifies the effort.  To whet your appetite, try to answer this question, why would God dedicate 12 long chapters in the first book of the Bible to describing the life of Joseph?  These new pages go through verse by verse to show Joseph in unbelievable detail as a prophetic life to show Christ who would come thousands of years later.  Please visit these pages and pass on this material to others. 

On a less enjoyable note, we have many other struggles in our lives.  Some take time away from important things and yet they have importance as well.  However, finally things have come together so that I may update the political side of the web site specifically with President Bush in mind as he has dealt with God's most important issues.   Some things have been found in these update pages in the past.  Some are new and some are now being realized.  Even these pages are behind as  the activist homosexual agenda is accelerating on almost a daily basis. 

Once again, adultery that has become commonplace in 'Christian' settings is abhorrent to God as is homosexual behavior.  Nevertheless, we must oppose an agenda that unravels the fabric of our Christian nation as our founders so well understood and as God would expect  His servants to do.  This is without hatred or even a dislike of homosexual individuals.  God warns of their future condemnation in multiple places in the scriptures.  Homosexuals need prayer like the rest of us.  We cannot normalize this lifestyle without realistically expecting God's chastisement on our nation and upon us for accepting this sin.

Abortion is another key 'moral issue' that President Bush and fellow Republicans now have a track record.  This new page outlines some of these failures.  Howard Phillips deserves the credit for these excerpts from his publication, "50 Reasons (and more) We Are Not Better with Bush".



We have had unparalleled success on the battle field with the overwhelming destruction of Saddam Hussein's control of Iraq.  We finally see a liberated people with great joy, if only for a while.  Thanks to God who brought us this far with amazing protection. 

Our success, to date, must not be claimed as evidence God is pleased with us.  Our success comes directly from God.  The Iraqi people have been severely oppressed and this includes approximately 1% of their population as Christians.  From God's standpoint, it was time for Saddam to go.  Perhaps we will see more Iraqis come to Christ, God heard the prayers of the Iraqi Christians for deliverance.  God used us to do this. 

Our success, so far, may also be linked to prayers of the righteous in our nation, as few as that may be.  At the same time, without repentance, we may invite pain and suffering that could come at any time, especially to those of us in America without chemical suits or flak jackets.  We have not heard a call to prayer and thanksgiving in response to our current success.  We think we are self-sufficient.  We were given this ability by the hand of God, who we have largely forgotten.

We are not out of the woods yet.  The danger is great and perhaps greater as we try to bring 'democracy' to Iraq.  How long will this take and will it work?   The Iraqi people need an internal conscience in order to govern themselves.   Why is it democracy is not embraced in Islamic nations?  There is no self-sacrificial love of others at the expense of one's self.  It is a religion that centers on what one can get for themselves, considered Allah's reward.  Islam wants to conquer the world and to submit it to their will.  Christianity wants to reason with the world and do good to others. 

iraqlooters.jpeg (25711 bytes)
Looters in Baghdad

On October 11, 1798, President John Adams stated in a letter to the officers of the First Brigade of the Third Division of the Militia of Massachusetts:

We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

John Adams in 1776 wrote:

Statesmen, my dear Sir, may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone, which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue; and if this cannot be inspired into our people in a greater measure than they have it now, they may change their rulers and the forms of government, but they will not obtain a lasting liberty. They will only exchange tyrants and tyrannies.

America needs to get back to the basics of Christianity to truly defeat terror and to save ourselves.

Proverbs 16:7 When a man's ways are pleasing to the LORD, he makes even his enemies live at peace with him. 

At this time, as always, God's grace is greater than our deserved judgment.  We have no reason to believe He will indefinitely continue our blessings.   We have had some more time to repent of our falling.  Thank God.  If we repent we could likely avert such destruction.  May God have mercy on our souls and our troops. 

Addendum (4/22/03)

Another pertinent quote in regard to establishing democracy in Iraq and unfortunately speaks about our own nation as well today.

Benjamin Franklin in 1787 said:

Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.

One additional most important piece of information, war, as bad as it is, oftentimes is associated with spiritual revival.  Remember the huge sandstorm a couple of days into the battle?  Was God giving others more down time to consider their eternal position?   Could this be the beginning of more generalized revival?  Pray to Almighty God it is.

desertbaptism (40522 bytes)

Baptism in Kuwait before invasion into Iraq


War.  We hear we must pray for the troops, our leaders and the Iraqi people.   Absolutely.

What is neglected by most is that before we dare to ask God for His help, we must repent of our great sinfulness and beg His mercy.  Yes, fear Him, or this may apply.

Isaiah 1:4 Ah, sinful nation, a people loaded with guilt, a brood of evildoers, children given to corruption! They have forsaken the LORD; they have spurned the Holy One of Israel and turned their backs on him... 11 "The multitude of your sacrifices-- what are they to me?" says the LORD. "I have more than enough of burnt offerings, of rams and the fat of fattened animals; I have no pleasure in the blood of bulls and lambs and goats. 12 When you come to appear before me, who has asked this of you, this trampling of my courts? 13 Stop bringing meaningless offerings! Your incense is detestable to me. New Moons, Sabbaths and convocations-- I cannot bear your evil assemblies. 14 Your New Moon festivals and your appointed feasts my soul hates. They have become a burden to me; I am weary of bearing them. 15 When you spread out your hands in prayer, I will hide my eyes from you; even if you offer many prayers, I will not listen. Your hands are full of blood; 16 wash and make yourselves clean. Take your evil deeds out of my sight! Stop doing wrong, 17 learn to do right! Seek justice, encourage the oppressed. Defend the cause of the fatherless, plead the case of the widow.

The enemy can do only as much as God allows.  Here or in other parts of the world.   When lives are on the line, why haven't we seen a sincere call for us to repent?  

James 5:16 Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous man is powerful and effective. 

Not all of us are needed to pray with effect.  How many prayers are a waste of time?  On the other hand, God hears the righteous.  We must seek this (knowing we can never be considered totally righteous without Christ).

Isaiah 66:2 Has not my hand made all these things, and so they came into being?" declares the LORD. "This is the one I esteem : he who is humble and contrite in spirit, and trembles at my word.

Yes, you who pursue righteousness, stand in the gap.


2- 12-2003

We are at a "High" state of alert.  The madman who embraces death has called his demon possessed followers to kill more.  They call us weak. 

Despite our military strength, we are weak when it comes to terror.  The terrorists are weak too.  Our only hope, again is to fall to our knees in humble repentance, turn to living righteous lives and to beg for His mercy.  It isn't that they are worse than us.  It is that both the terrorists and the Americans deny God's direction and we both deserve punishment.  God will allow both of us to deal it out to each other as He did throughout the Old Testament, until we are broken and fall in true repentance. 

Sin?  Start with the Ten Commandments.  Not only have we failed to keep them, we continue to dismiss our sin as old fashioned notions that somehow don't apply to us today.  We compromise our previously held values on the Sabbath, adultery, homosexuality and the purchase of pornography (even HBO,etc.) financing others to entertain us with sin through money entrusted to us by God, love of other gods ahead of Him (such as possessions and money), ~42,000,000 abortions and our own love of death and evil, etc.  We have fallen so far.  Why should God protect us when the only way some of us can be truly saved is for us to develop a true fear of Him and beg for forgiveness?

Our hope comes from only one thing.  We must beg His forgiveness, promise to change ourselves and then beg God to help us.  Otherwise, God will discipline His children.

1Corinthians 11:31 But if we judged ourselves, we would not come under judgment. 32 When we are judged by the Lord, we are being disciplined so that we will not be condemned with the world.

Deuteronomy 28:45 All these curses will come upon you. They will pursue you and overtake you until you are destroyed, because you did not obey the LORD your God and observe the commands and decrees he gave you. 46 They will be a sign and a wonder to you and your descendants forever. 47 Because you did not serve the LORD your God joyfully and gladly in the time of prosperity,
(see http://dutyisours.com/oops.htm)

Why wait for bad things to happen when we may be able to implore God's blessing in our battle against an evil, dedicated enemy?  Otherwise, we should expect pain and suffering and more body bags (maybe even our own) until we get the message that we cannot call ourselves a godly nation and at the same time spit in the eye of Almighty God.   May God have mercy on us.



The space shuttle tragedy today reminds us of the fragility of life.  Truly we do not know how much time we are given.  This is a tragic opportunity for the rest of us to consider -what if I died today, as many others did as well?  May God bless the souls of the astronauts and comfort their families.  Please pray for them.   President Bush's address blessed the nation.  Thank you sir. 

Shall we consider the wonderful scripture from Isaiah that our President quoted, and then let us look at the verse immediately before the quoted verse.

Isaiah 40:26 Lift your eyes and look to the heavens: Who created all these? He who brings out the starry host one by one, and calls them each by name . Because of his great power and mighty strength, not one of them is missing.

Yes, He who created and knows each star by name knows each of the astronauts and the rest of us intimately, by name as well.  Those who know Him take great solace in this truth.  The verse immediately before the above, now quoted verse reads:

Isaiah 40:25 "To whom will you compare me? Or who is my equal?" says the Holy One.

President Bush is right, "....may God continue to bless America."   Thank you to our President, the astronauts' families and especially the astronauts.


A few comments after the State of the Union address, not all-inclusive, but just a few.  First, it was refreshing for a president to speak of God in a manner of honor to our Creator.  At the end, it was clear President Bush was asking God to continue to bless America, not demand it as many Americans proudly proclaim.  Still, there was a void regarding our own role in begging forgiveness of our private and national sins.   We do not repent of our sins yet we ask God for His blessing.  It was appropriate in the speech, George Washington and others would have done that.  There was no asking of prayer for our troops' or our own protection, prayer that would be answered if we show our true repentant nature that does not exist now.

Let us remember that the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, touted as a great pro-life victory is merely a federal law that outlaws what is considered murder in all states.  Cloning and Partial Birth Abortion may be banned   in the next few years.  If so, thank God.  Any more, forget it.  To the politicians, these bones should satisfy us since we have shown we accept much less.

Justices appointed?  We will see.  Sandra Day O'Connor was nominated by President Reagan, most of the others by Republican Presidents.  Don't count on this fixing our problems.  This is not the most important legacy for President Bush.   This is only our hopeful wishing and exhibits our refusal to follow God's commandments and direction as laid out in His scriptures.  President Bush is his own legacy.  He has to answer to God for his decisions.  May he choose well and may God bless these decisions.    

It was of great importance to see the official from Uganda!!!!  They have the right approach in combatting AIDS and they have saved hundreds of thousands of lives, if not millions, by their direction, discussed elsewhere on this site.  AID's is devastating and if we really care for others, we must work to end this infection here and overseas. 

Faith-based programs sound good but remember, there is a cost when the government is involved.  First, the money comes from taxpayers who could give it to the organization if the government would not take it from them.  This money would be undiluted for the Christians who are known to be altruistic and giving- if we had it to give.  Second, the government will regulate those who accept it.    

War?  God, please protect your people and awaken us to our sins before it is too late.  With Him no one else can prevail.  Without Him, we are merely dying a slow death as we increase our debt, lose our young soldiers and lose our freedoms in the name of security.  The enemy is not our greatest problem, merely a reason for us to destroy ourselves. 

Christians, you are representing Almighty God!  Isn't it time we woke up?



Welcome to the new year. 

We will now have a new senate majority leader, Dr. Bill Frist.  He is very likeable guy, much like our president, G.W. Bush.  He is, again like our president, a stable, consciencious and dedicated man.  His intelligence is another asset.  He claims, and by his record, is generally pro-life.  Generally.

Unfortunately, he pushed for Dr. David Satcher to be the Surgeon General.  This individual was known to have performed abortions himself.  Since he was from Tennessee, Dr. Frist felt that was the right thing to do to represent his state. It appears that the Christian community who unreservedly put God's values first will be in opposition to the same political battles of compromise.  Of course this is no surprise. 

President Bush carefully pushed for Senator Frist to be the next Majority Leader, probably for the reasons outlined above.   There is some concern that the White House took advantage of Senator Lott's misstatement to redirect Senate leadership to one more friendly to President Bush's agenda.  The White House advisors became quite disturbed when Sen. Lott claimed immediately after the Senate victory that they will now pass a ban on partial birth abortion (when there are other 'more important' and less divisive issues to consider).  It seems they would rather have a few more babies die in the interim while they are dealing with the more important issues like taxes.  Could this be the reason our president gave Senator Lott no aid in his time of need?  He seemed to be tossing the anchor to the drowning victim.  Hopefully not, but this change in Senate leadership could mask an underlying lack of conviction by our now greatly empowered President to pass the Christian agenda items.  Hopefully not.  Time will tell.

Will the combination of Bush and Frist make a positive difference?  Let us pray God will direct them in this way.

Good news.  President Bush has reappointed reportedly pro-life individuals (Judge Pickering and Judge Owen) to be confirmed by the now Republican led Senate.  This is a start, assuming their dedication to the right values as Christian organizations have reported.   

The Christians in America made a statement with the last election.  The votes said that we trust President Bush.  We must continue to pray.  Whatever happens, good or bad, we can now blame or credit our president.  He has unprecedented power.   We too will deserve credit or blame as we were part of it.  We will answer to Almighty God for the state of our nation and ourselves.

First, let us fall on our knees in humble repentance to entreat God's blessings on our efforts.  We must be diligent.  We must develop the fear of God in ourselves and teach it to others to have any chance at all of success in this spiritual battle.    





Copyright © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 Dio, Inc.

cialis prijs cialis kopen viagra voor vrouwen kamagra kopen viagra prijs

oakley solbriller mont blanc kuglepen michael kors tasker ghd glattejern ghd fladjern

kamagra acheter levitra ou cialis cialis generique viagra prix viagra 50mg kamagra en ligne kamagra avis viagra acheter kamagra pharmacie cialis lilly levitra acheter kamagra pas cher viagra pas cher cialis sans ordonnance viagra en ligne lovegra avis viagra generique cialis 20 kamagra 100 cialis original viagra ou cialis viagra sans ordonnance levitra pas cher cialis en ligne kamagra 100mg