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.
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)
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.
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.
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."
"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.
(Family Research Council)
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.
Mrs. Lafferty is shown with Associate Justice of the Supreme Court Samuel Alito.
(above)
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
31 SDecadence
September 1-4 SDecadence
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
1
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 FantasyFest
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 peoplemindful 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 hitherout 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 athome, 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 withthankfulness,
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 withoutHis
favor, and at the same time deploring the national offenses which have provoked His
righteous judgment, yet encouraged in this day of troubleby
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.
CNN IN THE MONEY Aired October 8, 2005 - 13:00 ET
..."YOUSSEF IBRAHIM,
STRATEGIC ENERGY INVESTMENT GROUP: Hi Jack.
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
SAN DIEGO
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...
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.
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."
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?
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.
SAYS HE WILL NOT PUSH GAY MARRIAGE AMENDMENT
By Jim VandeHei And Michael A. Fletcher
THE WASHINGTON POST
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.
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."
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.
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.
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.
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...
(CROSSTALK)
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.
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?
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.Check it out. Also check
out the Constitution Party's site as well.
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.
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.
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?
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
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.
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.
In 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.
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
Godspeed,
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".
4/21/03
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.
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.
Baptism in Kuwait before invasion into Iraq
3-19-03
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.
2/01/03
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.
1-29-03
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?
1/8/03
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.
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)
