7-15D

Sandra Cunningham has sent you a message on Team Sarah

for full story go to:
http://polarik.blogtownhall.com/

It's Official! Hawaii never issued Obama's 2007 Certification of Live Birth
Posted by Polarik on Tuesday, July 14, 2009 7:02:25 PM
Today is July 14, and in the space of less than two months, Obama's Press
Secretary, Robert Gibbs, has acknowledged, for a second time, that Obama had
posted a copy of his Certification of Live Birth (COLB) on the Internet and one
that Gibbs alleges is a real certificate sent by Hawaii.

The big problem for Gibbs here, and for Obama, is that what was posted on the
Internet and on Obama's website, (which has now been scrubbed) is a fabricated
and forged "scan image." Furthermore, the document object shown in photos taken
by Factcheck staffer, Jess Henig, and alleged to be the same document shown in
the "scan image," is also a fabricated forgery. I documented it all in my final
report, Obama's Born Conspiracy, and in my recent post, "Why Obama will never
show his birth certificate."

To reply to this message, click here: http://www.teamsarah.org/profiles/message/listInbox

7-15C

By RYAN J. FOLEY – 1 day ago MADISON, Wis. (AP) — The nation's largest group of atheists and agnostics filed a lawsuit Tuesday seeking to block an architect from engraving "In God We Trust" and the Pledge of Allegiance at the Capitol Visitor Center in Washington.The Madison-based Freedom From Religion Foundation's lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in western Wisconsin, claims the taxpayer-funded engravings would be an unconstitutional endorsement of religion.The House and Senate passed identical resolutions this month directing the Architect of the Capitol to engrave "In God We Trust" and the pledge in prominent places at the entrance for 3 million tourists who visit the Capitol each year.The resolution came in response to critics who complained Congress spent $621 million on the new three-story underground center without paying respect to the nation's religious heritage. The center opened in December after years of construction.The foundation is seeking a court order to stop the engravings, which the Congressional Budget Office estimates will cost less than $100,000."In God We Trust" has been the national motto since 1956 and has appeared on U.S. currency since 1957.The lawsuit says both the motto and the words "under God" in the pledge were adopted during the Cold War as anti-communism measures. Engraving them at the entrance to the U.S. Capitol would discriminate against those who do not practice religion and unfairly promote a Judeo-Christian perspective, it says.Members of Congress who supported the measure swiftly denounced the lawsuit."This lawsuit is another attempt by liberal activists to rewrite history and deny that America's Judeo-Christian heritage is an essential foundation stone of our great nation," said Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa.Rep. Daniel Lungren, R-Calif., said he was expecting a lawsuit but called the claims "patently absurd."The foundation also is challenging the constitutionality of the National Day of Prayer in federal court.

7-15b

Senator Leahy couldn't get this to pass as a stand alone bill, so he's hiding it in military appropriations as, "protect my pedophiles, or the military won't get paid."

Time: July 15, 2009 to July 16, 2009 Location: Your telephone to Capitol Hill Organized By: Bat Zion Event Description: BREAKING NEWS: SENATOR LEAHY HIDES "HATE BILL" IN PENTAGON BUDGET What do homosexual rights have to do with Pentagon spending? Everything, if you're a Democrat trying to hide an unpopular "pedophile protection" bill from the American people. On Monday, Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) spoke on the floor of the U.S. Senate and argued essentially that since he couldn't get 60 honest votes to pass the "Punish Pastors, Protect Pedophiles" hate crimes S. 909 as a stand-alone bill, it should instead be attached as an amendment to S. 1390, the National Defense Authorization Act. Staffers for Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) then admitted the homosexual bill could be attached and voted on as early as Wednesday or Thursday. We may have just one more day to act. TAKE ACTION TODAY, RIGHT NOW: So let's all telephone today all 18 of these "moderates" (plus Al Franken) and ask them PLEASE DON'T ATTACH THE PEDOPHILE PROTECTION ACT (S.909) TO THE DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT (S. 1309) and don't punish our pastors for preaching the truth. Homosexual rights should have nothing to do with Pentagon spending. x Blanche Lincoln D- AR 202-224-4843 x Byron L. Dorgan D- ND 202-224-2551 x Herb Kohl D-WI 202-224-5653 x James Webb D- VA 202-224-4024 x Jon Tester D- MT 202-224-2644 x Kay Hagan D- NC 202-224-6342 x Kent Conrad D- ND 202-224-2043 x Mark Pryor D- AR 202-224-2353 x Mark Warner D- VA 202-224-2023 x Max Baucus D- MT 202-224-2651 x Michael Bennet D- CO 202-224-5852 x Robert C. Byrd D- WV 202-224-3954 x Russ Feingold D-WI 202-224-5323 x Ted Kaufman D-DE 202-224-5042 x Thomas Carper D- DE 202-224-2441 x Tom Udall D- NM 202-224-6621 x Al Franken D-MN 202-224-5641 x = undecided Democrat. y Olympia Snowe R-ME 202-224-5344 y Susan Collins R-ME 202-224-2523 y = co-sponsoring Republican.

7-15

Senators on Capitol Hill may be forcedtomorrow to make a choice between approving an important defense spending bill and voting down "hate crimes" legislation.Senate Democrats are once again trying to pass a hate crimes bill by attaching it as an amendment to the Defense Authorization bill.

The hate crimes legislation, known as the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act (S. 909), would add gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, and disability to the list of protected categories under federal hate crimes law. A vote is expected Thursday on the Defense Authorization bill and its accompanying hate crimes amendment.Story continues below ...What have you done to express your concern or opinions aboutthe 'hate crimes' bill coming up for a vote in the Senate on Thursday?Vote in our poll
Bishop Harry Jackson, Jr., chairman of theHigh Impact Leadership Coalition, warns the hate crimes measure will lead to more than just the prosecution of violent crimes that are deemed bias-related.

"The problem is that the way that they define violence has to do with name-calling, has to do with an array of different things," he explains. "And the ultimate issue is going to be that it only takes one or two lawsuits, or the threat of a lawsuit, for there to be a chilling effect on pastors from preaching these passages of the Bible like Leviticus and Romans 1, and many, many other passages as our culture slips more into darkness."

Those scriptural passages address homosexual acts, which the Bible says God considers to be an abomination.

Jackson and other conservative activists are hoping to persuade a group of about 14 moderate senators to oppose the bill. They include Arkansas Democrats Blanche Lincoln and Mark Pryor, Louisiana Democrat Mary Landrieu, and Republicans John McCain (Arizona) Lindsey Graham (South Carolina) and Judd Gregg (New Hampshire).

7-15

The National Education Association has thrown its full support behind homosexual "marriage."The NEA recently held its annual convention in San Diego, California, where members voted on two issues of importance to those involved in the culture war. One of those issues was whether the union would support same-gender marriage. According to Jeralee Smith, co-founder of the Conservative Educators Caucus, the resolution passed by roughly a two-thirds majority.

"There are quite a few items where the NEA absolutely puts its political muscle behind taking down any legislation in any state that they consider to be discriminatory to homosexuals," says Smith. "And some of the language in the resolution also hints that the NEA will try to take down the Defense of Marriage Act [DOMA] on the federal level."

Smith told Baptist Press that when a representative of the Conservative Caucus spoke against the resolution and mentioned the words "marriage should be between a man and a woman," the speaker was booed.

Also up for a vote was a resolution for the NEA to take a "no position" stance on the issue of abortion. That proposal was voted down 61 percent to 39 percent.

During the meeting, the organization's retiring general counsel, Bob Chanin, complained that "conservative and right-wing bastards" are after the NEA and its state affiliates. Smith called that statement "refreshing honesty" on Chanin's part about how he feels about conservatives. (See related article from LifeSiteNews.com)

7-13b

Without a vote from shareholders, one of America's largest corporations has decided to grant its transgender employees special protected status.Memphis-based FedEx has agreed to implement a shareholder resolution proposed by Huffington Post blogger Sara Whitman that would add "gender identity" to the company's non-discrimination policy. Whitman is a self-proclaimed "married lesbian mother of three boys" in Massachusetts.

The resolution was filed on Whitman's behalf by Julie Goodridge, CEO of NorthStar Asset Management. Goodridge was the lead plaintiff in the well-known lawsuit (Goodridge v. Department of Public Health) that led to the legalization of same-sex "marriage" in Massachusetts. Earlier this year, she and her lesbian partner filed for divorce.

Goodridge says FedEx management did not feel shareholder approval of the gender-identity resolution was necessary. "They gave us a call and said that they had read through our policy and decided to enact the policy -- and on that basis we decided to withdraw our resolution," she explains.

Goodridge says adding gender identity to the non-discrimination policy is not a controversial move by the shipping company, but rather the equivalent of protecting workers from racial discrimination.

"They had within I think the last seven years or so added non-discrimination [on the basis of] sexual orientation as a protective status at their company," says Goodridge, "and they wanted to be as forthright as possible in protecting all of their employees who contribute to the value of the company."Story continues below ...Why didn't FedEx allow its shareholders a say in the company's decisionto grant special status to transgender employees?Vote in our poll
Although FedEx includes sexual orientation in its non-discrimination policy, it does not provide benefits for same-sex partners firm-wide, including to married same-sex couples. As a result, the company received only a 55 out of 100 rating in the Human Rights Campaign's Corporate Equality Index. That rating is likely to improve next year. FedEx, which employs more than a quarter of a million workers, did not respond to OneNewsNow's request for an interview.

Goodridge says she is now "interested in talking with FedEx" about adding the term "gender expression" to its non-discrimination language. Her portfolio management company has been highly successful in persuading Fortune 500 companies to provide special workplace protections for their homosexual employees.

In a letter to SEC chairman Christopher Cox in 2007, she boasted that NorthStar Asset Management had "been instrumental in creating more just and fair workplaces for thousands of gay and lesbian workers at companies like Berkshire Hathaway, Caterpillar, Emerson Electric, Fifth Third Bancorp, and FedEx."

In the very same letter, she urged the SEC not to eliminate or further restrict "the right of shareowners to sponsor advisory resolutions."

7-13

On Monday morning 13 July 2009 between the hours of 3 and 5
am, this radio show host in his broadcast demanded the jailing of Cheney and makes a huge hero out of the usurper. This four am broadcast may be where the jailing comments were made. This guy is on from 1:00 am to 5:00 and has his show archived for seven days in one hour increments.

Kgo needs to be made cognizant of their support of a fraud and all should demand fair reporting from show host who have adverse political bends on what TRUTH is all about.
Ray Telefano... (spelling) is the RACIST show host , imo.

7-12

The lock-up-your-opponents bills of 2009?

posted at 11:08 am on July 10, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly Would Congress ever pass legislation that would allow the executive to determine at its own discretion whether political opponents had crossed the line into domestic terrorists and build camps in which to keep them? Sounds like something out of 20th-century totalitarian systems or dystopian fiction. Mark Tapscott says it’s not fiction, and he warns readers about an effort by Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL) to do just that:

Rep. Alcee Hastings - the impeached Florida judge Nancy Pelosi tried to install as chairman of the House Intelligence Committee until her own party members rebelled - introduced an amendment to the defense authorization bill that gives Attorney General Eric Holder sole discretion to label groups that oppose government policy on guns, abortion, immigration, states’ rights, or a host of other issues. In a June 25 speech on the House floor, Rep. Trent Franks, R-AZ, blasted the idea: “This sounds an alarm for many of us because of the recent shocking and offensive report released by the Department of Homeland Security which labeled, arguably, a majority of Americans as ‘extremists.’” Another Hastings bill (HR 645) authorizes $360 million in 2009 and 2010 to set up “not fewer than six national emergency centers on military installations” capable of housing “a large number of individuals affected by an emergency or major disaster.” But Section 2 (b) 4 allows the Secretary of Homeland Security to use the camps “to meet other appropriate needs” - none of which are specified. This is the kind of blank check that Congress should never, ever sign. It’s not paranoid to be extremely wary of legislation that would give two unelected government officials power to legally declare someone a “domestic terrorist” and send them to a government-run camp.

To be fair on the second point, most legislation includes phrases similar to the “meet other appropriate needs” as a means of allowing flexibility in using facilities commissioned by Congress. Under unforeseen circumstances even apart from creating concentration camps for abortion opponents, the six national emergency centers might need to get some use other than housing military personnel or civilians evacuated from a disaster area. That language allows the Pentagon and Homeland Security leeway to adapt for other issues without having to worry that lawyers will descend upon them like locusts for not strictly limiting use to the statutes. However, the designation of domestic terrorist groups — a necessary and critical process for keeping the peace — should not fall into the hands of just one person. That process needs oversight and consensus to be credible and fair. Congress should have some involvement, especially in oversight. Holder could be the greatest AG in the history of the US but still should not have the absolute authority to make that designation, especially after the track record of the DHS in using vague parameters and broad-based smears of legitimate political protest earlier this year. Mark may also want to look at HR 1966, introduced by Rep. Linda Sanchez last April in reaction to the suburban mother who drove one of her daughter’s acquaintances — a 13-year-old girl — to suicide. Bas cases make bad law, and that’s doubly true here. Look at this language and imagine how this could be used:

Sec. 881. Cyberbullying ‘(a) Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person, using electronic means to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.

Who decides what constitutes “substantial emotional distress”? What is the definition of “severe” and “hostile”? What kinds of persons can claim victimhood under this bill? This purports to be a bill to prevent cyberbullying — which is hardly a crime wave in America anyway — but could easily be perverted to shut down “mean” bloggers. This Congress has taken a strange and dangerous turn away from the principles of free speech and towards … something else entirely. Update: Apparently, the Irish are also having trouble with this concept. Update II: I think I was a little too subtle in my post. I don’t think Hastings is passing a “concentration camp” bill, but just a badly worded piece of pork. Irishspy in the comments sums it up better than I did above:

I read the original text of these bills a few days ago and, while I have strong concerns about the lack of due process in allowing the AG to simply designate someone a dangerous person just because of his beliefs or (IIRC) tattoos, Hastings’ amendment about the regional command centers looks more like a bunch of pork for areas affected by base closures than anything else.

That was my point. The language that Mark points out is pretty much legislative boilerplate, probably meaningless in the sense Mark takes it. I’m much more concerned about the cyberbullying bill and the authority Hastings wants to grant to the AG. Update II: Radio Vice Online has been looking at the cyberbullying bill, too.

7-11
American Life League has produced a video on violence against pro-lifers.Scott Roeder is accused of killing abortionist George Tiller in Wichita, Kansas. The secular media has made violence against pro-abortion people like Tiller a major news story. In light of that,American Life League(ALL) spokesman Michael Hichborn was asked why he produced the video.

"This most recent one was prompted by the fact that the media has absolutely been just lambasting the pro-life movement as a whole for what they call 'domestic terrorism' or resurgence of pro-life violence, which is a contradiction in terms," he contends.

Hichborn believes a truly pro-life person would never take someone's life or intentionally harm a person. He also states that the Obama administration intends to look at pro-lifers as potential terrorist risks.

"I thought it was necessary to point out not only the hypocrisy of the media but the fact that violence actually comes from the pro-abortion side, not from the pro-life side -- because what Scott Roeder did, by definition, was not pro-life," he concludes.

Hichborn's video is available on the American Life League website.


7-11
The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled against pharmacistsexercising theirconscience.The lawsuit was filed to block the state of Washington from enforcing a law requiring pharmacists to dispense medication in violation of their religious beliefs. That is especially related to Plan B, otherwise known as the "morning-after" pill --which some medical professionals believe induces abortion. Brad Dacus heads thePacific Justice Institute.

"This is a clear affront and a violation of the fundamental religious convictions of the owners of pharmacies," he contends. "No pharmacist owner should ever have to choose between saving a human life and keeping their shop and business."

Many consider the Ninth Circuit to be the most liberal court in the U.S.

"This radical decision by the Ninth Circuit gives the green light to liberal state legislators and regulators to be able to clamp down on medical and other professionals with sincere religious convictions against supporting abortions," Dacus adds.

If the decision is upheld, pharmacists and owners with a conscience will have to choose between violating the law or going out of business. Dacus hopes the case will be accepted by the U.S. Supreme Court.

7-9
Capitol religious engravings added to Senate bill



WASHINGTON- Senator Jim DeMint's amendment calling for
the addition of patriotic religious references to the
new Capitol Visitors Center has been added to a key appropriations bill.

DeMint's measure was approved on a voice vote.

It would authorize spending $150,000 to add engravings of the
National Motto "In God We Trust" and the Pledge of Allegiance,
with its reference to "one nation under God."

The South Carolina Republican told his colleagues
it's essential that the nation's religious heritage be recognized
in the historic displays that greet tourists at the U.S. Capitol.

The three-level Capitol Visitors Center cost $621 million and
has welcomed more than one million visitors since opening last December.



7-9
Super Grand Jury Presentments audio. Click on "Blog Talk Radio" underneath the "Channel" text shown in the banner.
The meat of the discussion occurs after about 20 minutes into the audio stream.

This audio presents the tenacity of TRUE AMERICANS who are demanding that OUR Constitutional rights be adhered to.

The presentments given to judge Lambert ended up as predicted. The judge used court 'procedural' rules to ignore the presentment filings.

Remember that the court rules were initiated to eliminate 'frivolous' or harassing grand jury investigations. The legal birds created a 'work around' to control the abuse by citizens of the grand jury process.

As always a 'work around' did what all 'work around' the system rules cause...and that is the 'unintended consequences' arise to defeat the original system processes, which in this case are TRUE AMERICAN citizens' Constitutional rights.

As stated in other emails...the feds will frustrate anyone who files against the government using legal 'process' issues instead of the 'case merits'. The Fed legal beagles represent ALL Americans, so everything needed to move them in one's preferred direction needs to be used at its max to corner the feds into doing the job that one wants done.




http://www.blogtalkradio.com/American-Grand-Jury/2009/07/09/American-Grand-Jury-Bi-weekly-Broadcast



7-9
Attorney Mat Staver is convinced the Obama administration is behind a federal lawsuit filed yesterday in Boston challenging the constitutionality of the federal Defense of Marriage Act.The first state to legalize homosexual "marriage" has filed suit against the federal government to overturn DOMA -- the Defense of Marriage Act -- which defines marriage as between a man and a woman. On Wednesday, Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley filed the lawsuit in federal court in Boston. The suit claims DOMA interferes with the right of Massachusetts to define marriage as it sees fit.

In his race for the White House, Barack Obama vowed to overturn DOMA. But Mat Staver ofLiberty Counselbelieves that while yesterday's lawsuit was filed in Massachusetts, there are some political strings between there and Washington, DC.

"That's [Obama's] political preference [that DOMA be overturned]," Staver says. "There's no doubt in my mind, absolutely no question at all, that he and some of those in the Department of Justice are coordinating with individuals -- and perhaps even the attorney general in Massachusetts -- to literally bring these lawsuits and have a very weak defense so that the courts will ultimately overturn it without having the politicians and the president go on record showing that they are in favor of same-sex marriage."

Staver goes on to say that Liberty Counsel is not going to allow the Obama administration to tear down the nation's moral values, which he argues it seems intent on doing. He vows that Liberty Counsel will vigorously fight this latest challenge to marriage, just as it has a lawsuit in California targeting DOMA.

7-8c
Look what has made it through committee and is being introduced into the House for a vote:

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-hj5/text

Text of H.J.Res.5 as Introduced in House Event.observe(window, 'load', function() { BillText.setCommentsForNode(1518, 't0:ih:1', 12) BillText.setCommentsForNode(1518, 't0:ih:11', 1) BillText.setCommentsForNode(1518, 't0:ih:12', 3) BillText.setCommentsForNode(1518, 't0:ih:14', 19) BillText.setCommentsForNode(1518, 't0:ih:3', 1) BillText.setCommentsForNode(1518, 't0:ih:4', 2) BillText.setCommentsForNode(1518, 't0:ih:5', 7) $('bill_text_loading').hide(); $('bill_text').show(); });

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as President.

current 111st session of congress Back to Bill Details

Version History

HJ 5 IHCommentsClose CommentsPermalink 111th CONGRESSCommentsClose CommentsPermalink 1st SessionCommentsClose CommentsPermalink H. J. RES. 5CommentsClose CommentsPermalink Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as President.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVESCommentsClose CommentsPermalink

January 6, 2009CommentsClose CommentsPermalink

Mr. SERRANO introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the JudiciaryCommentsClose CommentsPermalink JOINT RESOLUTIONCommentsClose CommentsPermalink Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as President.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink

3
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink

‘Article--

‘The twenty-second article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.’.


All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.
Thomas Jefferson
“Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government...”
Thomas Jefferson

7-8b
The National Institutes of Health has issued guidelines for research on human embryos. One pro-family spokesman accuses NIH of ignoring the public on the matter.The guidelines, which are based on a presidential executive order, open the door for research that pro-life groups have fought against for years. Dr. David Prentice of theFamily Research Counciltells OneNewsNow those guidelines set up a system that creates an incentive for embryonic sacrifice. He goes on to say NIH simply did not listen to the public.

"Of the 49,000 comments they got, 30,000 told them not to fund any human embryo research [using federal funds]. The acting director of the NIH said they just ignored those comments," Prentice notes. "[So] the question wasn't whether to fund it, but how to go about sacrificing embryos."

Prentice adds those figures show America is still strongly pro-life. "And [that] they want our taxpayer funds going towards successful and ethical adult stem-cell research -- the stuff that is already helping patients now," he emphasizes.

Adult stem-cell research, which does not involve killing a tiny human being, is now being used to help more than 70 documented medical conditions and diseases. Research on human embryos, in contrast, has produced no useable results.What's the primary reason the push for embryonic stem-cell research continuesdespite the successes of research using adult stem cells?Vote in our poll

7-8
Please read this entire article...paying close attention to one of the last lines (in red). Sorry, folks--but this means YOU, and ME, and every other American citizen!
Circulate this article--circulate, circulate, circulate!
A journalist that calls a spade a spade


7-7c Remove God + Homosexuality = fall of a Nation. Period. (Emil)
Homosexuality is becoming a way of life for many young people who are buying the lie that they are born homosexuals. The world equates same-sex attraction with an innate homosexual identity, so those who struggle with homosexual feelings are told it must be who they are.But Scott Davis, vice president of education for Exodus International -- the leading ministry aimed at men and women tempted by unwanted same-sex attraction -- sets the record straight in the powerful DVD titled The Question of Homosexuality: A Conversation for Youth About Same-Sex Attraction.

The DVD, which can be used in an individual or group setting, combines intriguing testimonies and insightful teaching about homosexuality and the impact it is having on teens and young adults. It is 100 minutes in length and addresses the hard-hitting questions that today’s youth are asking, provides Biblical instruction about God’s design for sexuality, and moves viewers’ hearts to compassion for their gay-identified peers and loved ones.

In the interview below, Davis reflects on the contents of the DVD, which is available at http://store.afa.net.

(Note: The DVD contains frank and detailed discussions about homosexuality.)

AFA Journal: How did this DVD project come about?

Scott Davis: As a campus leader [a number of years ago], I saw a tremendous need for resources for youth and campus ministers on the topic of homosexuality. I found this out when I had a large number of friends coming to me and saying, “Scott, I struggle with homosexual feelings. I don’t want to be gay, and I don’t know what to do about it. Can you help me with it?” This was sort of my introduction to the issue.

This DVD -- a product of many years -- grew out of my experience as a campus minister, finding great resources from Exodus and then coming on staff and creating a tool that youth leaders and campus ministers could use in talking to their students about homosexuality.

AFAJ: Why is homosexuality so problematic for young people?

SD: Many students find themselves experiencing these feelings and trying to figure out why and what to do with them. They’ve been told that if they experience the homosexual feeling – a feeling of attraction to someone of the same gender – then that defines them as a homosexual. That is their identity. They are told that they have those feelings because they were born gay, they’ll always be gay, and their only option is to accept and to pursue a homosexual lifestyle.

AFAJ: How can the church help?

SD: It really is the church’s battle. The key is to be actively involved in all students’ lives, teaching them in word and in deed what healthy sexuality looks like. One of the most damaging things for students, especially those growing up in Christian homes, is they will experience these confusing sexual feelings at a young age, which is very common, but they don’t feel like they can talk about it. They don’t feel like they can talk to their parents, church or youth minister about it, so really all that’s left is a school counselor who will likely tell them that this means they’re gay.

So it’s very important for youth pastors to talk about this topic in a compassionate and loving way so that a student who is listening and struggling with this knows this is a safe person with whom he can talk to get help.

AFAJ: Why are love and compassion significant when ministering to students struggling with homosexuality?

SD: Obviously love and compassion are extremely important in every avenue of life, especially in the Christian life and ministry. They are just plain effective. But in addition to that, the need that lies at the root of homosexuality isn’t the need to have sex with people of the same gender. The need is for love, affirmation and acceptance, specifically from family, church and peers.

AFAJ: How did you come to this understanding?

SD: What really affected me as a young man in ministry who began to address this topic of homosexuality was really looking at Christ and the Gospels and how He responded to sinners of all sorts. The Gospels are full of stories of Jesus interacting with sexual sinners and people who were apart from God in all sorts of ways. Seeing him interact with these people who were really outcasts in their own day, helps me understand how I should respond in my own day. Interacting with Christ and the Gospels moved my heart to compassion and changed me inside.


7-7b
WASHINGTON, DC- A law recognizing same-sex "marriages" performed elsewhere has gone into effect in the District of Columbia.The bill was approved in a 12-1 vote by the D.C. Council in May, with council member Marion Barry casting the lone no vote.Congress, which has the final say over the city's laws, had 30 days to review the bill. A push by black church leaders who oppose same-gender marriage failed to get a referendum on the matter.And Congress took no action, allowing the bill to become law Tuesday.Council member David Catania has said that recognizing same-sex marriages performed elsewhere is a first step toward performing homosexual weddings in the city.Six states-- Connecticut, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Vermont and New Hampshire-- allow same-sex marriage.


7-7
FOX News reported yesterday that a seventh-grade girl in California was ordered by her school principal to remove her pro-life T-shirt on "National Pro-Life T-Shirt Day." The T-shirt depicted two graphic pictures of a fetus growing in the womb. The incident apparently took place in April, 2008, at McSwain Elementary School, a K-8 school in Merced, California. Anna Amador, mother of the child,says thatPrincipalTerrie Rohrer, Asst. Principal C.W. Smith and clerk Martha Hernandez denied her daughter's First Amendment rights by ordering her to leave the cafeteria and remove her shirt. The lawsuit alleges that:

"Before Plaintiff could eat [breakfast] she was ordered by a school staff member to throw her food out and reportimmediately to Defendant Smith's office, located in the main office of McSwain Elementary School." "Upon arriving at the main office, Defendant Hernandez, intentionally and without Plaintiff's consent, grabbed Plaintiff's arm and forcibly escorted her toward Smith's office, at all times maintaining a vice-like grip on Plaintiff's arm. Hernandez only released Plaintiff's arm after physically locating her in front of Smith and Defendant Rohrer...

"Smith and Rohrer ordered Plaintiff to remove her pro-life T-shirt and instructed Plaintiff to never wear her pro-life T-shirt at McSwain Elementary School ever again. . .[c]ompletely humiliated and held out for ridicule, Plaintiff complied with Defendants' directives and removed her pro-life T-shirt, whereupon, Defendants seized and confiscated it. Defendants did not return Plaintiff's property until the end of the school day."

The school is disputing the allegations,saying that the legal complaint doesn't accurately "characterize the events that happened." However, a district court judge ruled just last month that the all Amador's claims could move forward except one. The school claims that Amador's daughter was asked to remove her shirt because it contained "inappropriate subject matter" which violated the school's dress code, which apparently bans clothing with "suggestion of tobacco, drug or alcohol use, sexual promiscuity, profanity, vulgarity, or other inappropriate subject matter." This is ironic, because the girl's lawyer points out that the images contained on her T-shirt of a fetus in the womb were the same as those in her science textbooks. No student complained about the shirt, and the girl's parents were not even called when the incident happened. I am betting that the girl will win her case against the school, especially since the 1969 Supreme Court case Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District ruledin favor of the right of public school student to wear black armbands to protest the Vietnam War. If kids can protest the war,they shouldcertainly be able to wear a T-shirt protesting abortion. As Amador's attorney William Becker points out,"The message of the T-shirt is that life is sacred. One would be very hard pressed to find anything wrong with that particular idea, except that some people do object to the political message.”


7-6b

July 06, 2009
by Van Helsing

Alcee Hastings Paves the Way for Concentration Camps

Nancy Pelosi was unable to install disgraced former judge Alcee Hastings — who was impeached for bribery and perjury, and then hit a further low by cochairing Shrillary's presidential campaign — as Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. But that doesn't mean this felonious Congresscritter (D-FL) hasn't been busily participating in the destruction of our country.

An amendment to a bill swiftly moving through the US Congress will allow the Obama Administration's Attorney General to classify Americans as domestic terrorists if they are pro-life, pro-gun and anti-big government. Impeached Florida judge — now a Democrat Party member of the House of Representatives — Rep. Alcee Hastings introduced what some claim is a disturbing piece of legislation. Hasting's amendment calls for the Attorney General to have discretion over who is called a terrorist and what groups will be treated as terrorist groups.

Imagine the irony of patriots being denounced as terrorists by the scuttling cockroach Holder, the best friend of any real terrorist.

"This is arguably one of the worst pieces of legislation to come down the pike in a long, long time. In essence Attorney General Eric Holder — a Bill Clinton retread — will have the discretion to label Americans terrorists. Hastings is a dangerous man and should be forced to resign from congress. He's also proposed the creation of "emergency camps" that are nothing more than prisons," warns political strategist Mike Baker. "This amendment is part and parcel of the trend in this country to suppress dissent by patriots by calling them domestic terrorists," he added.

The trend was given a major boost by Comrade Obama's preposterous choice for head of Homeland Security:

In an unclassified report entitled "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment," Secretary for Homeland Security Janet Napolitano and her agency included the following description of "extremists:" "Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration."

If "terrorists" are defined as those who believe in states rights, border defense, the Second Amendment, and/or the sanctity of human life, the government will need new facilities to house them all. Hastings is on top of it:

Rep. Alcee Hastings also introduced what many say is another disturbing piece of legislation. That new bill calls for the Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano to build at least six facilities that can be designated as "emergency centers. Hastings' rationale for such facilities is to gather and "house" civilians on what are basically detention centers guarded by armed soldiers or paramilitary troops. The House bill (HR 645) — National Emergency Centers Establishment Act — is not even on the radar of members of the elite media. According to critics of the plan, if passed the government will create camps or centers that by their nature restrict the activities of US citizens herded into them.

In the near future, voicing opposition to the radical left agenda being rammed down our country's throat could land you in a concentration camp. Now's a good time to start resisting what liberals are doing to this country, because it won't be getting any easier.

Hastings: Concentration camps for conservatives?
On a tip from Oiao. Cross-posted at Moonbattery.

Permalink: RightWingNews
Posted for educational purposes only pursuant to the Fair Use doctrine.



7-6
President Obama hosted a reception at the White House celebrating LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender) Pride month. Black Christians should take note and learn a few things about our black president.

As they say, we are what we do.

It tells us something that Mr. Obama had no time to host an event for the National Day of Prayer.

Nor did he have time to accept the invitation to convey greetings and a few remarks to the couple hundred thousand who came to Washington, as they do every January, for the March for Life.

However, the LGBT Pride event did make it onto the president's busy schedule.Here are parts of his remarks I think noteworthy for black Christians:

First, we now know that Mr. Obama buys into reasoning equating the homosexual political movement to the black civil rights movement: "...it's not for me to tell you to be patient any more than it was for others to counsel patience to African Americans who were petitioning for equal rights a half century ago."

Perhaps Obama can extend some of his famous empathy to a black Christian woman, Crystal Dixon, who lost her University of Toledo job for writing a column in her local paper challenging this premise. Dixon was fired for being uppity enough to write "...I take great umbrage at the notion that those choosing the homosexual lifestyle are 'civil rights victims' ...I cannot wake up tomorrow and not be a black woman."

Considering our president's priorities, I recall a song popular during the civil rights movement: "Which Side Are You On?"

Second, Obama sees the black community as being a little slow on the uptake to grasp that homosexuality and same-sex marriage are okay. There still are those, according to him, "who don't yet fully embrace their gay brothers and sisters..." He deals with this, he said, by talking about it in front of "unlikely audiences," such as, "in front of African American church members."

Maybe a lot of us black folks, still readin' our Bibles, just haven't had enough of that Harvard learnin'.

And, third, Obama talked about HIV/AIDS but didn't bother to mention that it's overwhelmingly blacks that this scourge is killing.

Why would our black president discuss HIV/AIDS and not mention that although blacks represent 12 percent of our population, they account for 50 percent of HIV/AIDS cases and half of HIV-related deaths? Or that the incidence of HIV/AIDS infection per every 100,000 people is nine times higher among blacks than whites?

Of course, it would have been bad form for Obama to sour the punch bowl at the LBGT Pride month festivities by mentioning the disproportionate toll this lifestyle takes on blacks.

Blacks, of course, made the difference in getting Proposition 8 passed in California, which defined marriage as between a man and a woman. They then switched over and voted for Obama.

Obama has said he opposes same-sex marriage. Can this really be so? He said at the White House event that he's called for Congress to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act. DOMA is the main obstacle to nationalizing legalization of same-sex marriage.

Black Christians have a lot of soul searching to do. We know the pain of black history. But we also must retain clarity that these many injustices were the result of race and color trumping Christian principles.

How can black Christians do this themselves? How can black Christians allow race and color to trump Christian principles in driving their support for a leader?

Particularly as sexually transmitted diseases kill our people, when a third of all abortions are black babies, and the only hope for future black prosperity is restoration of the black family?


7-5

July 4, 2009: CAIR/ISNA THUGGERY VS. LIFE, LIBERTY AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS

There are two Americas indeed. One for beleaguered, put-upon patriots under siege for their love of country, the Constitution, freedom of speech, and individual rights. The other is the "special class" that oppresses and subjugates us on a daily basis. Individualism vs collectivism. Islamic supremacism vs democracy. Today was the kick-off of the Islamic Society of North America conference in Washington DC. The timing could not be more deliberate. Sort of like the North Koreans firing missiles on the Fourth of July. ISNA is as compatible with American values and freedoms as sharia is compatible with democracy.As you read the following account, bear in mind that Obama's Department of Justice and the FBI had teamed with these groups. Dave Gaubatz attended the ISNA conference (or at least attempted to); what follows is his experience. Dave Gaubatz was the first U.S. civilian (1811) Federal Agent deployed to Iraq in 2003. He is the owner of DG Counter-terrorism Publishing. He is currently conducting a 50 State Counter-terrorism Research Tour (CTRT). He can be contacted at davegaubatz@gmail.com. Here is what Dave wrote: What happened to Mr. Gaubatz is an outrage. Bear in mind this is America, and these very same Islamists invoke our freedoms to kill our freedom. They invoke freedom of speech to kill freedom of speech. They use lawfare and litigation jihad to silence truth tellers. Dave will be writing a full recounting of today's events, but look at his report thus far. It's pretty clear CAIR/ISNA tried to have this man killed or arrested. Expose Islam and risk your life. CAIR/ISNA distributing photos of "threats" to the police is like the Nazis distributing photos of Jews. They are this century's Nazis. Shouldn't law enforcement know who the good guys are?This is America? They set up Gaubatz. They know who he is. Clearly, CAIR and ISNA were hoping for a larger incident.Gaubatz was surrounded by nine people who had no identification (they were just wearing suits) when he attempted to register. He asked who they were. Only one of the nine spoke to him; the others just glared. The one who did speak to him asked if he could come with them. He repeatedly asked who they were, because he was not going to go with a group of nine men unless he knew who they were. The individual who was speaking to him refused to identify himself. He asked for a manager, again, because he was not going to walk away with a group of people that he did not know. The only answer he received was, "our parent organization said you were a threat". He was surrounded for just under a half hour. Finally, one individual, who identified himself as being with the convention center, spoke to Gaubatz. When Gaubatz asked why he was being asked to leave, he stated repeatedly, "I don't know why"..."They just said you didn't register"..."I really don't know".

They did not say why he was on their list, but if you read the Frontpage magazine article about the Cease and Desist letter, this is exactly why he was on the list. His main point for legal recourse is that all of this could have been avoided if ISNA had called or sent an email asking him not to be there. Clearly this was done intentionally, with the hopes that DC police would respond to their false claim of threats and the picture of Gaubatz's war photos and picture of him photoshopped in a Nazi uniform.Here is an excerpt from the Frontpage article:CAIR has actually just sent me a letter from the law firm of Martin F. McMahon & Associates pertaining to my upcoming attendance at the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) conference to be held in Washington , during the 4th of July holiday. FP: What did the letter say? Gaubatz: First let me emphasize what I have said for several years: [1] It is my professional opinion that CAIR and its executives are terrorist supporters and their ‘non profit’ and IRS endorsed organization should have never been allowed to open almost 15 years ago. [2] It is also my professional opinion that anyone or organization supporting CAIR or its ideology supports terrorism and are a national security threat to our country. [3] A different acronym used does not change the ideology. CAIR is ISNA, ISNA is MSA, and MSA is MANA (Imam Siraj Wahhaj). These are different people representing the same ideology of an Islamic Ummah (Nation) under Sharia law. [4] Many of our law enforcement executives of various agencies have lost sight of who they work for. They do not work for Saudi financed CAIR or ISNA, they work for America and its citizens Gaubatz: The letter is a notice for me to cease and desist from contacting CAIR and its reps both at the ISNA convention and anytime afterwards. Read the whole thing here. Very informative on the intimidation tactics of CAIR/ISNA.Gaubatz is making his statement and filing charges tomorrow. He did feel threatened because of being surrounded, and felt like he could not safely leave the area. DC police will decide, based on his statement, which charge is appropriate. When Gaubatz was leaving the convention, there were two police cars out front. Two officers behind him (he did not see them at any time) subsequently got in one of the cars and tailed him to his car (which was parked across the street). He got into his vehicle, and then an officer approached and asked him to step out of the vehicle. The officer said, "You know why we're asking you to get out of the vehicle", to which Gaubatz replied, "No I don't". To which the officer said, "Well, we've got this picture. Can you tell me about all these guns" (referencing a picture of Gaubatz serving in Iraq with M-16, and 9mm military issue). Gaubatz then told him that they were pictures of him in the war for this country. Gaubatz then told him that the picture of him in a Nazi uniform was obviously a photoshop. The officer then stated, "You understand with the holocaust shooting...". They asked if they could search his trunk. He stated, No, I have been harassed enough, if you want to get a warrant, I'll wait all day. The officer exchanged cards with him. The officers were just doing their jobs, because they had been duped into following up this lead based on faulty intel.
The main point of concern here is that CAIR/ISNA gave misleading information to law enforcement that put Gaubatz's life in jeopardy. At any time when he was leaving, if had reached into his bag, the police, acting on faulty information from CAIR/ISNA, would have assumed he was a threat and drawn on him, or worse (like the officer said, considering the Holocaust shooting). CAIR/ISNA purposely used the Nazi uniform photo to get this effect from law enforcement. CAIR/ISNA did not inform law enforcement that these pictures were of him serving in the war (with the guns), and the police must have believed he was a threat based on this information. They wanted the incident to escalate; otherwise they would have just sent him an email and a refund online requesting that he not attend. Here is a copy of Dave's confirmation and registration for ISNA.

Obama's administration is partnering with these enemies of freedom: Patrick Poole has a scathing indictment of Eric Holder's Department of Justice and ISNA. Here is an account of a pro-freedom rally across the street from the conference:July 4, 2009 - Independence Day: Defending Equality And Liberty at DC ISNA ConferenceOn July 4, Responsible for Equality And Liberty (R.E.A.L.) members stood outside of the DC Convention Center in the Mt. Vernon Square across the street to challenge the Washington DC ISNA convention on the issue of Islamic supremacism. Per our previous article announcing this protest, we explained why we felt it was necessary to challenge ISNA on this Independence Day - where R.E.A.L. is calling for independence not just for America, but for the rest of humanity from supremacist and totalitarian ideologies. On this Independence Day, we are also calling for independence from those oppressed by Islamic supremacists as well. At today’s protest, we stated that as Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. recognized the ideological challenge of “white supremacism,” so we too today recognize the ideological challenge of “Islamic supremacism.” While we realize that such a challenge is not popular with some, we feel that if we are true to courage of convictions on human equality, that on July 4, as on every other day, we must defy such supremacist ideologies. We challenged ISNA to address the universal human right of EQUALITY, including equality of women, homosexuals, non-Muslims, and different Muslim sects. We challenged ISNA that without equality, we have no life, liberty, or the pursuit of happiness. We challenged Americans to remember, especially on July 4, that in our Declaration of Independence we view human equality as “a truth that we hold self-evident.” Equality is the foundation to all of our other universal human rights. We asked ISNA this question: “when will you condemn Islamic supremacism?” We asked ISNA - “when will you start addressing the stonings and honor killings of women and homosexuals by Islamic supremacists around the world?” We asked ISNA - “when will you acknowledge the use of Sharia in the deaths, mutilations, and amputations of women, non-Muslims, and Muslims around the world?” We spent two hours going over specific examples of the repression, torture, mutilations, stoning, honor killings, and murders of women, other Muslims, non-Muslims, homosexuals and others who Islamic surpremacists have viewed as a threat. We stated that on this Independence Day, we must speak for those suffering from oppression from Islamic supremacism around the world. We explained that our universal human rights are not dependent on any religion, and we explained our universal human rights must be consistent for all people around the world. Some ISNA convention goers stated to us that universal human rights don’t matter to them; they stated that the only rights that matter to them where those based on their religion. We challenge that supremacist view on “human rights,” both as Americans and as fellow human beings. We declare that our universal human rights apply - no matter your religion, your gender, your race, or your identity - our universal human rights apply to every human being.We also announced our ORANGE RIBBON campaign for equality and liberty, and provided handouts to those going to the ISNA convention to educate them on their universal human rights and our campaign to defend such rights. We have chosen ORANGE as our symbol for universal human rights that apply to all our fellow human beings on Earth. Several individuals going to the ISNA conference did not like what we had to say. Those individuals sought to shout us down. However, the Washington DC Metropolitan Police Department stepped in to defend our right to freedom of speech.Several individuals going to the ISNA conference did not like what we had to say. Those individuals sought to shout us down. However, the Washington DC Metropolitan Police Department stepped in to defend our right to freedom of speech. We also asked ISNA how it could have a theme of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” when it not only ignored the foundation of EQUALITY that is the basis for all of our universal human rights, but also had speakers who have defended or been unwilling to challenge Islamic supremacism. – Siraj Wahhaj was a character witness for convicted 1993 World Trade Center terrorist “blind sheik” Omar Rahman, has called for replacing the American government with a caliphate. According to Siraj Wahhaj, “if only Muslims were clever politically, they could take over the United States and replace its constitutional govt. with a caliphate. If we were united and strong, he said, we would elect our own emir and give allegiance to him. Take my word if 8 million Muslims unite in America, the country will come to us.” – Hamza Yusef (also spelled Hamza Yousuf or Hamza Yousef) has described Judaism as a “most racist religion,” and who promotes Jihad stating that Jihad is the duty and responsibility of all Muslims, further stating that “Jihad is actually considered a Rahma (mercy) in Islam.” Yusef’s idea of “compromise” is that “There are times when you have to live like a sheep in order to live in the future like a lion.” – Zaid Shakir has stated “Every Muslim who is honest would say, I would like to see America become a Muslim country” – ISNA’s Ingrid Mattson has defended the idea of an Islamic supremacist caliphate, and has portrayed Christians as a threat to Jews. On the idea of the Islamic supremacist caliphate, she has stated that “the overthrowing of the caliphate… was a plan of European powers for many years. This deprived the Muslim world of a stable and centralized authority, and much of the chaos that we’re living in today is the result of that.” Ingrid Mattson also claims that “Muslim women have the same legal rights as Muslim men,” when we see daily how women are treated as second-class human beings by Islamic supremacists who seek the same “caliphate” that Ingrid Mattson defends. On July 3, the ISNA conference also had Ihsan Bagby speak on “compelling history of Islam in the Americas and highlight the extraordinary contributions of Muslims to the American experience.” But what has ISNA speaker Ihsan Bagby said about America? According to Ihsan Bagby, “we [Muslims] can never be full citizens of this country… because there is no way we can be fully committed to the institutions and ideologies of this country.”
We call for Independence for those people oppressed by Islamic supremacism around the world, so that they might find Independence in their universal human rights, including the women, homosexuals, non-Muslims, and other Muslims who are oppressed by Islamic supremacists around the world. To that end, we seek to introduce a new symbol of freedom that extends our expression of freedom beyond America’s patriotic red, white, and blue - to reach out to the rest of our fellow human beings suffering from oppression on Earth. As we Declare Independence for those who don’t have the voice to speak for themselves, for those who live in oppression around the world, we call for a new symbol of Independence based on all of our universal rights, including EQUALITY, based on our Orange Ribbon of universal human rights. We ask that you join us in solidarity of our inalienable and universal human rights by wearing or displaying orange or an orange ribbon along with your traditional red, white, and blue, as a measure of outreach to oppressed people around the world that we will continue to defend. For the sake of those who are oppressed, for the sake of those who don’t have freedom, for those whose lives are lived in terror, for those whose voice is silenced, let us remember this July 4 for them as well. Let us be their voice to help them declare their own Independence Day.
--
Please help to further develop this STRAWMAN survey.
http://www.kwiksurveys.com/online-survey.php?surveyID=KCHNJ_e6da7feb
WALK the TALK VOLUNTEERS NEEDED to AID DR.Orly and Other attorneys to be successful with their pursuits.
What can one do to move the process forward?
Resource to Combine progress Data of various Obama Elimination Groups:
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dg7bd2qt_43f3qddwdk




7-4
VIRGINIA BEACH, VA - Authorities say a white powder substance that was mailed to the Christian Broadcasting Network headquarters in Virginia, causing several employees to be isolated for six hours, was whey protein powder.Virginia Beach fire spokesman Tim Riley says lab work determined the powder was the kind used by body builders, not a biohazard such as anthrax or ricin.
CBN spokesman Chris Roslan says two employees opened the envelope containing white powder Wednesday morning. Those employees, a CBN security guard, and a U.S. postal service inspector were placed on precautionary medical watch until officials received the test results.

7-3

A Pennsylvania pastor rejected by the state's House of Representatives will pray in the Senate instead.

The pastor is Gerry Stoltzfoos of Freedom Valley Worship Center in Gettysburg. He was asked to pray before the House by his own representative and sent officials a written prayer on their request.

"I wrote the prayer and sent it to them and they sent back a very short rejection notice," he recalls. "So I wrote back, 'I'm curious as to why.' And they said it had an offensive word. Can you tell me what the word was?' And they came back and said 'Jesus.'"

Stoltzfoos says he prays in Jesus' name because Jesus instructed him to do so in the Bible. He contends the censorship puts him at odds with his strongly held religious beliefs. Stoltzfoos also told OneNewsNow that House Speaker Keith McCall stated that he was trying to avoid a lawsuit over church-state issues.

"Ironically, I've had two or three organizations now beg me to allow them to represent me in a lawsuit on the other side, so he may be creating a lawsuit more than preventing one. I don't know," he adds.

Stoltzfoos admits he wants no part of a lawsuit and is not showing off. He claims he is simply standing by his religious discipline. Senator Rich Alloway (R-Pennsylvania) heard the story and has invited Stoltzfoos to pray before the state Senate on July 29.










7-2
The co-founder of the National Education Association (NEA) Conservative Educators Caucus says the NEA will consider adoption of a resolution supporting homosexual "marriage."

The NEA is currently holding its annual convention in San Diego, California. Educator and conservative activist Jeralee Smith called OneNewsNow from the convention to report that the executive council has approved language that will throw the full support of the NEA behind same-gender marriage, homosexual adoption, and other issues surrounding the homosexual agenda.

"They will help to overturn legislation that is discriminatory against same-sex couples," she notes. "And then there is one little bullet about [how] they will recognize that marriage has a religious connotation and it's not compatible with beliefs and values -- because of that they recognize that certain churches should not be forced to conduct same-sex marriage."

Smith says the resolution could be voted on as early as midday Friday or as late as Tuesday of next week. She points out this is not the first political issue the NEA has undertaken. The NEA gave $50 million to help elect President Obama in 2008.




7-1
A black evangelical Christian pastor and former NFL linebacker says there was "absolutely no truth in anything" President Obama said in his speech to homosexuals in the East Room of the White House Monday.


President Obama promised LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) supporters Monday at a White House "gay pride" celebration that he "will continue to be an ally and a champion" for their agenda, once again vowing he will repeal the Defense of Marriage Act and the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy. (Related article: Obama White House not appealing transgender ruling)

Ken Hutcherson, senior pastor of Antioch Bible Church in Washington state, says it is "a shame" that the president is "supporting what destroys the family."

"There's absolutely no truth in anything he said, from beginning to the end," says Pastor Hutcherson. "There is no such thing as [a] biblical stance for homosexuality, if you use the Bible. If you want to use any other denomination, feel free -- but where I stand is...biblical; it is marriage between one man [and] one woman, and that is the relationship, heterosexual, that is ordained, blessed, and called by God."

In his talk, Obama acknowledged that many Americans still disapprove of homosexuality. "There are still fellow citizens, perhaps neighbors or even family members and loved ones, who still hold fast to worn arguments and old attitudes," he stated. (See related article) Hutcherson says those comments demonstrate the president has contempt for more than just conservative Christians.

"I think this president has a disdain for anyone who disagrees with anything about him -- don't just limit it to Christians and conservatives," he remarks. "Brother, this man doesn't like anyone who doesn't think he's the smartest man in the world."

Hutcherson says until conservative Christians make their small voice a dominating one, there is nothing that will stop President Obama from pushing for the legalization of same-sex "marriage."


6/30

WASHINGTON, DC - President Barack Obama says that while he's dedicated to expanding homosexual rights, many Americans still cling to what he calls "worn arguments and old attitudes."


At a White House celebration of Gay Pride Month, Obama said he hopes to persuade all Americans to accept homosexuality. ""There are good and decent people in this country who don't yet fully embrace their gay brothers and sisters -- not yet," said the president. "That's why I've spoken about these issues -- not just in front of you -- but in front of unlikely audiences, in front of African-American church members."

Obama acknowledged that many Americans still disapprove of homosexuality. "There are still fellow citizens, perhaps neighbors or even family members and loved ones, who still hold fast to worn arguments and old attitudes," he stated.




He added that Congress should repeal what Obama referred to as "the so-called Defense of Marriage Act" -- and that his administration is working to pass a hate crimes bill and to repeal the "don't ask, don't tell" policy on homosexuals in the military.

The audience at the White House ceremony included Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson and other homosexual clergy. Obama introduced Robinson as a "special friend."

6/29 ACLU defends Muslim prison prayer The American Civil Liberties Union has filed suit on behalf of Muslim inmates who want to pray together five times a day in an Indiana federal prison.

The Associated Press reports prison inmates in Terre Haute are allowed to pray as a group for one hour a week on Fridays. However, their religion commands them to pray corporately five times a day. The ACLU contends the government and prison system is restricting religious activities for no reason.

Ken Falk, Indiana's ACLU legal director, finds it ironic that prisoners are allowed out of their cells to watch television, play cards, and engage in other group activities, yet their worship time is restricted. A local Islamic leader said Muhammad, Islam's prophet, gives greater rewards to his followers who pray in congregation rather than praying individually.

Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel disagrees with the ACLU'S stance.

"The lawsuit, however, in this particular case says that they are allowed to pray as a group only just one hour a week. The fact is that there is no constitutional right to assembly as a group five times a day, whether it's in the workplace or in the prison," he notes.

Staver points out that Liberty Counsel completely supports religious liberty, regardless of a person's faith group. "But I think in the situation with regards to the Muslims, there is clearly a security issue at risk here when you are requesting the prisons to accommodate five daily group meetings to have prayer," he contends.

The Liberty Counsel attorney believes if a similar request had come from Christians, the ACLU would not have even considered handling the case.


(ed note. Can you just see all the new converts happy to spread their new found Sharai law with all those they "Love" when they are releashed from prison?).
6/29
The chief counsel with the Pacific Justice Institute is fighting for the rights of parents to opt out of a controversial curriculum.

San Francisco Bay-area Alameda Unified School District has approved a "lesbian, gay, bi-sexual and transgender" (LGBT) curriculum for use with kindergarten through fifth-grade students. The curriculum is intended to deal with issues such as bullying and harassment.

Kevin Snider with the Pacific Justice Institute (PJI) says the board passed the curriculum despite the objection of 73 percent of the speakers from the community who attended the board meeting.

"The fundamental problem with the curriculum is it gives a monopoly to one segment of the population -- namely gay, lesbian, bi-sexual, transgender persons -- on the issue of harassment," he contends. "And our position is that all students deserve safe schools, and that sexual orientation is only one of six protected classes. The other classes include race, gender, religion, disability, etc.; and so we have opposed this."

Alameda Unified School District is not allowing parents to opt their children out of the curriculum. PJI is sending opt-out letters to the district on behalf of parents. If the district rejects those letters, Snider says PJI will take the issue to court.

6/29 'Gays' in the military - bad idea then, bad idea now Matt Barber - Guest Columnist - 6/29/2009 8:20:00 AM Most are unaware that during the Revolutionary War George Washington was a staunch advocate for allowing "gays" in the military. In fact, he boldly commissioned the little-known "Fabulous Pink Brigade," which once infiltrated a British camp and – while the redcoats slept – covertly redecorated in eye-popping pastels. No, although Washington was a revolutionary, he wasn't a radical. The idea of open homosexuality within our armed services has long been considered preposterous. Washington wisely understood that to allow men among the ranks who sodomized other men would necessarily distract from the mission at hand, disrupt unit cohesion, and damage the morale of non-sodomy-disposed soldiers forced to sleep and bathe alongside those so inclined. It's understandably disquieting to wonder whether your foxhole buddy "has your back" or wants to rub it. In general court-martial orders dated March 14, 1778, Washington, through his designs, addressed the disposition of a homosexual soldier "tried for attempting to commit sodomy": "[We] do sentence him to be dismiss'd [from] the service with infamy. His Excellency the Commander in Chief approves the sentence and with abhorrence and detestation of such infamous crimes orders Lieutt. Enslin to be drummed out of camp tomorrow morning by all the drummers and fifers in the Army never to return." Barack Obama is no George Washington. He and a like-minded gaggle of congressional liberals have pledged to repeal the federal law, Section 654, Title 10, which stipulates that homosexual practice is incompatible with military service. Furthermore, they intend to do away with Bill Clinton's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT) administrative compromise. The president has asked Congress to pass and send to his desk H.R. 1283, which, for the first time in American history, would homosexualize the military. To wit, he seeks to supplant military vitality with San Francisco vice. Whereas George Washington put a premium on combat readiness and national security, these indispensable safeguards play last fiddle to liberals' obtuse fixation with political correctness. In the deadly game of war it's dangerously irresponsible to place extreme social ideology above national security. In combat, even the slightest disruption or distraction can spell the difference between victory and defeat – life and death. The left fails to understand this grave reality. The boots on the ground, however, do understand. In a March 31, 2009, letter addressed to President Obama and members of Congress, more than 1,100 of the military's highest ranking and most distinguished commanders warned that they were "greatly concerned" by movement toward military homosexualization. They expressed fear that a DADT repeal would "eventually break the All-Volunteer Force." It seems their fears are justified. A 2009 Military Times poll determined that nearly one in 10 of those currently serving would not re-enlist if the policy were repealed. In today's highly perilous global political climate, such a plummet in service could be devastating to national security. I'm speaking from personal experience. I served 12 years in the Army National Guard. During basic training a young man who later turned out to be homosexual was discharged after making unwanted advances toward other soldiers and for inappropriately touching several while they slept in the barracks. A lengthy investigation ensued. Troops were pulled away from their regular training to answer questions. It was a tremendous distraction for our entire platoon. This incident most definitely disrupted unit cohesion and harmed troop morale. But none of this matters to liberals. Obama is the un-Washington. The left – of which Obama sits on the fringe – loathe the armed services. Rather than viewing the military as a noble and necessary institution designed as our last line of defense, they consider it a giant petri dish ripe for radical social experimentation. Move over Army National Guard; make way for the smarmy avant-garde. But it's not just the military that Obama seeks to "remake"; it's the entire social construct. On June 1, 2009, he unilaterally and arbitrarily issued an official Presidential Proclamation smugly declaring that all Americans should celebrate sexual deviancy. He dubbed June "Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month." Rather than regarding homosexual practice with "abhorrence" and "detestation" – as did George Washington and most everyone until recent years – Obama has euphemistically vowed to "outlaw discrimination" (read: criminalize traditional morality). Included within his proclamation – and among a host of equally radical social pledges – was yet another promise to "[end] the existing 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' policy...." Well, the federal courts have rejected the notion that DADT constitutes "discrimination." In recent weeks the U.S. Supreme Court was not persuaded to hear an appeal from a lower-court ruling which determined that the policy is "rationally related to the government's legitimate interest in military discipline and cohesion." In an age of rampant judicial activism, it's refreshing to witness some common-sense judicial restraint. This decision by the Supreme Court should once again remind everyone that, contrary to the propaganda fomented by the organized homosexual lobby, Barack Obama and liberals in Congress, homosexual temptation and the destructive but changeable homosexual lifestyle must not be confused with neutral and immutable characteristics such as race or gender for purposes of assigning special government minority status. That is to say, it's properly illegal, for instance, to ban African-Americans from serving in the armed forces. It is neither illegal nor discriminatory, however, to disallow any American who "loudly and proudly" opts to practice what George Washington would have called "the sin that dare not speak its name." Hands off the military, Mr. Obama; we can't afford the "progress." 6/28 Anti-religion group protests 'prayer booth' at City Hall Charlie Butts - OneNewsNow - 6/28/2009 4:10:00 AM The Tabernacle church has set up a prayer booth at City Hall in Warren, Michigan, and an anti-religion organization is protesting it. The Detroit News reports that about 400 people have stopped to ask for prayer for job loss, medical, or financial problems. People at the booth -- located in the lobby of city offices with a banner that reads "Prayer Station" -- offer prayer to God as the answer. Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel says a local agnostic-atheist group is angry with the city. "This is another one of those cases from the radical Freedom From Religion Foundation," he notes. "This organization is not concerned with the Constitution or the First Amendment or equal treatment. They're concerned with eradicating religion, particularly Christian viewpoints." The Liberty Counsel founder tells OneNewsNow that Freedom From Religion Foundation could have its own booth there, but chooses otherwise. The facilities are made available to anyone in the community, for secular or religious events. Warren Mayor Jim Fouts points out the city rents the space to any group that fills out the proper paperwork and complies with city policy. "When Christianity or Christian viewpoints happen on public property on an equal basis, that doesn't make it unconstitutional," Staver points out. "Freedom From Religion Foundation would want to eliminate any kind of Christian viewpoints or religious expression from the public marketplace. To do so, in fact, is blatantly contrary to our history and undermines the very First Amendment that they pretend to uphold." If the Foundation does file suit, Staver says Liberty Counsel will offer to defend the city free-of-charge. 6/27 Not for the weak of stomack (ed.) WAR ON TERROR 'Is it permitted to eat the flesh of American soldiers?' Jihadist says slaughtering needs to be according to Shariah Posted: June 25, 2009 9:20 pm Eastern © 2009 WorldNetDaily The Al-Falluja jihadist forum has featured a new discussion – on the slaughter and eating of U.S. soldiers, according to officials with the Middle East Media Research Institute. On the organization's Jihad Threat and Terrorism page, a subscription service of the nonprofit that monitors, interprets and reports on media developments in the Middle East, a report said the discussion was prompted by a new book from Abu Muhammad Al-Maqdisi, one of the most influential jihadist sheiks alive.
The MEMRI report said a forum participant who identifies himself as "Al-Maqdisi's Student," wrote on June 13: "Is it permitted to eat the flesh of American soldiers? A quote from the illustrious Sheik Al-Maqdisi, may Allah preserve him." He recounted an exchange involving early Muslim commander Khalid b. Al-Walid and a Byzantine commander at the battle of Yarmuk, which is thought to have happened in A..D. 636 . "The Byzantine commander said to Khalid that the Muslims had only gone out from the land due to hunger, and offered to buy them off. Khalid responded, 'It was not hunger that drove us out of our land, as you say; we are a people who drink blood, and we know that there is no blood more delicious than Byzantine blood. That is why we came,'" the report said. (Story continues below)
The forum participant, the "Student," then follows up with the comment: "The mujahideen should inform their belligerent [infidel] and apostate enemies of this exceptional law so that they can bring it up and study it at their conferences on human rights, counterterrorism, and so on! Then they in turn can proclaim that our soldiers lick their lips [at the thought of] eating the flesh of their hamburger- and Pepsi-eating soldiers!" As with many forums, some of the responses were on varied topics, but on the issue of cannibalism, "Abu Hajir Al-Muqrin" wrote: "If we are forced to eat Americans, let's make them into a gunpowder-flavored kabsa with some hors d'oeuvres made of apostates." Another comment, "But the slaughtering needs to be according to the Shariah," from "Muhammad Al-Baghdadi." He added images to his post, stills from the video done by Islamic radicals who decapitated Nick Berg and wrote, "Perhaps this is the best way." The "Student" then returned to the threat, posting:

"A true story: a group of mujahideen from one of the brigades was in the mountains during the jihad against the Russians. One of them was sent off on a mission; he went and came back, but he couldn't find any of the brothers. He saw a roasted calf leg that the brothers in the brigade left for him for dinner, and he ate of it until he was full. When he went back to the main camp, the brothers saw him and offered him dinner! He said: praise Allah, I already ate! They said: Where did you find dinner? He said: You left me roasted calf leg! They said: No, no, that wasn't calf, that was the leg of a Russian infidel! He answered: No matter, it's all Islamic slaughter!"

WND reported earlier when MEMRI documented a segment on the Hamas terrorist organization's official television network proclaiming the Jews' "favorite cocktail" was Muslim blood mixed withi soda water. "You must drink from the blood of Muslims," says a Jewish father to his son during the drama. "But mix it with soda water," replies the son, whose name is Shimon. MEMRI also has documented extensively television training of children to be jihadists and martyrs. ************************** 6/27 Angry parent breaks bond between church, school Charlie Butts and Marty Cooper - OneNewsNow - 6/27/2009 4:00:00 AM Local volunteers from Turning Point Church can no longer evangelize at Totem Middle School in Marysville, Washington. Volunteers from the church helped teachers by watching students and doing other tasks assigned by the teacher. HeraldNet.com reports on an incident that took place between a 19-year-old church volunteer and an 11-year-old student. Matt Krause with Liberty Counsel explains. "Apparently one of the interns met one of the middle-school students and got her MySpace name and later on that night wrote her on MySpace and said, 'Hey, we've got a church service tonight. Let me know if you want to come. I'll pick you up,'" he notes. The parent became upset and complained to school and church officials. Interns are barred now from discussing religion at length with students. Totem Middle School superintendent Larry Nyland added a new section to the school district's volunteer handbook, outlining how volunteers should approach religious topics and instructing that they should be neutral on political and religious matters. Volunteers can answer religious questions honestly, but briefly; and cannot proselytize, invite students to events, or request any contact information. Krause understands concern over a stranger contacting a student and offering to give the student a ride to an event, but he disagrees with the handbook's new policy. "There's nothing wrong with an intern or a volunteer talking about religion when a student approaches them, which was the old policy," he concludes. The pastor of Turning Point Church has since withdrawn his volunteers from the school; however, the interns will return to the school after new volunteer training. 6/27 Liberal leadership + conservative base = denominational fireworks Allie Martin and Jody Brown - OneNewsNow - 6/26/2009 8:50:00 AM A decision to allow a lesbian couple to testify during the annual meeting of Mississippi United Methodists has caused widespread controversy. The couple spoke at the June 12 worship service at the Mississippi Annual Conference of the United Methodist Church, held in Jackson. The two women spoke of their desire to see the denomination formally accept homosexuals. Mississippi Bishop Hope Morgan Ward later told The Clarion-Ledger newspaper their "witness was not a challenge to the law of the church in any way." But at least two Mississippi-based ordained UMC ministers -- Don Wildmon, founder and chairman of the American Family Association; and Buddy Smith, who pastors in Tremont, MS -- see it differently. Wildmon, according to The Clarion-Ledger, views the women's testimony as an indication that the state's leadership of the UMC "is promoting homosexual marriage." And Smith voiced concerns that young people in the audience "heard glowing testimony about the beauty and innocence of the homosexual lifestyle, which the Bible clearly says is sinful." Story continues below ... If your denomination allowed a homosexual 'couple' to speak at a state or national meeting, how would you interpret that? Vote in our poll Mark Tooley, president of the Institute on Religion & Democracy, says the issue of homosexuality will affect United Methodists in every state. "It illustrates the problem of when you have a liberal bishop or other church leader presiding over a conservative church area," Tooley explains. "Mississippi, like most of the southeast, is a theologically and socially conservative area for the United Methodist Church, as it is across the board. And so inevitably there was going to be some conflict and controversy -- and this is the first vivid example of that." Bishop Ward has invited clergy and lay people to a dialogue on the issue in early July 6/27 Chicago children march in gay pride parade...or not Pete Chagnon - OneNewsNow - 6/26/2009 7:20:00 AM The Chicago Tribune is reporting that Chicago's Nettlehorst Elementary School will be the first public school in the community to march in the city's gay pride parade. According to the Tribune, the school's fence is adorned with thousands of green, blue, purple, and red strips of fabric -- each hand-tied by a student. A sign by the gate stated that the elementary school will "be the first Chicago public school to march in the city's gay pride parade." The sign also stated that the school believes that family means everybody. OneNewsNow contacted Nettlehorst Elementary School and requested an interview with school principal Cindy Wulbert. However OneNewsNow was informed that she was unavailable, but the person who answered the phone told OneNewsNow that the school does not endorse the gay pride parade; neither is it participating in the event. She also told OneNewsNow that some of the parents of students were participating in the event with their children but that, again, the school is not supporting that effort. When asked about the strips of fabric, OneNewsNow was told that they do not exist. Laurie Higgins is with the Illinois Family Institute and was also told that the school was not participating in the event, but that parents and students who are participating can identify themselves as being a part of Nettlehorst elementary. Higgins was also informed that the sign referred to in the Tribune did not exist. "I'm sorry; this just sounds very fuzzy to me. I find it difficult to believe that the reporter who quoted the sign imagined that the sign was there. And this morning I was told that they were participating, and now we're told that they are not participating, but that the parents who are marching can actually identify that they are going to Nettlehorst," she notes. "So I think that it's a distinction without a difference. It sounds to me like they caught a lot of flack today, and they are trying to find a way to wiggle out of this." Higgins is currently attempting to contact a Tribune reporter. As far as the participation by some of the parents and students in the gay pride parade, Higgins notes that some of the parents are homosexual, but she believes that is no excuse to expose young children to such an event. "These parades are noted for nudity. Sometimes there are open sex acts. They have cross-dressers in these parades. Any parent who takes their child to this is not a responsible parent, she contends. "To me this is the equivalent to child abuse; it's exposing their kids to live pornography, and I find it very shocking." Higgins notes that it would be a pleasant surprise if nudity laws were enforced at this event. 6/27 Proposed federal law would be a hate crime against America Robert Knight - Guest Columnist - 6/26/2009 7:30:00 AM "We're not going to win this case, but that's okay. Once we get 'hate crime' laws on the books, we're going to go after the Scouts and all the other bigots." This was a remark made in the gallery by the Clinton White House liaison for "gay" issues during U.S. Supreme Court hearings on the Boy Scouts case in 2000. She had whispered it to the Rev. Rob Schenck, whom she mistakenly thought was one of those liberal clerics who think God is still making up His mind about sexual morality. The point is that the proposed federal "hate crime" law before the Senate is less about righting wrongs than it is about elevating sexual preferences -- all of them -- to civil rights status so they can be used as a battering ram against people with traditional values. "Hate crime" laws ensure unequal justice. They empower some groups of victims at the expense of others. A grandma using an ATM machine should have as much protection under the law as a man walking out of a "gay" bar. But under the proposed federal "hate crimes" law, an assailant of a man perceived as homosexual would face greater penalties than grandma's mugger. Yesterday (Thursday, June 25), the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act (S. 909), which passed the House on April 29 in a largely partisan vote of 249 to 175, with 10 abstentions. Named after the Wyoming college student beaten to death in 1998 and whose killers received the maximum in a state without a hate crimes law, S. 909 is not only unnecessary but poses an acute threat to constitutional civil rights. It's a massive federal power grab over state criminal law, giving the attorney general's office the power to intervene into a "hate crime" case whenever they feel it is necessary. It would add "sexual orientation" and "gender identity" to a list of specially protected classes such as race, ethnicity, sex and religion. If this bill passes, the Congress of the United States will be officially creating a new civil rights category based on sexual confusion. Like "sexual orientation," "gender identity" is infinitely flexible, and includes transvestitism (cross-dressing) and transsexualism (believing that one is in the wrong sex's body and sometimes surgically changing one's sex organs). In the House version, an effort to amend the bill to exclude "pedophilia" was defeated in committee along party lines. Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL) even read a partial list of paraphilias from the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, including pedophilia, and declared that "all of these philias and fetishes and isms that were put forward – need not live in fear because of who they are." This is why some of the bill's opponents call it the "Pedophile Protection Act." Here's how the law would work in practice: It would add penalties on top of those levied for criminal convictions, based on the perpetrators' perceived beliefs or the victims' group identification. In order to prove that the defendant holds particular beliefs, his or her speech, writing, reading materials and organizational memberships would become key evidence. "Have you now, or have you ever been involved with a homophobic organization (like, say, Catholic Charities)?" Two paragraphs were inserted to mollify such concerns:

(3) CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS - Nothing in this Act shall be construed to prohibit any constitutionally protected speech, expressive conduct or activities (regardless of whether compelled by, or central to, a system of religious belief), including the exercise of religion protected by the First Amendment and peaceful picketing or demonstration. The Constitution does not protect speech, conduct or activities consisting of planning for, conspiring to commit, or committing an act of violence. (4) "FREE EXPRESSION - Nothing in this Act shall be construed to allow prosecution based solely upon an individual's expression of racial, religious, political, or other beliefs or solely upon an individual's membership in a group advocating or espousing such beliefs."

But American Civil Rights Union (ACRU) attorney John Armor notes: "This is a head fake for citizens who don't understand freedom of speech protections." Ken Klukowski, an ACRU senior legal analyst, explains, "Paragraph (3) is only a statement of the obvious, so it has no legal effect. No statute can abridge constitutionally-protected speech. If any speech is burdened, and the speaker files suit, then the process and the result is the same regardless of whether there is any paragraph such as (3). The court then looks to the speech in question, the nature of the burden on that speech, and what protection the First Amendment extends to that particular speech. The court does not look to language such as (3) in deciding the case. If the burden in the specific case is unconstitutional, then it's impermissible whether the statute acknowledges the fact or not. So (3) is just there to help pass the bill by giving people a talking point to say 'this law does nothing to violate anyone's free speech rights.' It makes no difference in court whatsoever." The bill also would create a federal slush fund for hate crime prevention programs at the state and local levels, including school programs that equate traditional morality with "bigotry." The Justice Department's "hate crime" section relies on material from groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center, which lumps legitimate conservative and Christian organizations with "hate groups." Besides its threats to basic freedoms, the law is unnecessary. America is not awash in an epidemic of hate crimes, which constitute a microscopic portion of the more than 11 million crimes reported in the United States annually. In the latest crime report released in October 2008 by the U.S. Justice Department for 2007, nearly 80 percent of the 7,624 incidents of "hate crimes" listed in "crimes against persons" involved "intimidation" (47.4 percent) or "simple assault" (31.1 percent), which could involve nothing more than words. The proposed federal hate crime law, like all hate crime laws, politicizes crime, leading to pressure on police and prosecutors to devote more of their limited resources to certain victims at the expense of others. For example, homosexual activist groups descended on Wyoming and created a media circus around the Matthew Shepard case, costing the state heavily for public relations. Meanwhile, the story of Kristin Lamb, an eight-year-old girl who a month before Shepard's death was killed in Wyoming and her body thrown into a landfill, received virtually no news coverage or concerns about a possible "hate crime." Hate crime laws lay the groundwork for assaults on freedom of speech and freedom of religion. In Canada, Great Britain, and Sweden, clergy have been investigated and arrested for advocating traditional morality. "Hate crime" laws are already being used to silence people in the United States. A pastor in New York's Staten Island saw two billboards with a Bible verse on them taken down in 2000 under pressure from city officials, who cited "hate crime" rhetoric. In Philadelphia, 11 Christians were arrested and jailed overnight for singing and preaching in a public park at a homosexual street festival in 2004. Five of them were bound over and charged with five felonies and three misdemeanors, totaling a possible 47 years in jail. These charges, based on Pennsylvania's "hate crimes" law, hung over them for months until a judge finally dismissed them. Freedom-loving Americans deplore any violence against innocent victims (including homosexuals), but strongly oppose "hate crime" laws as unjust and dangerous. All people deserve impartial justice under the 14th Amendment's guarantee of equal protection under the law. The proposed federal hate crime law imperils that cherished right on many levels. 6/23 Teacher fired for conservative website Pete Chagnon - OneNewsNow - 6/23/2009 4:00:00 AM A Kansas teacher says he was wrongfully terminated for his conservative views. Tim Latham has been teaching history and U.S. Government for over 19 years. But after teaching for just one year in the Lawrence School District in Lawrence, Kansas, Latham says his contract was not renewed because school officials did not like his conservative views -- particularly a teacher website that Latham hosted and paid for himself. A teacher coach confronted him on that issue. "She had concerns about it. I've never had a complaint about it -- nothing but compliments. Parents love it because of their access to assignments, grades, etc. And she wanted a lot of the stuff that was on it removed. And when I asked why, I was told because it was too patriotic." Latham had an introductory video on the site where he stated that he wanted students to truly love the American way of life, and he says he was told to remove that as well because not everybody loves the American way of life. According to Latham, other complaints included that he was picking on Obama too much. When he asked for an explanation as to why his contract was not renewed he was told, "You refuse to conform" and "you just don't fit in." "Those are word-for-word quotes given to me by the director of human resources, who says he is quoting what the administration told him -- I refuse to conform and I just don't fit in," Latham notes. He has since filed a grievance and is considering litigation if he does not get a satisfactory response. 6/23 Sarkozy: Burkas unwelcome in France Published: June 23, 2009 at 10:17 AM French President Nicolas Sarkozy said the wearing of burqas, the traditional Muslim garment covering women from head to toe, was not "welcome in France." In a speech before a joint session of parliament Monday, Sarkozy said the burqa was a "sign of subservience" and a matter of "a woman's freedom and dignity," CNN reported Tuesday. "The problem of the burqa is not a religious problem. This is an issue of a woman's freedom and dignity," Sarkozy said. "This is not a religious symbol. It is a sign of subservience; it is a sign of lowering. I want to say solemnly, the burqa is not welcome in France." France has been engaged in a heated debate about Muslim women wearing the traditional covering, with some French lawmakers calling for a ban on them, CNN said. Muslim leaders reacted with caution to Sarkozy's comments on wearing a burqa and niqab, a face veil, the Times of London reported. Dalil Boubakeur, rector of the Great Mosque of Paris, said Sarkozy's remarks were "in keeping with the republican spirit of secularism." Moderate Muslims also consider full face-covering as a symbol of submission, Boubakeur told the Times. © 2009 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved. ********************************************************************************************************* 6/22 LOUISVILLE, Ky. - Prison Fellowship founder Charles Colson predicts pastors will soon face prosecution under hate crimes laws if they preach that same-sex relationships are sinful. Colson, who served prison time for his role in the Watergate scandal, delivered a grim forecast to Southern Baptist pastors at their annual meeting in Louisville, Ky. Sponsors of congressional hate crimes legislation insist it won't restrict speech, but Colson warned that ministers will face the threat of prosecution within the next two years. He also said medical professionals are losing their conscience right to refuse to perform abortions, and faith-based ministries could soon have to hire non-believers. Colson also predicted a continuing threat from Islamic terrorists and dismissed the Quran as an "irrational" invention of Muhammad rather than divinely inspired scripture. ********************************************************************************************************* 6/21 Baptist university claims bias by education group Associated Press - 6/21/2009 4:10:00 AM CEDARVILLE, OH - A Baptist university in Ohio says an education group's criticism of the school reflects the group's anti-religious bias.Cedarville Universitywas censured by the American Association of University Professors for firing a tenured faculty member. The group says the employee, who's suing the university, wasn't given due process. In an e-mailed statement, Cedarville spokesman John Davis responds that the association has historically demonstrated bias against religious schools and the censuring is consistent with that. The association scoffs at the school's claim, noting that one of its investigators in the Cedarville case is a professor at Calvin College, a Christian school in Michigan. Davis says Cedarville is guided by "biblical principles -- not an external body like the AAUP." ********************************************************************************************************* 6/20 FAITH UNDER FIRE Washington Post columnist: Christians 'pernicious' Uses review of gardening book to deliver missionary dig Posted: June 19, 2009 8:00 pm Eastern ©2009WorldNetDaily

Hawaiian flower

A columnist at the Washington Post has used a column about a gardening book to deliver a dig at Christians, calling the missionaries who traveled to the Hawaiian Islands while the region still was a kingdom "pernicious." That's the word defined in various online dictionaries as:

• "baneful: exceedingly harmful"
• "insidious: working or spreading in a hidden and usually injurious way
• "causing much harm in a subtle way"
• "grave harmfulness or deadlines

Columnist James P. Pinkerton at Fox News raised the alert about the insult. "Are Christian missionaries 'pernicious'? The Washington Post seems to think so," he wrote today. "In a review of a book about a botanical garden in Hawaii, Carolyn See, a longtime contributor to the Post's 'Style' section, includes this nasty little aside about newcomers who changed the ecosystem of Hawaii: 'then white people and their pernicious missionaries,'" Pinkerton wrote. "Needless to say, no other group was similarly saddled with an insulting modifier. Only missionaries are 'pernicious.'" See's article was about "Waking Up In Eden," a book by Lucinda Fleeson, who exchanged her life as a reporter for the Philadelphia Inquirer for a life in Hawaii working on restoring its plant life. In the discussion about the damage to the island flora and fauna, See cited the impact of severe storms and other factors. "The Hawaiian Islands have about 1,000 unique native plant species, but about 100 were already gone. The culprits for this plant massacre were many: the first Polynesians, then white people and their pernicious missionaries, then feral goats and pigs. And there were numerous plant villains as well, particularly bougainvillea and morning glory," she wrote. Pinkerton said the slam is significant. "For perspective, we might try to imagine the reaction if the writer had written, say, 'black people and their pernicious ministers.' Or 'Jews and their pernicious rabbis.' Or 'Muslims and their pernicious mullahs,'" he wrote. "'It's only Christian-bashing' and it is becoming more and more common," wrote a participant on Pinkerton's forum page. Said another, "Interesting how one can become inured to the constant stream of 'innocent' comments and subtle digs at some groups. While others enjoy near total immunity from any form of criticism." ********************************************************************************************************* FAITH UNDER FIRE Washington Post columnist: Christians 'pernicious' Uses review of gardening book to deliver missionary dig Posted: June 19, 2009 8:00 pm Eastern ©2009WorldNetDaily

Hawaiian flower

A columnist at the Washington Post has used a column about a gardening book to deliver a dig at Christians, calling the missionaries who traveled to the Hawaiian Islands while the region still was a kingdom "pernicious." That's the word defined in various online dictionaries as:

• "baneful: exceedingly harmful"
• "insidious: working or spreading in a hidden and usually injurious way
• "causing much harm in a subtle way"
• "grave harmfulness or deadlines

Columnist James P. Pinkerton at Fox News raised the alert about the insult. "Are Christian missionaries 'pernicious'? The Washington Post seems to think so," he wrote today. "In a review of a book about a botanical garden in Hawaii, Carolyn See, a longtime contributor to the Post's 'Style' section, includes this nasty little aside about newcomers who changed the ecosystem of Hawaii: 'then white people and their pernicious missionaries,'" Pinkerton wrote. "Needless to say, no other group was similarly saddled with an insulting modifier. Only missionaries are 'pernicious.'" See's article was about "Waking Up In Eden," a book by Lucinda Fleeson, who exchanged her life as a reporter for the Philadelphia Inquirer for a life in Hawaii working on restoring its plant life. In the discussion about the damage to the island flora and fauna , See cited the impact of severe storms and other factors. "The Hawaiian Islands have about 1,000 unique native plant species, but about 100 were already gone. The culprits for this plant massacre were many: the first Polynesians, then white people and their pernicious missionaries, then feral goats and pigs. And there were numerous plant villains as well, particularly bougainvillea and morning glory," she wrote. Pinkerton said the slam is significant. "For perspective, we might try to imagine the reaction if the writer had written, say, 'black people and their pernicious ministers.' Or 'Jews and their pernicious rabbis.' Or 'Muslims and their pernicious mullahs,'" he wrote. "'It's only Christian-bashing' and it is becoming more and more common," wrote a participant on Pinkerton's forum page. Said another, "Interesting how one can become inured to the constant stream of 'innocent' comments and subtle digs at some groups. While others enjoy near total immunity from any form of criticism." ********************************************************************************************************* 6/19 Chinese gov't harasses registered church Allie Martin - OneNewsNow - 6/19/2009 7:40:00 AM Communist Chinese authorities continue to harass a registered church in one province.According toChina Aid Association(CAA), the Chengnan Christian Church --a registered Three-Self Patriotic Movement church --has faced harassment by government officials and real estate developers. Katherine Cason, a spokesperson with CAA, says authorities want to force the church from its building and use the property for a commercial housing development. She says many churches felt they were safe by registering with the government. "A lot of them are finding that even being registered, it actually opens the door for greater harassment because they have no alternative because they've agreed to the government's authority over their church," she explains, "and when they're forced off of their property, they're left with no alternative." Cason says Christians in the United States and elsewhere should contact Chinese authorities and ask them to stop harassing the registered church. The CAA website offers contact information for the church as well as suggestions on how to contact Chinese officials. ***************************** Religious conscience rule for therapists Charlie Butts - OneNewsNow - 6/19/2009 5:20:00 AM Religious groups in Nebraska want conscience rules implemented in proposed rules governing mental health professionals, including psychologists.The rules govern every category of people typically included in anti-discrimination laws. But as Jim Cunningham ofNebraska Catholic Conference(NCC) points out, "we also noted that in the list of these categories were sexual orientation [and] gender identity." Therefore, the NCC executive director says, it is conceivable that a licensed psychologist could face sanctions or loss of license for refusing counseling services for homosexuals on the basis of religious beliefs -- for example, a homosexual pair wanting relationship counseling. "We saw a potential problem for credential holders that we might typically employ because they are governed, of course, by our religious convictions," he adds. So the rules, Cunningham contends, need a conscience exception based on religion. He has developed suggestions that will provide for that, while at the same time making sure that services are available to the client or clients. At a recent hearing on the proposed rule, Nebraska psychologist James Cole argued that such a rule could open the door for discrimination as long as a therapist claimed a religious conflict. ************************* Small business sued over Christian slogan Charlie Butts - OneNewsNow - 6/19/2009 8:00:00 AM A Minnesota-based collection agency is being sued by a larger competitor, alleging its tactics are offensive and harassing.Bullseye Collection Agency uses "WWJD," or What Would Jesus do?, as its motto, and it appears on the agency'sbusiness stationery. Bullseye isbeing called to task by Mark Neill, who received one of their collection letters and was offended by WWJD. Neill owns the Bureau of Collection Recovery, a debt-collection agency and Bullseye competitor. Liberty Counselattorney Harry Mihet is representing Bullseye. "They treat their customers with respect, with integrity, and the way that they themselves would like to be treated," he claims. "They listen to the debtors. They try to work out solutions for the problems that they are facing. They even pray with the debtors over the phone sometimes in certain situations." Neill, the competitor, has filed a lawsuit against Bullseye, a much smaller, family-owned collection company.The Liberty Counsel attorney explains the current situation. "They are now defendants in a federal class-action lawsuit that alleges that by using that business motto, they are in fact harassing and oppressing the public at large and therefore are violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act," Mihet explains. Mihet argues the allegations are false, and says he intends to prove it in court. ********************************* 6/18 Big city mayors pushing homosexual agenda Jim Brown - OneNewsNow - 6/18/2009 5:00:00 AM A conservative activist says big city mayors are pandering to the homosexual agenda, but only because homosexual activists pushing "counterfeit marriage" are concentrated in those large cities.On Monday at its annual meeting, the U.S. Conference of Mayors passed a resolution supporting what it calls "marriage equality for same-sex couples." The resolution also included support for federal bills such as the Employment Non-Discrimination Act and the Matthew Shepard Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act, as well as repealing the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy.Story continues below ...What might motivate big-city leaders to support such issues as'hate crimes' legislation and same-sex 'marriage'?Vote in our poll Interestingly,31 of the 41 states represented by the 173 mayors who attended the meeting have either constitutional or state laws protecting traditional marriage. Peter LaBarbera, president ofAmericans for Truth About Homosexuality, says the mayors are out of touch with the mainstream American public. "People in most states now have ratified marriage between a man and a woman, and the big cities are pandering to the homosexual side. Fortunately, the big cities and the bigcity mayors do not represent the American people," he believes. "The American people are solidly for marriage between one man and one woman. And even in blue states like Illinois, even civil unions didn't pass here in Barack Obama's own home state." LaBarbera claims that homosexual activists are largely concentrated in big cities and do not accurately represent the rest of the country. 6/18 Update on PBS post of 6/17 PBS board approves compromise on religious programs Associated Press - 6/18/2009 9:35:00 AM WASHINGTON, DC - The board of the Public Broadcasting Service says the handful of PBS stations that carry religious services or devotionals can continue showing them, but cannot add new programs defined as sectarian -- that is, "placing one religion above all others."That compromise preserves the status of some public television stations whose membership was jeopardized under a PBS policy review that could have banned such programs. The decision allows Brigham Young University's KBYU to keep broadcasting Mormon devotionals. Public TV stations owned by Catholic groups in New Orleans and Harlingen, Texas, also will be able to continue their existing religious broadcasts while maintaining their PBS affiliation. 6/18 Lawsuit Filed Against City Over Restriction of Christian Ministry to Pass Out Religious Tracts on Public Sidewalks During Annual Arab Festival Thursday, June 18, 2009 ANN ARBOR, MI – For the last five years, Pastor George Saieg and scores of his volunteers have visited Dearborn, Michigan during its annual Dearborn Arab International Festival to pass out religious literature and discuss their Christian Faith. Pastor Saieg is a Sudanese Christian, and Founder and Director of the Arabic Christian Perspective (ACP), which ministers to Muslims. Dearborn happens to be one of the most densely populated Muslim communities in the United States. An estimated 30,000 of its 98,000 residents are Muslims. Even though there has never been a disruption of the public peace during this Christian ministry, last week Dearborn police officials told Pastor Saieg that he and his group are prohibited from freely traveling the public sidewalks to distribute their literature outside the festival. They must remain at a specific location. As a result, the Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, and the Becker Law Firm based in Los Angeles, California, the general counsel for ACP, filed a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Dearborn’s policy. The lawsuit was filed only after attempts were made to amicably assert Pastor Saieg’s constitutional rights to free speech. Click here to read the complaint. Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, commented, “It’s ironic that while Americans are applauding the free speech exercised by hundreds of thousands of Muslims on the streets of Iran, the City of Dearborn is restricting free speech rights Christians are attempting to exercise on the City’s public sidewalks.” The conflict arose when Pastor George Saieg called the City of Dearborn to find out when the festival was to begin. He was then told on June 9th that his group would be confined to a predetermined location. Pastor Saieg questioned the constitutional validity of this restriction, especially considering his group had attended the Dearborn Festival many times in the past without incident. Late this morning, Federal District Court Judge Nancy Edmonds denied an emergency motion for a temporary restraining order (TRO) prohibiting Dearborn from restricting Pastor Saieg and his group from passing out Christian literature on the public sidewalks. The Festival will be held for only 3 days, beginning tomorrow, Friday, June 19, 2009, and lasting through Sunday, June 21. Thomas More Law Center attorney Robert J. Muise argued the motion before Judge Edmonds on behalf of Pastor George Saieg and the Arabic Christian Perspective (ACP). Despite the TRO ruling, the lawsuit will proceed. According to Muise, “This case involves an important constitutional question regarding the government’s ability to prohibit peaceful speech activities. This preliminary ruling, while disappointing, will not affect the remainder of the case. We intend to pursue this as far as necessary.” The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes America’s Christian heritage and moral values, including the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life. It supports a strong national defense and an independent and sovereign United States of America. The Law Center accomplishes its mission through litigation, education, and related activities. It does not charge for its services. The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization. You may reach the Thomas More Law Center at (734) 827-2001 or visit our website at www.thomasmore.org. ************************* AP source: Same-sex partners to get fed benefitsPHILIP ELLIOTT- Associated Press Writer - 6/17/2009 5:10:00 AM WASHINGTON- President Barack Obama, whose homosexual supporters have grown frustrated with his slow movement on their priorities, is extending benefits to same-sex partners of federal employees, a White House official said. Obama plans to announce his decision Wednesday in the Oval Office, the official said Tuesday. The official spoke on the condition of anonymity because the president hadn't yet signed the presidential memorandum. The official said Obama would release more details Wednesday. The decision is a political nod to a reliably Democratic voting bloc that has become impatient with the White House in recent weeks. Several powerful homosexual fundraisers withdrew their support from a June 25 Democratic National Committee event where Vice President Joe Biden is expected to speak. Their exit came in response to a June 12 Justice Department brief that defended the Defense of Marriage Act, a prime target for homosexual criticism. Homosexual men and womenalso fretted as the White House declined to intervene in the cases of enlisted military members facing courts martial for defying the Clinton-era "don't ask, don't tell" policies. White House officials say they want Congress to repeal the policy as part of a "lasting and durable" solution, instead of intervening on individual cases. "The president agreed that ... the policy wasn't working for our national interests, that he committed to change that policy, that he's working with the secretary of defense and the joint chiefs on making that happen," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said last month. In the meantime, the administration has tried to make small, quiet moves to extend benefits to homosexuals. The State Department has promised to give partners of homosexual diplomats many benefits, such as diplomatic passports and language training. But without a specific change in the Federal Employees' Health Benefits Program, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton's promises left out financial benefits such as pensions. Obama's move could make that shift. Richard Socarides, a New York attorney and former senior adviser on homosexual rights issues to President Bill Clinton, was taking a wait-and-see attitude on Obama's announcement. "If it doesn't include health insurance, if he doesn't talk about the military and about the [Justice Department] brief, I think it will fall short," Socarides said in an e-mail late Tuesday. "Right now, people are looking for real action." John Berry, head of the Office of Personnel Management and the highest-ranking homosexual official in the administration, told a pro-homosexual rally last weekend that Obama planned to take action on benefits soon.




6/17 From America c2c by Stepanie BOYCOTT PBS!!!!! YET ANOTHER BROADCASTING COMPANY THAT HAS FALLEN FOR THE EVIL ONE! PLEASE BOYCOTT PBS BY NOT WATCHING OR SUPPORTING THEIR FUND RAISING DRIVES! AMERICA IS UNDER ATTACK BY THE EVIL THAT IS CONSUMING HER. PBS IS THE FIRST BROADCASTING NETWORK TO CANCEL ALL RELIGIOUS SERVICES!!!!! HERE WE GO PUT ON YOUR SEAT BELTS AMERICA! ALL OF YOU AMERICANS THAT CLING TO YOUR BIBLES AND YOUR GUNS, WELL YOU HAD BETTER GRAB THEM BEFORE THEY COME AFTER THEM TO. WAKE UP! WAKE UP! WAKE UP AMERICA!!!! 6/16 I know I said nothing political but these are must sees sent to me by Brother Jay.

6/15 Talking Jesus: Obama vs. Bush Dr. Paul Kengor - Guest Columnist - 6/15/2009 7:40:00 AMvar addthis_pub = 'onenewsnow'; There's an important article in the Politico, titled, "Obama invokes Jesus more than Bush." President Barack Obama, says the article, has mentioned Jesus Christ "in a number of high-profile public speeches," more so than did President George W. Bush, and in much less "innocuous contexts." Obama has done so in order to promote certain policies, especially his economic policies, and "to connect with a broader base of supporters." He does this via various "targeted messages." Most remarkable, the article considers whether Obama is using the bully pulpit to pursue "an even larger goal" of resurrecting the Christian left, of appealing to disillusioned conservative evangelicals, and to attract "swing Protestants" and "swing Catholics." In other words, Obama is doing the things, faith-wise, that Bush was angrily accused of doing.That's not surprising. Obama will pursue these goals with the secular-liberal media's acquiescence, silent approval and encouragement, and warmest appreciation. To cover for this political recruitment by their president, liberals in the press will ignore the activity, and certainly not expose it in their news coverage. Among the claims in the Politico piece, I was struck by the one that's most verifiable: the frequency of the mentions of Jesus. Within about a year, we will be able to tabulate these through the Presidential Documents as they become available on-line. I did those tabulations for George W. Bush compared to Bill Clinton. I ran the data because I sensed that Bush's references to God — which sent liberal journalists into fits of irrational rage — were less frequent and considerably more benign than anything I heard from Bill Clinton, not to mention a long line of Democratic presidents and politicians. Revisiting those findings here is worthwhile, since they tell us much about how Democratic presidents use faith and, far more important, how the liberal media manipulates public perception. I searched The Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents, which are the exhaustive, official collection of every public presidential statement. I compared the mentions of "Jesus," or "Jesus Christ," or "Christ" by Bush and Clinton. (Hereafter referred to as "Christ.") Clinton, of course, won handily. Most telling, however, was the how and when. Bush's biggest year was 2001, when he mentioned Christ in seven statements, typically relating to September 11 memorial services. In 2002, Bush cited Christ five times. Most interesting, in all of 2003, the Presidential Documents display only two statements in which Bush mentioned Christ: Easter and Christmas messages. This downward trend continued, suggesting that the hostile press reaction to Bush's mentions of Christ pressured him into silence. Such pressure, naturally, was never placed on Bush's Democratic predecessor. President Bill Clinton's biggest year for Christ remarks was 1996 — the year of his reelection campaign — when he spoke of Christ in nine separate statements. For a single year, Bush never outdid Clinton in references to Christ. Generally, Clinton's biggest years for references to Christ were election years: nine statements in 1996, seven in 1998, six in 2000, and five in 1994. In total, Clinton mentioned Christ 27 times in the four election years, compared to only 14 times in the four non-election years. He mentioned Christ twice as much in election years. Also, the way in which Clinton employed these references would have scandalized the press if Bush had used them. Clinton openly said that his personal "ministry" as president was "to do the work of God here on Earth" (Temple Hills, Maryland, August 14, 1994); declared that "God's work must be our own" (Newark, New Jersey, October 20, 1996); cited the teachings of Christ in support of federal legislation (July 26, 2000); said that his attempted impeachment was "in God's hands" (December 18, 1998); and constantly exhorted congregations to vote for him or Al Gore or other Democrats (Alfred Baptist Church in Alexandria, Virginia, October 29, 2000, and the Kelly Temple Church of God in Christ in Harlem, October 31, 2000, to cite just two examples). Never heard this before? Of course, you haven't. It was never reported. It was left to researchers to dig it out years after the fact. I could go on and on with examples. Vice President Al Gore sounded like a Baptist preacher on the 2000 campaign trail, andHillary Clinton obliterated any proprietywith her breathtaking statements in dozens of New York City churches during her 2000 Senate campaign. What I've noted here is the tip of an iceberg. I've devoted chapters and books to liberal Democrats' extremely expressive public expressions of faith. A core element of that story is how the press embraces these expressions but then, on a dime, turns and blasts conservative Republicans for much milder statements. Thus, I fully expect President Obama to talk about God in much stronger terms and far more often than did President Bush. Liberals will not politically crucify him as they did Bush. When the double standard is pointed out — strictly by conservatives — liberals will cover their ears, wink, and move on. At best, when confronted, they will conjure up the usual excuses as to why the reaction is different. So, be prepared to be greatly frustrated. The press has made it abundantly clear: there are different sets of rules for conservative Christian politicians and liberal Christian politicians. *********************************************************************************************************
BRAVE NEW SCHOOLS Sorry, no Christian talent allowed 7-year-old blocked from using religious song in sign language performance Posted: June 13, 2009 12:05 am Eastern By Drew Zahn ©2009WorldNetDaily

The sign for "Jesus Christ"

A public elementary school in Oakley, Calif., told a seven-year-old second grader that she would not be able to perform her sign language accompaniment to the song "We Worship You" at the school's evening talent show because the song is Christian. According to the Pacific Justice Institute, officials at Vintage Parkway Elementary School praised Bette Ouellette's talent, but informed her after auditions that the song was unacceptable for the school's June 1 talent show. Bette's father, Brent, thought the school overreacted, and he called PJI, which in turn sent a demand letter to the school, explaining legal precedent that condemns the school's action as a wrongful misapplication of constitutional law and requesting notification that future student performances will not be censored based on religious content. "Common sense and the federal courts both tell us that school talent shows are clearly student expression protected by the First Amendment," commented PJI President Brad Dacus in a statement. "Censoring one student's expression based on religious content is therefore unconstitutional. We are hopeful that these straightforward principles will be quickly recognized by the school." The letter PJI sent informs the school that not only have federal courts repeatedly ruled that applying the "separation of church and state" to censor religious content from student performances is unconstitutional, but also that in an almost identical case in New Jersey, a federal court ruled that censoring a religious song at a school talent show amounted to viewpoint discrimination. "Contrary to popular belief, the United States Supreme Court has never insisted there be an impenetrable wall between church and state," the letter states, and then cites a pair of federal court rulings to affirm, "rather, the U.S. Constitution 'affirmatively mandates accommodation, not merely tolerance, of all religions, and forbids hostility toward any.' To allow such hostility under the guise of total separation of church and state would necessarily bring this country into 'war with our national tradition as embodied in the First Amendment's guarantee of the free exercise of religion.'" Further, the letter states, "Federal courts have warned that school censorship of student-initiated religious activities is just as onerous as school sponsorship of such activities." WND contacted the school's principal for comment, but received no response. PJI attorney Matthew B. McReynolds told WND that Bette Ouellette did not perform at the talent show. "All we want is an apology and a promise that this won't happen again," said Bette's father in a statement. "There are a variety of religious views within our own household, but we respect each other and don't try to silence anyone. We think the school should be the same way." ********************************************************************************************************
Liberty Counsel: Americans United a 'bogus' group Charlie Butts - OneNewsNow - 6/14/2009 4:20:00 AM Americans United for Separation of Church and State has filed a complaint against a small Richmond, Virginia, church after the pastor pointed out a candidate he would vote for from the pulpit.The situation developed after Americans United filed a complaint against Liberty University for decertifying the campus club for Democrats. Mat Staver, dean of the university's law school and founder ofLiberty Counsel, retaliated with a complaint. "I believe that this action by Americans United is in direct response to our action against [them]," he notes. "We filed a complaint against Americans United about a couple of weeks ago, complaining that they were a branch of the Democratic Party, that they have only filed complaints where Republican or conservative candidates were at issue." For the past four years, Staver contends, Americans United has ignored complaints about pastors endorsing Democratic or liberal candidates. Because of Liberty Counsel's complaint, he believes the action against Fifth Street Baptist Church's pastor is designed to save face. **********************************************************************************************************************************
A fight for religious freedom in the classroom Jody Brown - OneNewsNow - 6/13/2009 4:00:00 AM "Whether it's this pastor or whether it's some other pastor, Americans United is just simply a bogus, intimidating organization," Staver concludes. "It's never won a single one of these kinds of complaints with the IRS, and I don't believe they'll be successful here either."A Christian teacher in a public school is being hailed as "a hero of the faith."John Freshwater, an eighth-grade teacher in Ohio, filed suit this week against the Mount Vernon City School District and district officials, claiming they violated his free-speech and civil rights when he was released. The $1-million lawsuit claims he was fired by the district last year over accusations that he preached Christianity in class. He also says he was harassed because of his religion and was discriminated against because of his involvement with the Fellowship of Christian Athletes. Finn Laursen is executive director ofChristian Educators Association International, of which Freshwater is a member. "I am pleased to see a public school teacher like John Freshwater willing to go outside his comfort zone and fight for the religious freedoms our forefathers guaranteed is through the U.S. Constitution," says Laursen. "It is imperative that all Christian educators, students, and parents be willing to step forward to insist on their rights -- or those rights will slowly be forfeited. "John is proving to be a hero of the faith," he adds. In firing Freshwater, the Mount Vernon school board cited an internal investigation that found he had preached his Christian beliefs in class. Freshwater, a teacher for 24 years, was also accused of using a scientific device to burn a cross image onto a student's arm and of keeping a Bible on his desk. ************************************************************************************************************************************************************* Bill Clinton: U.S. no longer dominated by Christians and Jews Christine Simmons - Associated Press Writer - 6/14/2009 5:55:00 AM WASHINGTON - Former President Bill Clinton has told an Arab-American audience of 1,000 people that the U.S. is no longer just a black-white country, nor a country that is dominated by Christians and a powerful Jewish minority In a speech to the group on Saturday, Clinton said thatgiven the growing numbers of Muslims, Hindus and other religious groups here, Americans should be mindful of the nation's changing demographics, which led to the election of Barack Obama as president.Clinton said by 2050 the U.S. will no longer have a majority of people with European heritage and that in an interdependent world "this is a very positive thing."Speaking in a hotel ballroom to the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee during its annual convention, Clinton also praised Obama's speech in Cairo, Egypt, that was focused on the Arab world.Clinton told the audience that it's important that they push government leaders for a resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He cited an experience in 1993 when he failed to persuade many Jewish-American and Arab-American business people to invest in the Palestinian areas because violence and bombings had deterred them."It just took one more bus bomb or one more rocket or one more incident and then people got scared of losing their money," he said.As the U.S. continues to push for peace in the area, "I think it's really important to give the Palestinian people something to look forward to," Clinton said to loud applause.Clinton, who wasn't paid for his speech, spoke in a wide-ranging 35-minute address that focused on people's identity in an interdependent world. He said the U.S. can't rely on its military might in global relations. "It has to begin by people accepting the fact that they can be proud of who they are without despising who someone else is," he said. *************************************************************************************************************************
Christian college puts political correctness above scripture Charlie Butts - OneNewsNow - 6/13/2009 4:05:00 AM 'onenewsnow'; A Christian college in India allows applicants to indicate whether they are male, female, or transgender when they enroll.Matt Barber, cultural affairs director atLiberty Counsel, says Madras Christian College administrators must have misread the book of Genesis, believing God created male, female, and transgender. "You know, this is just ridiculous and insane," he contends. "It's really sad that a Christian college is joining in and entertaining this leftist, secular, humanist delusion that is transgenderism." He calls political correctness a barrier to truth. "Political correctness is a wall between what people want to be truth and what is actual reality," he adds, "and the more that universities help to foster these untruths and help to entertain delusions and walk people away from reality, I think the less credible the mission of those universities becomes." One student from the Indian school who decided to take a course at Loyola in the U.S. refused to check off anything but "T" on the application --an option which was notavailable. *********************************************************************************************************
Written by an unknown Pastor's Wife, and brilliantly said: And it came to pass in the Age of Insanity that the people of the land called America , having lost their morals, their work initiative, and their will to defend their liberties, chose as their Supreme Leader that person known as "The One". He emerged from the vapors with a message that had no meaning; but He hypnotized the people telling them, "I am sent to save you. My lack of experience, my questionable ethics, my monstrous ego, and my association with evil doers are of no consequence. For I shall save you with Hope and Change. Go, therefore, and proclaim throughout the land that he who preceded me is evil, that he has defiled the nation, and that all he has built must be destroyed." And the people rejoiced, for even though they knew not what "The One" would do, he had promised that he would bring change, and they proclaimed "Yes We Can". And "The One" said "We live in the greatest country in the world. Help me change everything about it!" And the people said, "Hallelujah!! Change is good!" Then He said, "We are going to tax the rich fat-cats,"---- And the people said "Sock it to them!" "---- and "Redistribute their wealth." And then He said, "Redistribution of wealth is good for everybody" And the people said, "Show us the money!" And Joe the plumber asked, "Are you kidding me? You're going to steal my money and give it to the deadbeats??" And "The One" ridiculed and taunted him, and Joe's personal records were hacked, publicized, and ridiculed; though no crime could be found. One lone reporter asked, "That shouldn't be, isn't that Marxist policy?" And she was banished from the kingdom! Then a citizen asked, "With no foreign relations experience and having zero military experience or knowledge, how will you deal with radical terrorists?" And "The One" said, "Simple. I shall sit with them and talk kindly to them and show them how nice we really are; and they will forget that they ever wanted to kill us all!" And the people said, "Hallelujah!! We are safe at last, and we can beat our weapons into free cars for the people!" Then "The One" said, "I shall give 95% of you lower taxes." And one, lone voice said, "But 40% of us don't pay ANY taxes." So "The One" said, "Then I shall give you some of the taxes the fat-cats pay!" And the people said, "Hallelujah!! Show us the money!" Then "The One" said, "I shall tax your Capital Gains when you sell your homes!" And the people yawned and the already slumping housing market fully collapsed. And He said, "I shall mandate employer-funded health care for EVERY worker and raise the minimum wage, and lower the white collar wage. And I shall also give every person unlimited healthcare and medicine and even transportation to the free clinics." And the people said, "Give me some of that!" Then he said, "I shall penalize employers who ship jobs overseas." And the people said, "Where's my rebate check?" Then "The One" said, "I shall bankrupt the coal industry, and perhaps even the oil industry (Cap & Trade/Carbon Tax) and though electricity rates will skyrocket, we shall soon build wind farms and solar power stations and drive green cars that I shall mandate in Detroit!" And the people said, "Coal is dirty, coal is evil, no more coal! But we don't care for that part about higher electric rates." So "The One" said, "Not to worry. If your rebate ($10/week) isn't enough to cover your extra expenses ($3,000/year), we shall bail you out. Just sign up with ACORN and your troubles are over!" "Only the fat cats will have to pay." Then He said, "Illegal immigrants feel scorned and slighted. Let's grant them amnesty, Social Security, free education, free lunches, free medical care, bi-lingual signs and guaranteed housing..." And the people said, "Hallelujah!!" And they made him King! And so it came to pass that employers, facing spiraling costs and ever-higher taxes, raised their prices and laid off workers; though they sold much less of their products. Others simply gave up and went out of business, and the economy sank like unto a rock dropped from a cliff. The banking industry was destroyed. Manufacturing slowed to a crawl. And more of the people were without a means of support. So "The One" again blamed the prior administration, extended unemployment benefits to a year, bailed out his favorite banks, and then took over the banks and auto industries. "The One" said, "I am the "The One" - The Messiah - and I'm here to save you! We shall just print more money so the government will have enough!" "Surely one trillion dollars will make everyone happy." And immediately the Fed complied and the money presses roared. And China reconsidered their one trillion dollars of loans to the US ,, and threatened to call in their debts. Other foreign trading partners said unto "The One", "Wait a minute. Your dollar is not worth a pile of camel dung! You will have to pay more.. for everything.. as your dollar becomes worth less." And the people said, "Wait a minute.. That is unfair!!" And the world said, "Neither are these other idiotic programs you have embraced. Lo, you have become a Socialist state and a second-rate power. What factories are not owned by your government are owned by us. Now you shall play by our rules!" And "The One" said "Americans are arrogant, divisive, and derisive!" "We will listen." And the people cried out, "Alas, alas!! What have we done?" But yea verily, it was too late. The people eventually set upon "The One" and spat upon him and stoned him, and his name was dung. But the once mighty nation was no more; and the once proud people were without sustenance or shelter or hope. And the Change that "The One" had given them was as like unto a poison that had destroyed them from within, and like a whirlwind that consumed all that they had built. And the people beat their chests in despair and cried out in anguish, "Give us back our nation and our pride and our hope!!" But it was too late, and the once-glorious "Home of the Brave and Land of the Free" was no more.. ############################################################### You may think this is a fairy tale, but it's not. It's happening RIGHT NOW, Already everything down to the last couple of lines....