Obama May Return to Minor Leagues of Community Organizing in January 2017

obamamyworkAs we watch the fabric of American Society continue to be torn asunder by those, who claim to champion “Social Justice”, when in fact, they are championing a failed political ideology, led by a United States President, who seems more intent on dividing us that uniting us, many of us are longing for the day when this long National Nightmare will be over.

So, what will Barack Hussein Obama do when he steps down from the Throne of the Regime?

Jim Sink of Bloomberg Politics reports that

One day when he’s done wrangling with the Iranians and congressional Republicans, President Barack Obama plans to get back to where he once belonged.

The most powerful man in the world wants to return to community organizing after he hands over the keys to the White House in 2017, he told middle-school students at a public library in Washington’s Anacostia neighborhood today.

 “I’ll be done being president in a couple of years and I’ll still be a pretty young man,” he said. “And so I’ll go back to doing the kinds of work I was doing before, just trying to find ways to help people.”

Obama, who will be 55 years old when he leaves office in 2017, said his post-presidential agenda includes helping children get educations and better access to the job market, and luring businesses into low-income neighborhoods. Just out of college, he worked on Chicago’s South Side as a community organizer, a career choice that earned him much derision from conservative quarters

“That’s the kind of work that I really love to do,” he said, after one child asked what inspired him to seek the presidency.

The president’s comments came against the backdrop of unrest in Baltimore, where protests and riots have followed the April 19 death of Freddie Gray, 25, who suffered spinal-cord injuries while in policy custody. Earlier this week, Obama said the violence in Baltimore was indicative of a “slow-rolling crisis” in the nation’s inner cities that would require “some soul-searching.”

“If our society really wanted to solve the problem, we could,” he said at an April 28 news conference. “It’s just it would require everybody saying this is important, this is significant, and that we don’t just pay attention to these communities when a CVS burns.”

 The president has previously hinted that he wanted to dedicate his post-presidential life to addressing those issues. Last June, Obama said at a town hall-style meeting that he and his wife, Michelle, had discussions about “developing young people and working with them and creating more institutions to promote young leadership.”

He said at the town hall, however, that his first move, will be to plant himself on “a beach somewhere, drinking out of a coconut.” 

From 1985 – 1988, Obama was a Community Organizer in Chicago.  What does a Community Organizer do?  I’m glad you asked.

Per Byron York in an article found at nationalreview.com:

Community organizing is most identified with the left-wing Chicago activist Saul Alinsky (1909-72), who pretty much defined the profession. In his classic book, Rules for Radicals, Alinsky wrote that a successful organizer should be “an abrasive agent to rub raw the resentments of the people of the community; to fan latent hostilities of many of the people to the point of overt expressions.” Once such hostilities were “whipped up to a fighting pitch,” Alinsky continued, the organizer steered his group toward confrontation, in the form of picketing, demonstrating, and general hell-raising.

Obama was hired by Jerry Kellman, a New Yorker who had gotten into organizing in the 1960s.  Kellman was trying to help laid-off factory workers on the far South Side of Chicago, in a nearly 100% black community.   He led a group, the Calumet Community Religious Conference, that had been created by several local Catholic churches in the industrial community.   Kellman was advised to hire a black organizer for a new spinoff from CCRC.  They called it the Developing Communities Project, designed to focus solely on the Chicago part of the area.

One of Obama’s projects while he was there, was to try to build an alliance of white and black churches and enlist them in the cause of social justice.  Obama had a problem, though.   He didn’t go to church himself.   And that, brothers and sisters, is how Obama, drawn to the preaching of Rev. Jeremiah Wright (and a political opportunity), joined Trinity United Church of Christ on 95th Street.

If you ask Obama’s fellow Community Organizers what his most significant accomplishments were, they’ll say two things: the expansion of a city summer-job program for South Side teenagers and the removal of asbestos from one of the area’s oldest housing projects.   Those  were his biggest victories.

As Americans have found out, the skills of a “professional Community Organizer”, while persuasive among those who seek to be “organized”, do not translates into be effective, or even serviceable in performing the duties of the President of the United States of America.

A President must be color blind, in order to treat all citizens equally under the law. Unfortunately, this President is not, as exhibited but his remarks in every single situation, involving a member of the Black Community and local police.

His confrontational attitude, developed to a finely honed blade, during his years as a “Professional Community Organizer” lends itself better to the role of a local activist/agitator, than to the responsibilities of the “Leader of the Free World”.

His failures in both his Domestic and Foreign Policy back my previous statement up, for the entire world to see.

Instead of making “the oceans rise and fall”, “healing our nation”, and bringing “hope and change”, Barack Hussein Obama has sown the seeds of Racial Division, Class Warfare, and Anti-Christian Intolerance.

Instead of leading Americans boldly into a bright future, his actions have led us into an era of distrust, reminiscent of a dark past in our own history, or, even, perhaps, that of 1930s Germany or the Russian Revolution.

This distrust and unrest of which I write, is spilling into our local communities, with black youth, attacking innocent people, black and white, in wanton hissy fits of violence and vandalizing, as Baltimore bore witness to, last Monday night.

Obama’s dream of a “Socialist Utopia”, in which finally he and the rest of the “smartest people in the room” are successful in installing a failed political ideology in the United States, replacing the proven success of our Constitutional Republic, installed by our Founding Fathers, has turned into a Failure of a Presidential Administration…a polarizing nightmare, which threatens to turn “The Shining City Upon a Hill” into a Third World Barrio.

Obama should have remained a Minor League Community Organizer.

At least, he was good at that.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

Faith-Based Institutions Will Be Affected By Possible Favorable Gay Marriage Ruling

th1DXO5NI3Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. – The First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America

You have seen me write, time and time again, that it is funny how those among us who claim to be the most tolerant, are actually the least of all.

The “Gay Mafia” is a prime example.

As with any liberal, as long as you believe what they believe, you’re one of the smartest people in the room. However, as soon as you cross them, and stand up for your own Christian Heritage of Faith, you are labeled a stupid “Christianist” and/or an inbred hillbilly.

Additionally, when the voters of a state get together to express their opposition to homosexual marriage through their right to vote, the Gay Mafia finds a sympathetic judge to rule that marriage is a “Civil Right”, instead of a Holy Sacrament…a bond between a man and a woman, ordained by God.

The problem that Christians and Conservatives alike face is the fact that being Pro-homosexual marriage is the “cool” thing to be now.

Even if it is at the expense of the First Amendment.

ChristianPost.com reports that

WASHINGTON — The lead attorney representing the Obama administration admitted before the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday that if the court were to rule in favor of making same-sex marriage a constitutional right, it would create a religious liberty “issue” for faith-based schools and institutions, who could be at risk of losing their tax-exempt statuses.

As the Supreme Court listened to oral arguments regarding whether the 14th Amendment requires states to issue same-sex marriage licenses, U.S. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli tried to dodge a question from Chief Justice John Roberts, who asked him whether or not religious schools which have married housing would be required to provide housing to same-­sex married couples.

The solicitor general, which is the third highest ranking official in the Justice Department and is appointed to speak on behalf of the Obama administration in court cases, provided a winded answer to Roberts about how it is the states that are responsible for setting their civil laws.

Roberts continued prodding Verrilli by saying that even though states set their laws, the federal government has “enforcement power,” which Verrilli admitted was true but reasoned that there is no federal law “now” that bans discrimination based on sexual orientation.

Justice Samuel Alito followed up and asked a pointed question regarding whether religious schools could have their tax-exempt status revoked for not providing same-sex couples with housing. Alito referenced the 1983 Bob Jones University Supreme Court case, which ruled that the Internal Revenue Service could revoke the school’s tax-exempt status for refusing to accommodate interracial married couples with housing.

“So would the same apply to a university or a college if it opposed same­-sex marriage?” Alito asked.

It was clear that Verrilli did not want to answer that question but offered an offhand remark assuring that a ruling in favor of gay marriage would create some issues.

“You know, I don’t think I can answer that question without knowing more specifics but it’s certainly going to be an issue,” Verrilli stated. “I ­­ I don’t deny that. I don’t deny that, Justice Alito. It is, it is going to be an issue.”

Speaking at a Heritage Foundation panel on Wednesday, which discussed Tuesday’s oral arguments, Carrie Severino, chief counsel and policy director for the Judicial Crisis Network, explained that Verrilli’s answer indicates that the Obama administration is looking to “preserve the ability to remove tax-exempt status from institutions, like religious universities.”

“What this exchange shows is that the administration wants to leave the door wide open to do [removing tax-exempt statuses],” Severino told The Christian Post after the panel. “Not that they could really be bound, necessarily, by the statements here but the solicitor general does not want to, even in furtherance of winning this case, because him saying ‘Don’t worry, that won’t happen,’ that would actually help him in this case. Even though that would help his case, he said, ‘I am not going to say that. We are not going to go there.'”

“Frankly his answer to Chief Justice Roberts a minute earlier more or less admitted that the federal government could say this case could force a religious college to open its married housing to a married same-sex couple if they were married under laws of the state,” Severino added.

Severino also explained that such a ruling in favor of constitutional gay marriage would create a “head-on collision” with religious expression.

“That ought to give a lot of people cause to say that this is an absolute head-on collision potentially with religious liberty because the arguments that are being made on the other side are so extreme here,” Severino stated.

Severino reasoned that if such a ruling could cause tax-exempt status issues for Christian universities and schools, it could also present religious freedom conflict for faith-based charities and other organizations also.

“There isn’t any reason to say that it clearly wouldn’t extend to charitable organizations, potentially even to removing tax-exempt status from a house of worship, which is a slightly different argument but I can see people trying to make that argument,” Severino asserted. “Taking the tax-exempt status thing would be a gigantic step and a very serious blow to a lot of institutions, all sorts of charitable institutions that are run by religious organizations from Salvation Army on down.”

“Just imagine if all of those groups were not tax-exempt anymore and what impact that would have on their ability to serve the poor the way they are attempting to do and live out their faith,” she continued.

Severino expects that the potential for conflict with religious liberty will somehow weigh into the case’s outcome even if the court decides to constitutionalize gay marriage.

“Those potential collisions were brought out and will affect the way the justices decide this case because I think that Justice [Anthony] Kennedy is not going to want to have that kind of collision with religious liberty, and any of the justices ought to be concerned with the potential of further limiting the religious liberty at this point,” she said. “Perhaps, even if it doesn’t mean that is going to affect the outcome entirely, it may affect the way that the opinion is written in a way to have less of a risk to steamroll religious freedom.”

Democratic Presidential Hopeful Hillary Rodham Clinton recently stated that religion would have to “change” in order to allow the American Genocide known as Abortion.

Today’s American Liberals, from Barack Hussein Obama on down to the Internet Troll, sitting at his computer in his Mom’s Basement, munching Cheetos, want Christians, like myself, to “change” our view on homosexuality, in order to proclaim Adam and Steve as husband and…err…husband.

What they do not understand, nor wish to, is the fact that man did not label it as deviant behavior and a “sin”.

GOD DID.

His Word, as revealed in the Old and New Testaments, with the Holy Bible, states that fact, over and over again.

Christianity is not something that can be boxed in, from 9 a.m. to 12 Noon on Sundays, as the President and the rest of the Gay Mafia seem to want it to be.

Nor can it be changed and modified to fit a culture which is currently embracing relative morality and situational ethics.

God’s Word, as is its Author, is eternal and unchanging.

The Supreme Court Justices must understand that, by undermining the Faith of Our Fathers, they are undermining the Solid Rock from which sprang forth the principles upon which our country was founded.

The future of America is in their hands.

“Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness – these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. … And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion.” – President George Washington’s First Inaugural Address,  April 30, 1789    

Until He Comes,

KJ

America Vs. the Far Left: A War Against Fascism

white-house-youth-corpsI have written. time and time again, about the Culture War, which is taking place in America.

Boys and Girls, it is not just a “Culture War”. We are battling a war against Government-sponsored FASCISM.

TheHill.com reports that

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) on Saturday said Democrats had gone to extremes in their persecution of Christians.

“Today’s Democratic Party has decided there is no room for Christians in today’s Democratic Party,” he said at the Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition summit in Waukee, Iowa.

“There is a liberal fascism that is going after Christian believers,” the 2016 GOP presidential candidate continued.

“It is heartbreaking,” Cruz argued. “But it is so extreme, it is waking people up.”

Cruz said same-sex marriage had produced rabid zealotry in Democratic ranks. This ideology, he argued, was excluding people of faith.

“Today’s Democratic Party has become so radicalized for legalizing gay marriage in all 50 states that there is no longer any room for religious liberty,” he said.

The Texas lawmaker said this stance was against America’s traditional values. Religious liberty, Cruz claimed, was one of the nation’s founding principles.

“We were founded by men and women fleeing religious persecution,” Cruz declared.

“We need leaders who will stand unapologetically in defense of the Judeo-Christian values upon which America was built,” he concluded.

Cruz, a long-time opponent of same-sex marriage, seemingly softened his tone on gay rights earlier this week.

The White House hopeful reportedly said Monday evening he would still accept one of his daughters if they became a lesbian.
 
The Texas lawmaker was the first official entrant into the 2016 election cycle.

He so far will face Sens. Rand Paul (Ky.) and Marco Rubio (Fla.) for their party’s nomination.

My late father was one of thousands of brave young American men, who landed on the beaches of Normandy , France on June 6, 1944, in the military operation which broke the backs of the Nazis, leading to the end of World War II,  now known as D-Day.

World War II was in a war against Fascism.

What is Fascism? Per merriam-webster.com, it is a

political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.

Ladies and gentlemen, I firmly believe that America is now fighting a new war against fascism.

It’s not a war that is being fought fought with guns and bullets, But instead with state referendums, Congressional votes, Executive Orders, and judicial activism.

And, it’s not our Brightest and Best who are dying on this field of battle, but rather, it is our Constitutional Freedoms which are dying an ignoble death, pierced by the arrows of socialism and political correctness.

By now, there’s some out there in the audience saying, “Oh Lord, the crazy old cracker’s overreacting again.”

No, Skippy, I’m not.

If you try to talk to a Liberal about this New Fascism, they will deny that there is any Fascism going on at all. In fact, they will tell you that this is “the will of the people” and they will site Democratically-stacked push polls in order to back their opinion up.

When you ask Liberals if , for example, “homosexual marriage” is the “will of the people”, why did voters in the overwhelming majority of states, including California, vote against it? And, if there is “no Fascism”, what do you call the fact that 2% of the population is having activist judges overturn the actual will of the people in order to get their way, in their attempt to redefine a word that has meant the same thing since time immemorial?

In response, you will usually see their eyes glaze over, like a deer in the headlights, or experience a dramatic pause in posting, if you are on the Internet.

Liberals can not legitimately defend the suppression of the First Amendment Rights of Christian Americans.

Fascism, in any form, remains indefensible, even, when a spineless Supreme Court kicks the can down the road.

The Godfather of Conservative Talk Radio, Rush Limbaugh, once said the following,

You know as well as I do that people are scared to death to tell you what they really think. The left has politicized everything — everything — to the point that people are afraid to go against what they know to be political correctness, which is nothing more than liberal fascism, nothing more than censorship.

When Barack Hussein Obama assumed the position of President of the United States, the Far Left became empowered. Obama’s handlers saw the opportunity to “radically change” America into a Democratic Socialist Republic. You know, the kind of government that is currently failing over in Europe.

Every piece of legislation that Barack Hussein Obama has tried to get passed, has been designed to either overtly or covertly limit our freedom.

From the stimulus bill on through the latest changes to Obamacare by Executive Order, every single piece of legislation has been designed to further the Far Left’s agenda.

Remember when Obama was campaigning so hard to get the Affordable Health Care Act passed?

He always used people as props for his speeches, whether it was just normal people or people dressed in white coats like doctors.

When he was trying to get gun control passed, he used the parents from the Newtown Massacre in Connecticut as human props to try to get his repressive agenda passed.

The use of human props is an old propaganda trick, which was used by Joseph Goebbels to make his boss Adolf Hitler seem like a man of the people who really cared about the German citizenry.

The use of propaganda to further the aims of fascist governments is an old and effective method of camouflaging fascism, which Obama’s handlers realize all too well.

In addition to the use of human props during a speech, another strategy used in a propaganda campaign is to select an enemy and target them with the aid of a sympathetic press behind you.

During Hitler’s rise to power, the German Press demonized European Jews, betraying them as evil and money grubbing…painting them as being different from normal German citizens. It was this classification of the European Jews as the enemy that almost led to the extinction of them in that horrible attempted genocide, known as the Holocaust.

Now, in the early 21st century, the Far Left, the Democratic Party, and the Obama Administration (but, I repeat myself) are using propaganda to isolate and demonize average Americans, who through hard work, have risen to a high station in life or through their strong Christian faith and love of their country refuse to follow a popular culture- worshiping Administration, when it issues Executive Orders or has its Democratic Congress pass legislation which clearly contradicts the Word of God and the Judeo-Christian Belief System upon which America was built.

If America keeps on the path we seem to be headed on, we will find out why America is not mentioned in the Book of Revelation.

Claiming to be wise, they became fools. – Romans 1 : 22

Until He Comes,

KJ

The War Against Christianity: Hillary-“Religious Beliefs Have to be Changed” to Allow Abortion

American Christianity 2History has shown us that, no matter how hard a politician tries to hide the nature of their heart and soul, eventually, they will say something to reveal it.

In a speech this past week at a Women’s Summit, Democratic Presidential Hopeful, Hillary Rodham Clinton, did just that.

Breitbart.com reports that

“Far too many women are denied access to reproductive health care and safe childbirth. All the laws we’ve passed don’t count for much if they’re not enforced,” Hillary Clinton said at the Women in the World Summit on Thursday night. “Rights have to exist in practice, not just on paper.  Laws have to be backed up with resources and political will. And deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed.”

Clinton made it emphatically clear she’s not just talking about, say, the horrific abuse of women by Islamist extremists: “As I have said, and as I believe, the advancement of the full participation of women and girls in every aspect of their societies is the great unfinished business of the 21st century, and not just for women but for everyone… and not just in far away countries but right here in the United States.” She pointed at the very ground she was standing upon, to emphasize the point.

As an aside, that has to be one of the strangest, clunkiest rhetorical devices I’ve ever heard: “As I have said, and as I believe…” Granted, with politicians in general and Clintons in particular, a disclaimer that what they’re saying really is what they believe is often necessary, but there’s no particular reason to believe such a disclaimer when Hillary Clinton delivers it.  If she really believed everything she was saying at this Women in the World Summit, why was she happy to rake in millions of dollars from countries that treat women horribly?

Quibbles about odd rhetorical devices aside, this vow to use government force to rewrite religious belief and make it more contraception- and abortion-friendly is deeply offensive, and par for the course with true believers in the Church of the State, as both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are. Clinton has been at it much longer. Back in the Nineties, she was high on the notion of the collectivist State as a spiritual vehicle – the “politics of meaning,” as the catch phrase went.

The difference is that Obama will occasionally use Christian symbolism and Scripture to advance his political agenda, as when he insists that charity can only be properly administered by the State, and Christians are therefore obliged to support high taxes, massive government spending, and regulatory power. Obama is also big on using Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” against Christians, as when he tried to shame them out of criticizing his foreign policy by pontificating about the Crusades.

Clinton, on the other hand, more explicitly views politics as absorbing religion, as in this example. Her Church of the State has made certain decrees concerning mandatory payment for other peoples’ contraceptives and unrestricted abortion; any organized religion that resists must be forcibly re-written to accept these judgments.

Unlike Obama, Hillary isn’t much interested in pretending to be a devout Christian. In this speech, she’s creating a continuum between Taliban savages murdering girls for daring to go to school, and American Christians who don’t want to pay for other peoples’ abortifacient drugs.  Genital mutilation, opposition to late-term abortion… it’s all the same to her. Religions must be reprogrammed until they’re fully compatible with the latest version of radical-feminist code.

It shouldn’t surprise anyone that a Far Left Radical Follower of Saul Alinsky, like Hillary Rodham Clinton, should feel this way.

Hillary, like Obama, sincerely believes that she is the smartest person in any room that she happens to walk into.

There is no room in her ego-filled heart and mind, for a Supreme Being. Hillary, herself, believes that she is the sole arbiter of Right and Wrong in her life.

Have you ever tried to have a discussion with an ardent  pro-abortion supporter, either on Facebook or face-to-face? You won’t hear these “Champions of Tolerance” call those innocent lives, babies, human beings, a life, a soul, a gift from God, or anything remotely resembling something that they should feel remorse about killing.

Heck, Pro-Abortionists are opposed to the taking of sonograms of the woman’s womb, before she has a abortion. They’re afraid that the “seed-carrier” will realize that IS a HUMAN BEING inside her, and will decide not to kill that baby.

Here are some thoughts from The Book provided by The Author of Life:

Did not He who made me in the womb make him, And the same one fashion us in the womb? (Job 31:15)

Yet Thou art He who didst bring me forth from the womb; Thou didst make me trust when upon my mother’s breasts. Upon Thee I was cast from birth; Thou hast been my God from my mother’s womb. (Psalm 22:9-10)

For Thou didst form my inward parts; Thou didst weave me in my mother’s womb. I will give thanks to Thee, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Wonderful are Thy works, And my soul knows it very well. My frame was not hidden from Thee, When I was made in secret, And skillfully wrought in the depths of the earth. Thine eyes have seen my unformed substance; And in Thy book they were all written, The days that were ordained for me, When as yet there was not one of them. (Psalm 139:13-16)

Thus says the LORD who made you And formed you from the womb, who will help you, `Do not fear, O Jacob My servant; And you Jeshurun whom I have chosen. (Isaiah 44:2)

Thus says the LORD, your Redeemer, and the one who formed you from the womb, “I, the LORD, am the maker of all things, Stretching out the heavens by Myself, And spreading out the earth all alone, (Isaiah 44:24)

“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, And before you were born I consecrated you; I have appointed you a prophet to the nations.” (Jeremiah 1:5)

Why,  even the hairs of your head are all numbered. Fear not;  you are of more value than many sparrows.”(Luke 12:7 )

From the scientific perspective, Dr. Carlo Bellieni, in his book “Dawn of the I: Pain, Memory, Desire, Dream of the Fetus,” writes:

As soon as it is born, the child shows in a scientifically demonstrable way that it recognizes its mother’s voice and distinguishes it from that of a stranger. Where has he learned that voice other than in the maternal womb?

There are also direct proofs. For example, we register how the movements and cardiac frequency of the fetus vary if we transmit unexpected sounds through the uterine wall. And we see that at first the fetus is startled, then it gets used to it, just like we do when we hear something that does not interest us.

In fact, the scientific evidence is immense. We cannot understand how it can be thought that it becomes a person at a certain point, perhaps when coming out of the uterus.

From the physical point of view, at the birth very little really changes: Air enters the lungs, the arrival of blood from the placenta is interrupted, the type of circulation of blood in the heart changes, and not much more.

As I often say, only blind faith in magic arts or some strange divinity can lead one to think that there is a “human” quality leap at a given moment — certainly not science.

I know that there are some of you that read my blog that are non-believers.  For you and for my Christian brothers and sisters, I offer the following closing thoughts:

There is a curious unique enzyme found in the human body.   Laminin is defined by the Webster Medical Dictionary as a “glycoprotein that is a component of connective tissue basement membrane and that promotes cell adhesion.”  In other words, a glue within the body.

Colossians 1:15-17 tells us:

15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. 16For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him. 17And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together.

I believe that our nation and our leaders should realize that you cannot mock God. With actions come consequences. You know, that “cause and effect” thingy that “the Smartest people in the Room” are so found of bringing up.

Each and every life is precious to The Creator. That baby growing in her womb, is not the property of the mother. Each and every one of us belong to the One who made us. He is our Sovereign Lord.

All those who believe that “it is a woman’s right to choose”…think too highly of themselves.

For every life is a Gift from The Creator to be loved and cherished, as He first loved us.

Until He Comes,

KJ

A Matter of Respect: OUR Flag, OUR Veterans, OUR Country

 

 

 

veteranflagand wheelchairI worry about the future of our country…

Fox News reports the following story…

GAINESVILLE, Fla. –  The University of Florida suspended one of its fraternities on Friday after allegations that its members hurled drunken insults and spat at a group of disabled military veterans at a Panama City Beach resort.

The school said on Friday that it is charging the Zeta Beta Tau fraternity with obscene behavior, public intoxication, theft, causing physical or other harm, and damage to property.

he suspension came after the fraternity had already suspended operations itself and expelled three of its members after finding they had behaved inappropriately.

“I am personally offended and disappointed by the behavior that has been described to me,” Dave Kratzer, the school’s student affairs vice president and retired U.S. Army major general, said in a statement.

The situation occurred while the fraternity and veterans with the Warrior Beach Retreat were at the Laketown Wharf Resort last weekend. The veterans were there for an annual retreat meant to honor their service, and the fraternity had a social function.

Linda Cope, founder of the warrior group, says the frat members were urinating on flags and verbally abusive.

“They were urinating off of balconies, vomiting off of balconies. They could see the men and women below were there with the retreat. They had on hats and shirts with logos,” Cope said.

Members of Zeta Beta Tau from the University of Florida and Emory University in Georgia were attending their spring formals at the resort. Emory officials have said they are investigating, but so far there’s no evidence to implicate their students.

About 60 veterans who fought in Iraq and Afghanistan were also attending a retreat that has been held twice a year for the past six years at the resort. Cope started the event in honor of her son Joshua, who lost both legs in Baghdad in 2006 when a roadside bomb exploded under his Humvee.

After the incident, Cope sent a letter to University of Florida President Ken Fuchs and described students spitting on veterans, throwing beer bottles over a balcony and ripping flags off their cars.

Local police did respond, but no criminal charges were filed.

The fraternity said it expelled three of its members Friday, and that it had hired an independent investigator.

And, in a related story

Protesters at a south Georgia college waved American flags Friday in support of a military veteran issued a criminal trespass warning in a flag flap last week.

Valdosta State University found itself mired in controversy when Air Force veteran Michelle Manhart took an American flag away from a group of student protesters trampling on it. The university fueled the furor when it sided with the students, saying they had a constitutional right to trample the flag in a protest over racism.

Manhart was among the participants in the 90-minute afternoon rally, which took place after Valdosta canceled classes.

The possibility of large numbers of people rallying on the outskirts of campus prompted the university to give students and staff the day off.

“That level of traffic and that many people will disrupt a lot of things in the city,” university spokesman Andy Clark said. “We’re, from an overall safety perspective, looking to close the campus down today so they can have a peaceful rally.”

Manhart said she took action to prevent the flag from being desecrated. Her confrontation with the students was caught on video and went viral.

The trespass warning against her bans her from all university activities, including graduation and football games. She is not a student.

Manhart, who once posed for Playboy, told Fox & Friends before the rally that she hopes the school lets her back on campus.

“I hope they lift the ban because I do support the college,” she said. “I always have and I will continue to support the college. And I hope that once things calm down maybe they’ll reconsider and lift that ban off of me.”

She said the students were wrong.

“To me it’s just a complete disrespect, to not only the men and women that are out there fighting for it but their freedom as a whole,” she said. “In my opinion they don’t have any respect for what they’ve been given and I just don’t think that’s right.”

Organizers of the “Flags Over Valdosta” rally said they expected as many as 4,000 people.

I have written a lot, over the last 5 years, about the Culture War going on in our country.

These two stories involve young “millennials”, and their Liberal enablers, showing disrespect for those who have fought for their American Freedom and the symbol of our country, the greatest nation on the face of the Earth.

These young people did not, all of the sudden, wake up one day, deciding to act like a bunch of horses’ arses.

There were convinced that it was, somehow, acceptable behavior to act in a disrespectful manner toward our veterans and our flag, components of a nation, which has supplied them with a cushy life.

These ungrateful little whelps, shielded from the vicissitudes of life by doting parents and the Nanny State Federal Government of Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm), seemingly have no cotton-pickin’ clue as to the hardships which previous generations of Americans, including American Veterans suffered, so that they can spit on them and trample our flag, while recording their own stupidity on their IPhones.

The kids aren’t completely to blame.

Absent and indulgent parents have a lot to do with their disrespectful behavior.

Yesterday afternoon, I posted, on Facebook, a story from Former White House Spokesperson Dana Perino’s new book, in which President George W. Bush went to Walter Reed to reward a medal to a war hero, who was in a comatose condition. The young man opened his eyes, prompting the President to ask that the orders bestowing the medal on the young men, be read again, as he cradled the soldier’s head in his hands. The young man passed away 6 days later.

Most of those on Facebook reacted appropriately to that touching story.

However, there were some posters on one political page, who savaged the story, calling our Former President everything but a Child of God, completely oblivious, and not caring that they were, to all of the wonderful things he has done since he left office for our Brightest and Best.

I guess my point in writing today’s blog is…

If children are not taught respect for the things that matter, God and Country, they will not have any respect for anything, or anybody, else.

I want to leave you today with a question:

When did respect and patriotism become political?

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

Supreme Court Showdown: Is “Gay Marriage” a “Constitutional Right”?

 

 

gay marriageYou have seen me write, time and time again, that it is funny how those among us who claim to be the most tolerant, are actually the least of all.

The “Gay Mafia” is a prime example.

As with any liberal, as long as you believe what they believe, you’re one of the smartest people in the room. However, as soon as you cross them, and stand up for your own Christian Heritage of Faith, you are labeled a stupid “Christianist” and/or an inbred hillbilly.

Additionally, when the voters of a state get together to express their opposition to homosexual marriage through their right to vote, the Gay Mafia finds a sympathetic judge to rule that marriage is a “Civil Right”, instead of a Holy Sacrament…a bond between a man and a woman, ordained by God.

The problem that Christians and Conservatives alike face is the fact that being Pro-homosexual marriage is the “cool” thing to be now.

Even if it is at the expense of the First Amendment.

Speaking of the Constitution, the Supreme Court is scheduled to address this very subject next week.

The Christian Post reports that

As the U.S. Supreme Court prepares to hear oral arguments next Tuesday on whether states will continue to be free to define marriage for their own citizens, a number of amicus briefs have been filed arguing that the U.S. Constitution does not guarantee a fundamental right to same-sex marriage.

Heritage Foundation Senior Fellow Ryan Anderson and prominent attorney and constitutional law expert Gene Schaerr recently co-authored their own amicus brief that asserts that the U.S. Constitution does not require states to redefine marriage to allow for two individuals of the same gender to get married.

Speaking at a Heritage Foundation discussion on Monday, Anderson and Schaerr, a former associate counsel to President George H.W. Bush, explained their brief in detail and offered more reasons as to why the Supreme Court should not force a decision in favor of same-sex marriage on all 50 states to uphold as law.

Anderson, who co-authored the book What is Marriage? Man and Woman: A Defense, explained that governments did not originally get into the “marriage business” because they wanted to be involved in their citizens’ romances. Rather, state governments got involved in marriage so that the children who were born from marriages would have the best chance of having a stable family environment to grow up in, which included both a mom and dad.

“There is nothing in the U.S. Constitution that requires all 50 states to redefine marriage,” Anderson asserted. “The Constitution is simply silent on whether the consent-based vision of marriage or the comprehensive vision of marriage is the true definition of marriage. It is silent on whether the states should devise their marriage policy to serve.”

Schaerr discredited a notion that a person has a constitutional right to get married to the person they love as long as they are two consenting adults.

“The bottom line is … there has never been any right to marry the person you love and so a states’ rejection of that claimed right couldn’t possibly be a denial of due process under the plain language of the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment,” Schaerr asserted. “If we turn to the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, the argument that same-sex marriage is based on, that clause also has holes in it.”

Schaerr also discredited a widely portrayed notion that bans on same-sex marriage are discriminatory against gays and lesbians.

“Unlike the old Jim Crow laws that prohibited mix-raced marriages, the man-woman definition of marriage doesn’t offend the equal protection guarantee because it allows any otherwise qualified man and woman to marry, regardless of their sexual orientation,” Schaerr said.

“The state man-woman marriage laws do not deny anybody the ability to marry based on their sexual orientation. There is no question on the marriage application that asks are you gay or lesbian,” Schaerr continued. “The law doesn’t care. The law just says that there are certain requirements for marriage and if you are willing to comply with those requirements, then we will give you a marriage license.”

Anderson argues that redefining marriage as a union between two consenting adults would have drastic societal consequences.

“If you redefine marriage to say that it is the union of any two consenting adults, irrespective of sexual complementarity, how will we as a community insist that fathers are essential when the laws redefine marriage to make fathers optional?” Anderson asks. “That is the challenge that faces the society that redefines marriage as consenting-adult romance and care-giving. It eliminates the public message of marriage as about uniting a man and a woman as husband and wife so that children will have both a mom and a dad.”

With unelected federal judges overturning a number of states’ gay marriage bans in the last year and many people thinking the Supreme Court could do the same a national level, Anderson said that just because the court has the power of judicial review, that does not mean the Supreme Court reigns supreme.

“I think it is important here to say that judicial review is not the same thing as judicial supremacy,” Anderson said. “The Supreme Court is not supreme. Judicial supremacy is a problem when it claims to be the only branch of government that has the obligation the defend and uphold the Constitution. All branches of government, the three federal branches and the state governments, take that oath to defend the Constitution. All branches of government are co-equal in interpreting what the Constitution means.”

Although many are confident that at least five justices will rule in favor same-sex marriage, Schaerr explained that no Supreme Court justice has ever written an opinion that held that there is a constitutional right for same-sex couples to get married.

“In fact, there are three justices that have written or have joined opinions that clearly say there is no constitutional right to same-sex marriage and Chief Justice Roberts’ opinion in the Windsor case goes at least half way there,” Schaerr stated. “So as of right now, in terms of Supreme Court Justices, its three-and-a-half on our side and nobody who’s committed to recognizing a Constitutional right to same-sex marriage.”

Obama and his one-minded collective have been desperately trying to desensitize Americans, regarding the Hot Button Issue of “gay marriage”, lately.

Even though, those who practice the sexually deviant behavior of homosexuality only compose around 3% of our population, those advocating defiling of the sacrament of marriage would like us to all believe that they number many, many more. And, those who rig polls for a living would like us to believe that the majority of Americans believe it is okay for homosexuals to imitate the union of a heterosexual couple.

If that were the case, the overwhelming majority of states would not have voted against “Gay Marriage”. And, “Activist Judges” would not have had to overturn the will of the people in several of those states.

In their desperation, Liberals have even tried to rewrite God’s Word regarding Homosexuality, labeling anyone who does not agree with them, into a “Hater”.

Recently, Liberals have even become “Biblical Experts” regarding the issue, bringing up the fact that Jesus Christ hung out with people “of all kinds”.

They are correct. He did.

What they are incorrect about, is their belief that he somehow condoned their sins.

He did not.

Christ “hung out” with those people out of love , a love whose purpose was to convict them of their sins and lead them to repentance, and then, to personal salvation.

Remember John 8: 1-11?

1but Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. 2Early in the morning he came again to the temple. All the people came to him, and he sat down and taught them. 3The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery, and placing her in the midst 4they said to him, “Teacher, this woman has been caught in the act of adultery. 5Now in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. So what do you say?” 6This they said to test him, that they might have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. 7And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8And once more he bent down and wrote on the ground. 9But when they heard it, they went away one by one, beginning with the older ones, and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him. 10Jesus stood up and said to her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?” 11She said, “No one, Lord.” And Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now on sin no more.”]]

Please notice that He did not tell her to go do whatever she felt like doing to whomever she felt like doing it to.

Sin still carries consequences.

Next week is going to be an important week in our nation’s history.

Pray for the Supreme Court Justices.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

The War Against Christianity: Atheist Organization Has IRS Monitoring Churches in Arizona

 

American ChristianityIn the “Left Behind” Christian Novel Series about the Rapture and subsequent Tribulation, people who become Christians after the Rapture find themselves abused by a repressive government, who keep tabs on Believers through informants.

That’s just fiction, right?

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

ChristianPost.com reports that

An Arizona-based legal group has filed a lawsuit in federal court demanding that the Internal Revenue Service divulge information about an agreement it made with an atheist organization regarding the monitoring of churches.

The Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative group based in Scottsdale filed the suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia earlier this month.

ADF’s complaint charges that the IRS has failed to honor a Freedom of Information Act request made by the Alliance regarding the details of an agreement between the tax collecting federal body and the Madison, Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation.

“As of the date of this complaint, Defendant has failed to: (i) determine whether to comply with the request; (ii) notify Plaintiff of any such determination or the reasons therefor; (iii) advise Plaintiff of the right to appeal any adverse determination; and/or (iv) produce the requested records or otherwise demonstrate that the requested records are exempt from production,” reads the complaint.

“Plaintiff is being irreparably harmed by reason of Defendant’s unlawful withholding of records responsive to Plaintiffs’ FOIA request, and Plaintiff will continue to be irreparably harmed unless Defendant is compelled to conform its conduct to the requirements of the law.”

In 2012, the FFRF sued the IRS demanding that they enforce the Johnson Amendment, a provision that strips a church or its tax exemption if it is openly involved in political activity.

Last summer, the FFRF and the IRS reached an agreement wherein the federal body would make an effort to enforce the Johnson Amendment when violations are brought to their attention. But the IRS has not disclosed the details of that agreement.

“This is a victory, and we’re pleased with this development in which the IRS has proved to our satisfaction that it now has in place a protocol to enforce its own anti-electioneering provisions,” said FFRF co-president Annie Laurie Gaylor in a statement.

Last November the group Judicial Watch, which is representing ADF in its complaint, filed its own FOIA lawsuit against the IRS demanding “any and all records” relating to the agency’s “monitoring of churches and other tax exempt religious organizations.”

Judicial Watch had filed a FOIA request earlier that year, but the IRS failed to provide them with a response. Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, said in a statement last November that he found it “troubling that the IRS seems set to rely on a group of atheists to point them toward churches that might have criticized politicians.”

“And it is even more disturbing that the IRS would violate federal law, The Freedom of Information Act, in order to keep secret its monitoring of Americans praying together in church,” continued Fitton.

Regarding the April complaint brought against the IRS, ADF Litigation Counsel Christiana Holcomb said in a statement that “Americans deserve to know what the IRS is up to.”

“The agency’s unwillingness to produce these records only furthers the perception that it makes secret deals with activists that it wishes to hide from the public,” said Holcomb.

Who is the Freedom of Religious Foundation (FFRF) and why should they be concerned about monitoring Christian Churches in Arizona?

According to their website:

The purposes of the Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc., as stated in its bylaws, are to promote the constitutional principle of separation of state and church, and to educate the public on matters relating to nontheism.

Incorporated in 1978 in Wisconsin, the Foundation is a national membership association of more than 17,000 freethinkers: atheists, agnostics and skeptics of any pedigree. The Foundation is a non-profit, tax-exempt, educational organization under Internal Revenue Code 501(c)(3). All dues and contributions are deductible for income tax purpose.

What Does the Foundation Do?

• Publishes the only freethought newspaper in the United States, Freethought Today

• Sponsors annual high school, college and grad student essay competitions with cash awards

• Conducts lively, annual national conventions, honoring state/church, student, and freethought activism

• Sponsors an online forum for members

• Bestows “The Emperor Has No Clothes” Award to public figures for “plain-speaking on religion”

• Promotes freedom from religion with educational books, literature, music CDs

• Provides speakers for events and debates

• Maintains a Web site at http://www.ffrf.org

• Broadcasts Freethought Radio

• Places freethought billboards and bus signs

…First Amendment violations are accelerating. The religious right is campaigning to raid the public till and advance religion at taxpayer expense, attacking our secular public schools, the rights of nonbelievers, and the Establishment Clause.

The Foundation recognizes that the United States was first among nations to adopt a secular Constitution. The founders who wrote the U.S. Constitution wanted citizens to be free to support the church of their choice, or no religion at all. Our Constitution was very purposefully written as a godless document, whose only references to religion are exclusionary.

It is vital to buttress the Jeffersonian “wall of separation between church and state” which has served our nation so well.

Funny.  Jefferson was a faithful attendant of Sunday Church that was held at the Capitol Building.  He once explained to a friend while they were walking to church together:

No nation has ever existed or been governed without religion. Nor can be. The Christian religion is the best religion that has been given to man and I, as Chief Magistrate of this nation, am bound to give it the sanction of my example.

He also proclaimed

I have always said and always will say that the studious perusal of the Sacred Volume will make us better citizens.

But, I digress…

Back in August of 2011, this same bitter bunch of Atheists sent a letter to the Schools Superintendent of Desoto County, Mississippi, insisting that the pre-game prayer, spoken over the stadiums’ loudspeakers, a tradition held in DeSoto County as long as anyone can remember,  be silenced.

DeSoto County Schools went along with the Freedom From Religion Foundation’s request, despite the disappointment of many students and parents.

And that’s when Americans started organizing.

Y’see, teammates traditionally would take a knee after the game to thank the Lord for a good game and His blessings and to pray for those injured during the game.  And their parents were bound and determined that their young men were not going to have that freedom taken away from them.

So, the next Friday night, instead of the coach telling the team to take a knee, the quarterback did.

Earlier, on Friday morning, students and parents held a prayer walk outside DeSoto County Schools.

As the bright, blessed day gave way to the dark, sacred night in DeSoto County, parents and students began to pray.

According to student Paige Lewis:

If they’re saying that we can’t pray over a loudspeaker, then we’re going to pray alone.

Earlier in the week, The Freedom From Religion Foundation had sent a second letter to School Superintendent Milton Kuykendall.  They not only asked the district to stop praying before school events, but also demanded an apology for the comments the superintendent made in a letter sent out earlier this week.

Cheeky, huh?

These bitter whiners were upset that Kuykendall wrote:

In my opinion, most people do not realize that this organization out of Wisconsin doesn’t really care if we have prayer in our schools. They see an opportunity to try and accuse us of breaking the law and therefore give them a chance to sue our district and win a lawsuit and take millions of our funds. This is money that is needed to pay teachers and educate our students.

In March of 2013, the Governor of Mississippi signed into law, State House Bill 683

What this law does is to allow students to initiate prayers in school and at student activities, to reference their religious beliefs in their schoolwork, both their assignments completed at school and their homework, as well. The bill also allows Mississippi’s students to speak to their classmates about their faith, to “give their witness” as we believers refer to our own personal testimony as to what God has done in our lives.

I make no bones about it. I am a Christian American Conservative. I pray daily. As I write this, I have just returned from a Church-Sponsored “Small Group Meeting” in someone’s home on a Tuesday night.

If it were up to Barack Hussein Obama and the rest of Modern “Liberals”, I would be forced to leave my faith every Sunday morning at the church door. What they don’t understand, is, the Author and Finisher of my faith is not Obama or anyone else up there on Capitol Hill, the Main Stream Media, or any self-proclaimed Liberal Political Pundit and newly-minted “Biblical Expert”.

I answer to Someone waaay about their pay grade.

Liberals, or “Progressives”, do not understand Christians at all. They believe that our faith is something that can be taken off and put back on again, as one would a shirt.

Groups like the FFDF believe that using the Obama Administration’s IRS to monitor Christian American Churches is somehow going to impede the sharing of the Gospel of Jesus Christ by Christian Americans.

They don’t have a clue.

Until He Comes,

KJ

The War Against Christianity: A Culture of Darkness

American FreedomFor we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places. – Ephesians 6:12

Am I insane? (Don’t answer that.) Or, have you noticed that, beginning back in January of 2009, the doors of decency and Old Fashioned American Values began coming off at the hinges even faster than they were before?

The internet is abuzz everyday with the left’s banshee screams for Gun Control , the “enlightened ones” incessant cries for Marijuana Legalization and all of their drug-addled, naivete-laden arguments in favor of it, and the whining and strawman arguments associated with the push to change the definition of the word “marriage”, so that Adam and Steve may be viewed as “normal”, and live, as least for a couple or years, as “husband” and…err…umm…”husband”.

Globally, our allies have become our enemies, as this Administration embraces and panders to a Political Ideology masquerading as a religion, whose avid followers want to kill each and every one of us “infidels.” In fact, Obama and his Administration want our strongest ally, God’s Chosen People, Israel, to give up half of their country to a nomadic people, the Palestinians.

Meanwhile, in a related story, earthquakes and violent weather have become commonplace in our nation and “the smartest people in the room” can not figure out why.

All this mayhem continues to dominate the 24-hour News Cycle, as Americans, who have lost their jobs through no fault of their own, either continue the struggle to find employment, or simply give up.

Yet, this nation re-elected, as I referred to him once, “an anti-American, Muslim-sympathizing, political-pandering, class warfare-preaching, card-carrying Communist”.

Has God taken His hand of providence and protection off this country?

A man, who would be considered a cornball by the standards of today’s Socially-Liberal Fiscally Conservative Liberals, Moderates, and “Libertarians”, wrote a prophetic analysis of today’s current events.

This speech was broadcast by legendary ABC Radio commentator Paul Harvey on April 3, 1965:

If I were the Devil . . . I mean, if I were the Prince of Darkness, I would of course, want to engulf the whole earth in darkness. I would have a third of its real estate and four-fifths of its population, but I would not be happy until I had seized the ripest apple on the tree, so I should set about however necessary to take over the United States. I would begin with a campaign of whispers. With the wisdom of a serpent, I would whisper to you as I whispered to Eve: “Do as you please.” “Do as you please.” To the young, I would whisper, “The Bible is a myth.” I would convince them that man created God instead of the other way around. I would confide that what is bad is good, and what is good is “square”. In the ears of the young marrieds, I would whisper that work is debasing, that cocktail parties are good for you. I would caution them not to be extreme in religion, in patriotism, in moral conduct. And the old, I would teach to pray. I would teach them to say after me: “Our Father, which art in Washington” . . .

If I were the devil, I’d educate authors in how to make lurid literature exciting so that anything else would appear dull an uninteresting. I’d threaten T.V. with dirtier movies and vice versa. And then, if I were the devil, I’d get organized. I’d infiltrate unions and urge more loafing and less work, because idle hands usually work for me. I’d peddle narcotics to whom I could. I’d sell alcohol to ladies and gentlemen of distinction. And I’d tranquilize the rest with pills. If I were the devil, I would encourage schools to refine young intellects but neglect to discipline emotions . . . let those run wild. I would designate an atheist to front for me before the highest courts in the land and I would get preachers to say “she’s right.” With flattery and promises of power, I could get the courts to rule what I construe as against God and in favor of pornography, and thus, I would evict God from the courthouse, and then from the school house, and then from the houses of Congress and then, in His own churches I would substitute psychology for religion, and I would deify science because that way men would become smart enough to create super weapons but not wise enough to control them.

If I were Satan, I’d make the symbol of Easter an egg, and the symbol of Christmas, a bottle. If I were the devil, I would take from those who have and I would give to those who wanted, until I had killed the incentive of the ambitious. And then, my police state would force everybody back to work. Then, I could separate families, putting children in uniform, women in coal mines, and objectors in slave camps. In other words, if I were Satan, I’d just keep on doing what he’s doing.

Paul Harvey, Good Day.

John Adams, the second President of these United States, delivered the following message to the Officers of the First Brigade of the Third Division of the Militia of Massacusetts on October 11, 1798:

Gentleman,

While our country remains untainted with the principles and manners which are now producing desolation in so many parts of the world; while she continues sincere, and incapable of insidious and impious policy, we shall have the strongest reason to rejoice in the local destination assigned us by Providence. But should the people of America once become capable of that deep simulation towards one another, and towards foreign nations, which assumes the language of justice and moderation while it is practising iniquity and extravagance, and displays I have received from Major-General Hull and Brigadier, General Walker your unanimous address from Lexington, animated with a martial spirit, and expressed with a military dignity becoming your character and the memorable plains on which it was adopted. In the most captivating manner the charming pictures of candor, frankness, and sincerity, while it is rioting in rapine and insolence, this country will be the most miserable habitation in the World; because we have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

The scripture I quoted at the beginning of today’s Blog is one of my favorites.  You see, both of these great Americans, Paul Harvey and John Adams, knew that there is spiritual warfare happening every moment of the day,  around each and every one of us.

Are the Powers of Darkness winning?

For example. if  you look at Horror Movies nowadays, all of them seem to seek to glorify the Powers of Darkness….and they seem to be very popular with young Americans.

Why is the Occult, including Satan and his Demons so fascinating to impressionable Americans?

Pastor Mark Driscoll of Mars Hill Church offers some background in answer to that question:

His knowledge, presence, and power are limited because he is an angelic being (a guardian cherub according to Ezekiel 28:14) created by God for the purpose of glorifying and serving God. However, he became proud in his heart and desired to be worshiped and exalted like God. So, he declared war on God and one-third of the angels joined his army to oppose God. Judged by God for his sin, the Serpent was then cast down to the earth (Isa. 14:11–23; Ezek. 28:1–19). Upon the earth he appeared as a serpent to tempt Adam and Eve by twisting God’s word and lying (Gen. 3:1–24). After successfully tempting Adam and Eve to sin, he was judged and cursed by God for his sin and told that Jesus would ultimately come to completely defeat him, though Jesus would suffer physical harm in their conflict (Gen. 3:14–15).

The motivation for all of the Serpent’s work is pride and self-glory instead of humility and God-glory (Ezek. 28:2; James 4:6–7). Subsequently, one of his most powerful allies in opposing God’s people is their own pride.

A lot of Americans have been raised to believe that they are their own God, and even some of them that were raised in the church have become victims of this popular culture. So, now, as God’s Word tells us, they want their “ears tickled”.

Were Paul Harvey and John Adams speaking about the situation we find our country in on April 19, 2015?

Do you see it? Or, is it just me?

Until He Comes,

KJ

The War Against Christianity: A Question of Intolerance

 

American Christianity 2

There has been a lot of discussion the past couple of weeks, concerning the Constitutional Rights of Christian Americans versus the hypocritical use of the words “tolerance” and “discrimination” by the American Left.

Napp Nazworth, writing for The Christian Post, makes the following observation…

Businesses should not discriminate, liberals proclaimed loudly in explaining their opposition to religious freedom laws. Three recent actions supported by liberals demonstrate that is not true.

1. Bakeries Should Be Able to Refuse Bible Verses

Christian activist Bill Jack was denied service when he went to Azucar Bakery in Denver and asked for two cakes in the shape of open Bibles. He asked for the words, “God hates sin — Psalm 45:7,” “Homosexuality is a detestable sin — Leviticus 18:22,” “God loves sinners,” and “While we were yet sinners Christ died for us — Romans 5:8,” on each of the “pages” of the Bible cakes.

Azucar Bakery is in the same state where the bakery Masterpiece Cake was successfully sued for declining to make a wedding cake for a same-sex wedding.

In a January interview with The Christian Post, Jack explained that he supports Azucar Bakery’s right to deny him service because they oppose the values he wanted written on the cakes. He only made the requests to find out if Colorado would be hypocritical. It was.

In Colorado, if a customer wants a cake with Christian values written on it, bakers are allowed to decline service if they disagree with those values. If a customer wants a cake for a same-sex wedding, bakers are not allowed to decline service if they disagree with same-sex marriage.

2. Pharmacists Should Refuse Death Penalty Drugs

The American Pharmacists Association approved a policy last month discouraging its members from participating in death penalty executions by providing the drugs required for lethal injections.

The move was encouraged by a letter sent to the group signed by 31 anti-death penalty and liberal organizations, including Amnesty International, the NAACP, National Council of Churches, SumOfUs and the United Methodist Church.

Liberal websites, such as The Huffington Post, Democracy Now and Think Progress, wrote positive reports about the move. There were no critics mentioned in their reports arguing that pharmacists should not have the right to decline their customers.

These reactions contrast sharply with liberal reactions to the notion that pro-life health care workers should not be forced to choose between participating in an abortion and losing their job.

3. Businesses Were Right to Boycott an Entire State Because of a Religious Freedom Law

In reaction to a religious freedom law passed in Indiana, Liberals were not only supporting, but praising Apple, Angie’s List and Salesforce for threatening boycotts in the state over the new law.

These liberals appreciated these companies making business decisions based upon their moral convictions. This exposed a glaring contradiction in their position: those companies opposed the law because it could (in some circumstances) let businesses make based upon owners’ religious convictions.

At its core, the issue was about wedding vendors, like Masterpiece Cake mentioned above, who declined service for same-sex weddings due to their religious convictions. Essentially, this means the companies were opposing a law that could (but not necessarily would) give small business owners the right to decline business for a particular event, by declining business with an entire state.

More than that, Angie’s List, Apple and Salesforce were much more extreme in their position than the wedding vendors. While wedding vendors opposed to working same-sex weddings would have no economic impact (because there are plenty of vendors willing to work same-sex weddings), boycotts by large companies would hurt local economies and workers — even those workers who agreed with their position. Yet, to hear liberals tell it, those companies were heroic while same-sex marriage opponents are bigots.

In a Thursday article for The Federalist, The Acton Institute’s Jordan Ballor put it well: “The problem in this instance, then, is not that companies like Angie’s List threaten economic sanction, …. The problem, rather, is that the freedom to discriminate is claimed by such companies for themselves but not extended and recognized for others. Boycotts against discrimination as such thus depend on the very thing they oppose. In this sense, the discriminatory actions of businesses ought to be judged alike, whether they are based on religious convictions or secular morality.”

So, what is it that American Liberals want Christian Americans to do, concerning the fact that our Holy Scriptures, God’s Word itself, condemns homosexuality?

According to Dr. Michael Brown, writing for The Christian Post, one  for the New York Times, believes that there is a simple solution to the “problem.”

Simply rewrite the Word of God.

How can the religious community live in peace and harmony with the LGBT community? New York Times columnist Frank Bruni has the solution. Just rewrite the Bible.

In his April 3rd column, “Bigotry, the Bible and the Lessons of Indiana,” Bruni, himself gay, recognizes that Christian beliefs are not necessarily grounded in hatred. The problem, he claims, is that, “Beliefs ossified over centuries aren’t easily shaken.”

Bruni, for his part, wants to shake us free from our fossilized faith.

According to Bruni, who evidences little or no understanding of how believers view the Scriptures (namely, as God’s inspired Word), if we hold to the view that homosexual practice is sinful, this is our “decision” and “choice.”

So, ironically, whereas homosexuality was once considered a choice, now what we believe about homosexuality is a choice.

After all, he argues, the belief that homosexual practice is sinful “prioritizes scattered passages of ancient texts over all that has been learned since — as if time had stood still, as if the advances of science and knowledge meant nothing.”

So, Bruni thinks he can simply dismiss the Scriptures as “ancient texts,” explaining “all writings reflect the biases and blind spots of their authors, cultures and eras.”

But for devout Jews and Christians, the Scriptures are not just any writings, full of biases and blind spots.

If that were the case, there would be no basis for our faith whatsoever and no absolute moral foundations of any kind.

Forget about homosexuality. We would have no reason to hold to any of the fundamentals of our faith if Bruni’s description was accurate.

Not only so, but Bruni wrongly claims that for those of us who hold to the authority of the Bible, “the advances of science and knowledge” mean “nothing.”

To the contrary, all the scientific advances in the world cannot determine what is or is not moral, and there’s nothing we know today that changes our view that God did not design men to be with men and women to be with women. The new interpretations of Scripture that the “progressive” Christians are touting (and which Bruni applauds) are not based on new textual or archeological or linguistic discoveries. They are based primarily on emotional arguments, since there is nothing in the Bible that supports homosexual practice.

Bruni also repeats the common misconception that there are just a handful of “scattered” texts that deal with homosexual practice.

To the contrary, every law dealing with marriage and family, every positive example and precept, every illustration in the Bible about sexuality morality is based on heterosexual relationships (see, for example, Genesis 2:24; Exodus 20:12; Matthew 19:4-6; Ephesians 5:22-33).

That’s why there was not a need to condemn homosexual practice on every page. Everything in Scripture was against it. (To be perfectly clear, the Bible plainly teaches that God loves every human being, that all of us are fallen and in need of redemption, and that Jesus died for heterosexual and homosexual alike. The issue here is the meaning of marriage and the standard of sexual morality.)

Bruni cannot countenance this for a moment. Instead, he claims that our biblically-based faith “elevates unthinking obeisance above intelligent observance,” which is why “our debate about religious freedom should include a conversation about freeing religions and religious people from prejudices that they needn’t cling to and can indeed jettison, much as they’ve jettisoned other aspects of their faith’s history, rightly bowing to the enlightenments of modernity.”

So, those of us who hold to biblical morality are “unthinking” and “prejudiced” people who need to be “freed” from our antiquated beliefs.

It’s high time, Bruni opines, for us to catch up with the 21st century. How utterly primitive of us to believe that there’s anything wrong with homosexual relationships or acts!

Bruni, however, sees positive trends, pointing to a number of books by Christian authors who advocate a reinterpretation of the Bible, claiming that we have outgrown other biblically based views over time, like the justification of slavery or the nature of gender roles.

…Bruni cites with approval a quote from Mitchell Gold, a furniture maker and gay philanthropist who says, “church leaders must be made ‘to take homosexuality off the sin list.'”

And Bruni means it when he says “made to” – as in pressured to or forced to or coerced to. As he writes at the end of his column, “His [namely, Gold’s] commandment is worthy — and warranted. All of us, no matter our religious traditions, should know better than to tell gay people that they’re an offense. And that’s precisely what the florists and bakers who want to turn them away are saying to them.” (Of course, Bruni misrepresents the positions of these Christian business owners as well, but why deal with truth when caricature is so much more effective?)

So, rather than follow the biblical commandments, which are explicit and unambiguous when it comes to both the heterosexual nature of marriage (“from the beginning,” as Jesus said) and the sinfulness of homosexual practice, we should follow the new “commandment” of Bruni and Gold and simply rewrite the Bible.

Well, here’s a note to Mr. Bruni and The New York Times: A billion years from now, when the names of Frank Bruni and Mitchell Gold and the Times itself are long forgotten, the words of God will still stand (Isaiah 40:7-8; Matthew 24:35), and those florists and bakers whom you ridicule in this world will be highly esteemed in the world to come.

The fact is that churches and denominations and religious groups may come and go, but the Word of God is here to stay.

We do not sit in judgment on the Scriptures; the Scriptures sit in judgment of us. And while they call us to love our neighbors as ourselves, they also forbid homosexual practice.

That is not about to change.

As I wrote earlier this week, the Far Left, have proven that they cannot stand Christian Americans. It is evident from their condescension toward us and derision of our traditional values and ethics in their propaganda. Our Constitution gives us Religious Freedom in its very First Amendment.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Please note that this amendment does not say “in some circumstances”.

I have said time and time again, that I find it funny that those among us who claim to be the most tolerant are actually the least tolerant of all.

However, this attack on our faith as Christian Americans, is not funny at all.

This Media Blitz, concerning the fact that Christian Americans refuse to support “Gay Marriage”, which was the impetus behind the President’s scolding Christian Americans about “not being loving enough” is not about discrimination, it is about control. Control of American Christians’ daily lives.

It is a rewriting and an attempted negating of God’s Word by those who cannot win a political or spiritual argument and are now trying to win a culture war by claiming that this law is something that it is not, and by rewriting Christianity by leaving out Individual Salvation through repentance of sin.

Joseph Goebbels, Adolf Hitler ‘ s Minister of Propaganda, once said that

If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.

The current lie that Obama and his sycophants are telling the American Public is that, somehow, the less than 24% of Americans who feel the same way as the Progressives in the Far Left do, somehow outnumber the 74% of Americans who proclaim Jesus Christ as our Personal Savior.

And, that overestimation just doesn’t add up.

Not even in Common Core.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

“His Holiness”, Obama, Concerned About “Less-Than-Loving” Christians

Obamahalologo'Back in April of 2008, Democrat Presidential Candidate Barack Hussein Obama, spoke the following words during a fundraiser in Pennsylvania:

You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them.

And they fell through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

His attitude toward average Christian Americans hasn’t changed one bit.

The Washington Times  reports that

President Obama appeared to break from his script for a moment at Tuesday morning’s Easter Prayer Breakfast to opine on Christians who espouse “less-than-loving” views.

“On Easter, I do reflect on the fact that as a Christian, I am supposed to love,” Mr. Obama said toward the end of his speech. “And I have to say that sometimes when I listen to less-than-loving expressions by Christians, I get concerned.”

“But that’s a topic for another day,” the president said, receiving laughter and applause.

“I was about to veer off; I’m pulling it back,” he said.

“Where there is injustice we defend the oppressed,” Mr. Obama said, returning to his prepared speech. “Where there is disagreement, we treat each other with compassion and respect. Where there are differences, we find strength in our common humanity, knowing that we are all children of God.”

Why are Christian Americans, such as myself, saying “less-than loving” things about Barack Hussein Obama and his cockamamie policies?

Perhaps, because he treats us like second class citizens.

For example, two months ago, Breitbart.com, reported the following story,

At the National Prayer Breakfast [February 4, 2015], President Obama reminded attendees that violence rooted in religion isn’t exclusive to Islam, but has been carried out by Christians as well.

Obama said that even though religion is a source for good around the world, there will always be people willing to “hijack religion for their own murderous ends.”

“Unless we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ,” Obama said. “In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.”

Obama also denounced Islamic State terrorists for professing to stand up for Islam when they were actually “betraying it.”

“We see ISIL, a brutal vicious death cult that in the name of religion carries out unspeakable acts of barbarism,” he said criticizing them for “claiming the mantle of religious authority for such actions.”

Do you know why Christians went on the crusades, all those hundreds of years ago?

It was to stop the spread of militant, radical Islam across the European continent.

For President Barack Hussein Obama to continue to equate Christianity with the heinous barbaric acts of Radical Muslims, was not only a false equivalency, but downright CRAZY.

On the preceding Tuesday afternoon, Obama held a secret meeting with Muslim leaders in the White House. This meeting was closed to the press, so no one exactly knows which “Muslim leaders” were there.

It could have been Calypso Louie Farrakhan or it could have been the head of ISIS, along with his friends, the Muslim Brotherhood, who were sitting in the People’s House, we just don’t know.

However, for the President of United States to stand at the National Prayer Breakfast and attempt such an ignorant, foolish attempt at drawing an equivalency between Islam and Christianity, was disingenuous and an insult to the 75 percent of us Americans who proclaim Jesus Christ as our Personal Savior.

Regarding his equating Christianity with Racism, he was taking a page straight out of his Former Pastor of 20 years, Former American Muslim, Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s, playbook.

Amazing how he failed to mention that Christian Americans ran the Underground Railroad, huh?

Obama and the members of his political ideology, the Far Left, have proven that they cannot stand Christian Americans. It is evident from their condescension toward us and derision of our traditional values and ethics in their propaganda.

Our Constitution gives us Religious Freedom in its very First Amendment.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Please note that this amendment does not say “in some circumstances”.

I have said time and time again, that I find it funny that those among us who claim to be the most tolerant are actually the least tolerant of all.

However, this attack on our faith as Christian Americans, is not funny at all.

This Media Blitz, concerning the fact that Christian Americans refuse to support “Gay Marriage”, which was the impetus behind the President’s scolding Christian Americans about “not being loving enough” is not about discrimination, it is about control. Control of American Christians’ daily lives.

It is a rewriting and an attempted negating of God’s Word by those who cannot win a political or spiritual argument and are now trying to win a culture war by claiming that this law is something that it is not, and by rewriting Christianity by leaving out Individual Salvation through repentance of sin.

Joseph Goebbels, Adolf Hitler ‘ s Minister of Propaganda, once said that

If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.

The current lie that Obama and his sycophants are telling the American Public is that, somehow, the less than 24% of Americans who feel the same way as the Progressives in the Far Left do, somehow outnumber the 74% of Americans who proclaim Jesus Christ as our Personal Savior.

And, that overestimation just doesn’t add up.

Not even in Common Core.

Until He Comes,

KJ