Category Archives: Christian

Christian Sermons are the New Hate Speech!

The “Bathroom Bill”

One October 17th, 2014, U.S. Senator Ted Cruz, R-Texas, stood in defense of Houston pastors’ First Amendment right to preach and speak from the pulpit freely.  The controversy has been nicknamed “the bathroom bill”   Thanks to our Bill of Rights, The City of Houston has backed off, a little bit at least. Let’s review the event and analyze how and why the Constitution once  again is at least almost doing its job as designed.

Senator Cruz’s speech concerned a shockingly unconstitutional attempt by the City of Houston to restrict Houstonians’ practice of religion and free speech, in favor of furthering a pro-gay political agenda backed by the city government.

In the video linked below, Senator Cruz called upon the pastors and citizens of Houston to defy the City of Houston’s recent unjust sermon subpoena requirement.

That’s right, you read it correctly; a city requirement to examine and approve the contents — of Christian sermons!

Listen to exactly what Senator Cruz had to say about the matter here,  courtesy of  The Liberty Foundation

Outrage is Due!

This action taken by the City of Houston should seem  outrageous to  every American, but what is frightening is that this unjust policy  garnered  any support from the public at all.  Gay and transgender supporters feel especially offended  by traditional Christians who disagree with their version of morality.

No Political Bias Here

I’m not here to defend or to oppose the morality held by the offended party, namely, the LGBT crowd.  I’m only here to defend every  citizen’s inalienable right to hold and to speak his own religious opinion freely.  Period.

Who Grants Human Authority?

Who granted the City of Houston the authority to pass judgment upon the truth of any human opinion?  Who granted The City of Houston the authority to exercise an assumption that their morality trumps all other versions of morality?  Nobody grants such authority, and that logically renders such supposed authority invalid.

Any humanly supposed authority is self granted. It has no real authority, except that imagined by those who claim it. Such a false supposition of authority rings of tyranny.

The First and Tenth Amendments

We’re all familiar with the First Amendment’s assurance of free speech and  of free religious practice, but what about the Tenth Amendment?

In a nutshell, the Tenth Amendment states that all clauses distinctly defined in the Bill of Rights are valid and enforceable at every level of government within the United States, including, but not limited to the level of state and city governments.

That means that the First Amendment always trumps local laws and rulings.  The right to practice free speech of any nature is universal and inalienable, and that is why it was spelled out in the Bill of Rights – because that is what the Bill of Rights is, namely, an enumeration of inalienable rights..

The Right to Live Your Own Belief System is also Universal

I can really sympathize with the LGBT point of view, but I cannot at all sympathize with their unconstitutional methods of flexing political power.

The right to your own belief system is yours,  and the right to speak freely about that belief system is yours  – whatever it might be.   So, let’s look at both sides of the coin.

If you are LGBT or an LGBT sympathizer, you have the right to be what you are, and you have the right to openly disagree with those who oppose your choices.  That is, in traditional Christian terms, free will.  If you are an atheist,  it’s a sure bet you will still agree that you possess an inherent right to choose for yourself.

Likewise, if you are the member of a Christian congregation, or the pastor over such a congregation, you also have the right to be what you are, and you have the right to openly disagree with those who oppose your choices.  It’s as simple as that!

LGBTs, like anyone else, don’t like being criticized for their choices, and neither do Christians.  Yet, Christian pastors do not disagree with the individual right for any individual to choose to be LGBT.  Once again, that’s called free will in religious circles.  It’s widely accepted in traditional Christianity that God granted us free will,  the option of making a mistake that can be corrected.  What  Christians preach about is what they see as the dangers of your making the wrong  choice, and of course they hope to talk you out of doing what they feel might be bad for you.

Yes, certain churches do condemn the practice of homosexuality, and they do openly preach against it, and  they do warn of what they believe to be the dangers of that style of life.  On the flip side, pro-gay groups are often quite active in openly bashing traditional Christianity.

Do not pastors, as Americans, have as much right to condemns LGBTs , as LGBTs have a right to openly preach against and condemn Christians?  Pro-gay groups do commonly openly bash traditional Christianity, yet traditional Christians generally do not call for the silencing of the opinions of the LGBT crowd.  Why the hypocrisy?

 The New Hate Speech

Why is a traditional pastor’s version of the truth painted as hateful, while the derision of Christians on the part of those who oppose traditional moral Christianity, the LGBT version of truth,  is painted as a fair and balanced view?

Why do we consistently see one sided behavior from human government that would silence traditional Christian opinion, and would herald their own humanist opinion as the superior one?  If Christians were really mistaken, and the real God is not divine, but instead humanism really rules us all, then there would be no real authority outside of humanism!

Who, then, in a supposed humanist world, would decide which of the two humanist views was superior?

Facebooktwitterrss

THE AFTERMATH OF PROP 8 – Pedophilia becoming a separate sexual orientation

normalizing pedophillia pedophiles sexual orientation

THE AFTERMATH OF PROP 8 – Pedophilia becoming a separate sexual orientation

Decadence is on the march! And now, a defense of pedophilia as just another “sexual orientation” has been published in the mainstream left wing UK newspaper The Guardian.  From, “Paedophilia: Bringing Dark Desires Into the Light:”

Paedophiles may be wired differently. This is radical stuff. But there is a growing conviction, notably in Canada, that paedophilia should probably be classified as a distinct sexual orientation, like heterosexuality or homosexuality. Two eminent researchers testified to that effect to a Canadian parliamentary commission last year, and the Harvard Mental Health Letter of July 2010 stated baldly that paedophilia “is a sexual orientation” and therefore “unlikely to change”.

This isn’t news. We already know that those who abuse children sexually are always dangerous. That is why they must register with the police when released from prison.

Understanding causes is one thing–I’m all for it–but the effort is definitely underway to normalize the behavior:

The reclassification of paedophilia as a sexual orientation would, however, play into what Goode calls “the sexual liberation discourse”, which has existed since the 1970s. “There are a lot of people,” she says, “who say: we outlawed homosexuality, and we were wrong. Perhaps we’re wrong about paedophilia.”

Social perceptions do change. Child brides were once the norm; in the late 16th century the age of consent in England was 10. More recently, campaigning organisations of the 70s and 80s such as the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE) and Paedophile Action for Liberation were active members of the NCCL when it made its parliamentary submission questioning the lasting damage caused by consensual paedophilic relations… A Dutch study published in 1987 found that a sample of boys in paedophilic relationships felt positively about them. And a major if still controversial 1998-2000 meta-study suggests – as J Michael Bailey of Northwestern University, Chicago, says – that such relationships, entered into voluntarily, are “nearly uncorrelated with undesirable outcomes”.

Read more: http://nation.foxnews.com/pedophilia/2013/01/07/normalizing-pedophilia#ixzz2XNiGgvpz

If you’re grateful that the media is still able to publicize this ridiculous nonsense so that more people can become aware and do something about it, then please protest the repealing of the first amendment bill sponsored by 41 Democrats and 1 Socialist in congress.

Facebooktwitterrss

ARMY ACKNOWLEDGES PEDOPHILIA PART OF ISLAM

muslim infestation emergency bacon kit

A new Army manual that warns American soldiers in Afghanistan to avoid talking about certain topics has unwittingly acknowledged that Western taboos such as pedophilia are an inherent part of Islamic culture.

“By mentioning that pedophilia and women’s rights and saying that soldiers should not mention such things they are tacitly admitting that those things are indeed part of Islam,” said Robert Spencer, founder of Jihad Watch.

According to the Wall Street Journal, a new 75-page Army manual suggests U.S. soldiers are to blame for the large number of deadly attacks on them by Afghan security forces. The manual reportedly says the soldiers may have brought the attacks on themselves because of insensitivity towards Islamic culture.

“Many of the confrontations occur because of [coalition] ignorance of, or lack of empathy for, Muslim and/or Afghan cultural norms, resulting in a violent reaction from the [Afghan security force] member,” the draft report prepared by Army researchers and obtained by the Journal said.

Clare Lopez, a senior fellow with the Center for Security Policy, said the suggestion that U.S. soldiers are to blame for the attacks on them by Afghan security forces is outrageous.

“To suggest that our troops are somehow being murdered because of our insensitivity to their culture is essentially saying it’s our own fault that the troops are being killed because we weren’t nice enough to them,” Lopez said. “The fundamental refusal to acknowledge that the enemy fights because of what he says he fight for, which is Islam, is a failure by our professional leadership from Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta on down. Because of this, we have no strategy.”

This year alone, more than three dozen attacks have killed 63 coalition forces. In an attempt to quell the attacks the Army report has issued a list of “taboo conversational topics.”

The topics include “making derogatory comments about the Taliban,” “advocating women’s rights” and “directing any criticism towards Afghans” or “anything related to Islam.”

WND contacted the Army to request a copy of the manual. Army spokesman Ray Harp responded by saying it would not release a copy, for security reasons. He explained the Army wished to avoid detailing specific tactics, techniques and procedures outlined in the handbook.

Regarding the WSJ copy, Harp said whoever released it was not authorized to do so.

“While the handbook does contain information we do not want freely distributed into the hands of our enemies, it is labeled with the ‘For Official Use Only’ restriction,” Harp said. “While still officially unclassified, we require the information to be protected from an open distribution and it should not have been released to anyone outside of those who needed access to it for official purposes.”

Elaine Donnelly, director of the Center for Military Readiness, says while she has not seen the draft copy, she can understand how it is beneficial for the Army to help teach soldiers about cultural differences. Unfortunately, she said, Congress and military leaders often go too far.

“There is a cultural problem that the military needs to confront, but I’m not sure this manual is the best way to go about it,” Donnelly said. “If the information in it is for our soldier’s protection so as to prevent something from being provocative, it might save a life, but if as the article suggests it is calling for soldiers to be overly deferential, that’s not called for.”

Donnelly noted the example of Navy Lt. Florence Choe, who was shot by an Afghan guard in 2009 for wearing shorts while jogging along the perimeter of the base.

“I’m not saying this was her fault, but if her commanders had taken the time to acknowledge that individuals in that part of the world have a different attitude in regards to women in shorts, it might have saved her life,” she said.

However, Donnelly says there are other taboos supposedly in the report that appear to have gone too far.

The Army manual also advises soldiers to avoid “any criticism of pedophilia” or “mentioning homosexuality and homosexual conduct.”

“In that part of the world homosexuality is condemned, and pedophilia is accepted. It’s not like our culture at all and that needs to be acknowledged. We don’t have to be subservient to be cautious,” she continued. “Unfortunately, often times our leaders want to go overboard, believing it will help our relationships with these countries, but the truth is it doesn’t.”

The Army manual has drawn sharp criticism from Marine Gen. John Allen, the top military commander in Afghanistan. Allen reportedly has rejected a proposed foreword written by the Army using his name.

“Gen. Allen did not author, nor does he intend to provide, a foreword,” Col. Tom Collins, a spokesman for the U.S.-led coalition in Afghanistan said. “He does not approve of its contents.”

Spencer says the ban on criticizing pedophilia has put the military in a difficult position. By attempting to show cultural sensitivity, it is forced to acknowledge that pedophilia is an inherent part of Islamic teaching.

“This draws attention to the fact that despite denials by the U.S. government and groups like CAIR, these things are a part of official Islam,” Spencer said. “However, I don’t expect them to have the honesty to acknowledge the inconsistency.”

He said that by telling soldiers not to speak against pedophilia, the military and the U.S. government is essentially endorsing the behavior.

“We are essentially sending the message that the United States endorses pedophilia by refusing to speak out against it. I don’t see any way around this.”

Clare Lopez, also a senior fellow with the Clarion Fund, said the new manual is another example of how the military is sending the message that Western culture and values are subservient to Islam.

“It’s another step in a process of submission to the appeasement of Islam that the United States leadership including military leadership has been pursuing for quite a while,” she said. “The entire program seems to be geared to appeasing the Taliban and jihadists by giving in to their world view which says Islam should not be offended and letting them decide what is offensive.”

She said the problem is not limited to the Obama administration but began in Afghanistan under President George W. Bush.

“This actually began in 2004 when we helped Afghanistan enshrine Islamic Shariah law in the constitution. Once we did that, we no longer had any purpose being in the country because we gave the enemy everything they asked for,” she noted. “That’s what they fight for, the imposition of Shariah. All of these other measures that followed from that point on have been a further attempt to win their hearts and minds. It hasn’t worked as is evident by the fact they are still killing our soldiers.”

The Army manual is in keeping with policies by the Obama administration to deliberately scrub all training materials that criticize Islam. Earlier this year, the FBI destroyed all of its materials that taught there was an Islamic connection to terrorism.

WND previously reported the Pentagon refused to give assurances that soldiers who burned the Quran would not be turned over to Afghan authorities to face trial.

Cmdr. William Speakes, a spokesman for the Pentagon, said: “It would be premature to speculate at any potential outcomes. Any disciplinary action if deemed warranted will be taken by U.S. authorities after a thorough review of the facts pursuant to all U.S. military law and regulations and in accordance with due process. We have made no commitments beyond that.”

When asked if that meant the only commitment officials were willing to make was that the soldiers would not be tried in an Afghan court, Speakes said: “No. The only commitment we have made is that we will take any appropriate disciplinary action deemed necessary by the investigation. Any suggestions that we have made more detailed commitments beyond what I just told you is inaccurate.”

Spencer said the Army manual sends the message to Middle Easterners that despite statements by our government, they cannot expect any help from America when it comes to fighting for basic human rights.

“Anybody in these Muslim countries that wanted to see freedom of speech, a crackdown on pedophilia, or rights for women were disappointed at the time that we endorsed the Afghan constitution which enshrined these principles in Islamic law,” Spencer said. “It sends the message to advocates of human rights and freedom that the United States is not going to help them and they are on their own.”
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2012/12/army-acknowledges-pedophilia-part-of-islam/#9d9RQsFQ4lxTCgee.99

Facebooktwitterrss
Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!