Archive for January 11th, 2006

More Disturbing News from the Homosexual Arena

Wednesday, January 11th, 2006

More information is coming out about the advancement of the homosexual agenda and how well it has been sold to the youth of this country.

AgapePress is reporting that a CDC study shows an increase in homosexual experimentation, and that Syphilis & Chlamydia Rates have jumped.

Read about it along with some Biblical information here.

Create an e-annoyance, go to jail

Wednesday, January 11th, 2006

You probably think I made this up, but I’ll tell ya, I wish I had…but I didn’t. This is really scary that now any e-mail that “annoys” someone can be deemed illegal punishable by a fine and jail term. As the author of the article says later on, “Our esteemed politicians can’t seem to grasp this simple point, but the First Amendment protects our right to write something that annoys someone else.” Read about it below.

Annoying someone via the Internet is now a federal crime.
It’s no joke. Last Thursday, President Bush
signed into law a prohibition on posting annoying Web messages or sending annoying e-mail messages without disclosing your true identity.
In other words, it’s OK to flame someone on a mailing list or in a blog as long as you do it under your real name. Thank Congress for small favors, I guess.
This ridiculous prohibition, which would likely imperil much of Usenet, is buried in the so-called
Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act. Criminal penalties include stiff fines and two years in prison.
“The use of the word ‘annoy’ is particularly problematic,” says Marv Johnson, legislative counsel for the
American Civil Liberties Union. “What’s annoying to one person may not be annoying to someone else.”
Buried deep in the new law is Sec. 113, an innocuously titled bit called “Preventing Cyberstalking.” It rewrites
existing telephone harassment law to prohibit anyone from using the Internet “without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy.”
To grease the rails for this idea, Sen. Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, and the section’s other sponsors slipped it into an unrelated, must-pass bill to fund the Department of Justice. The plan: to make it politically infeasible for politicians to oppose the measure.
The tactic worked. The bill cleared the House of Representatives by voice vote, and the Senate unanimously approved it Dec. 16.
There’s an interesting side note. An earlier
version that the House approved in September had radically different wording. It was reasonable by comparison, and criminalized only using an “interactive computer service” to cause someone “substantial emotional harm.”
That kind of prohibition might make sense. But why should merely annoying someone be illegal?
There are perfectly legitimate reasons to set up a Web site or write something incendiary without telling everyone exactly who you are.
Think about it: A woman fired by a manager who demanded sexual favors wants to blog about it without divulging her full name. An aspiring pundit hopes to set up the next A frustrated citizen wants to send e-mail describing corruption in local government without worrying about reprisals.
In each of those three cases, someone’s probably going to be annoyed. That’s enough to make the action a crime. (The Justice Department won’t file charges in every case, of course, but trusting prosecutorial discretion is hardly reassuring.)

I never thought I’d agree with the ACLU. Read the rest of the article here.

The Good Shepherd

Wednesday, January 11th, 2006
Psalm 23 (New American Standard Bible)

The LORD is my shepherd, I shall not want.
He makes me lie down in green pastures;
He leads me beside quiet waters.
He restores my soul;
He guides me in the paths of righteousness For His name’s sake.
Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death,
I fear no evil, for You are with me;
Your rod and Your staff, they comfort me.
You prepare a table before me in the presence of my enemies;
You have anointed my head with oil;
My cup overflows.
Surely goodness and lovingkindness will follow me all the days of my life,
And I will dwell in the house of the LORD forever.

Faith of the Mustard Seed

Wednesday, January 11th, 2006

Matthew 17:20 New American Standard Bible (NASB)
And He said to them, “Because of the littleness of your faith; for truly I say to you, if you have faith the size of a mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there,’ and it will move; and nothing will be impossible to you.”

Luke 17:5-6 New American Standard Bible (NASB)
The apostles said to the Lord, “Increase our faith!”
And the Lord said, “If you had faith like a mustard seed, you would say to this mulberry tree, ‘Be uprooted and be planted in the sea’; and it would obey you.”

Advertisers drop ‘Book of Daniel’

Wednesday, January 11th, 2006

My advice to you is this: Don’t let your curiosity get the best of you. Just don’t watch the show. Your money speaks to the advertisers and networks better than words ever could.

Three of the five national advertisers that had commercials run during the debut airing of NBC’s controversial “Book of Daniel” will no longer advertise on the program, states the organization leading the protest against the show.
According to
American Family Association, just five advertisers ran spots during the program’s two-hour premier on Friday night – and at least one of those got bargain-basement rates for the commercials the day before.
“Three of the five companies whose ads placed on the show said they would refrain from future episodes,” said a statement from AFA. “Chattem (Gold Bond, Icy Hot), Combe Inc. (Just For Men) and H&R Block said they would no longer advertise on the program.”
AFA says the five companies, which also include Mazda and Burlington Coat Factory, came under fire from consumers who believe the content of “Book of Daniel” is “disrespectful to people of the Christian faith.”
As WorldNetDaily reported, “The Book of Daniel,” written by a homosexual, is being promoted as the only show on television in which Jesus appears as a recurring character and the only network prime-time drama series with a regular male “gay” character, a 23-year-old Republican son. The main character, Daniel Webster, is a troubled, pill-popping Episcopal priest.
Touted as the riskiest show of the year, it includes a wife who relies on mid-day martinis, a 16-year-old daughter who is a drug dealer and a 16-year-old adopted son who is having sex with the bishop’s daughter. At the office, the priest’s lesbian secretary is sleeping with his sister-in-law.
“NBC lost a lot of money on this show that got a dismal 2.7 Nielson rating,” said Randy Sharp, director of special projects for AFA. “To mainstream corporate advertisers, this show clearly has leprosy written all over it. The healthy thing to do is avoid it.”
After last week’s public outcry, two NBC affiliates said they would not air the program, WTWO in Terre Haute, Ind., and KARK in Little Rock, Ark.

Hal Lindsey proclaims: “Islam a violent religion”

Wednesday, January 11th, 2006

Hal Lindsey isn’t afraid to call islam what it is: violent. You will see the term RoP (religion of peace) used on this and many other blogs. First coined by someone over at little green footballs, the term is used with the upmost sarcasm. Islam never has been and never will be a religion of peace.

Christian author Hal Lindsey proclaimed on national television last night that Islam is a violent religion, with many believers becoming more “radical” the more they read the Muslim holy book, the Quran.
“When someone becomes devout and they begin to get really into the Quran and they begin to study what it really teaches, they become what we call a fundamentalist or a radical because the Quran itself and the Hadith teaches violence,” Lindsey said on “Hannity & Colmes” on the Fox News Channel. “There are 109 verses that we sometimes call war verses … these are the verses that the radicals begin to take seriously and they begin to want to overthrow Western civilization.”

Lindsey was a guest on Fox after WorldNetDaily broke a series of stories about the best-selling non-fiction writer who is in a dispute with the Trinity Broadcasting Network over the content of his own twice-weekly Christian commentary program, “The International Intelligence Briefing,” because of what he considers to be efforts to muzzle his opinions about radical Islam.
“After 9-11, I really studied Islam, studied the Quran, studied what they’re teaching and especially why there was a difference between the moderate Muslims and those who were radical,” Lindsey said last night. “I saw that there was a tremendous danger facing this country that many Americans really didn’t seem to be seeing. So I started warning that radical Islam was at war with the United States, and that the threat was as great as any enemy we’d ever faced.”
Co-host Alan Colmes asked Lindsey straight out: “Islam is a radical religion in your view?”
“It is,” Lindsey responded. “It’s kind of like most Christians don’t read the Bible very much. I believe most Muslims don’t read the Quran very much. That’s why most Muslims are not radical, but when someone begins to really study the Quran and they begin to read the 109 verses that call for violence and war, they become very, very different. They become radical, they feel that they need to convert people by force.”
Lindsey, author of “The Late Great Planet Earth” and many other best-selling books and a
weekly columnist for WND, has anchored his own program for the last 12 years on the world’s largest Christian network, founded by evangelist Paul Crouch, whom Lindsey says remains his friend.
WND exclusively reported Jan. 3, Lindsey announced he would not go back to his show following an an abrupt six-week suspension of the popular TBN-sponsored program by Jan Crouch, TBN’s vice president for programming.
Though John Casoria, TBN’s general counsel
first told WorldNetDaily the show’s suspension was simply a traditional hiatus in lieu of seasonal programming, that statement was later revised to confirm that the network believed Lindsey’s program “placed Arabs in a negative light.”
Lindsey responded to this allegation: “I don’t have to cast radical Muslims in a bad light. If the intimidation and persecution of moderate Muslims makes radical Islam look bad, that is because it is bad – not that I ‘cast’ them in a bad light. But I have never cast the Arabs as a race in a bad light.”
Casoria said he could not recall specific examples from Lindsey’s programs that were anti-Arab or anti-Muslim, but he expressed the network’s concern about how Muslims are portrayed.
“TBN is a worldwide ministry; we have an entire channel that airs 24 hours a day, seven days a week in Arabic,” he said. “We are trying to reach the Islamic world and open a dialogue with them regarding Christ and Christianity.”
Casoria explained, “We do not feel that the best witness of Christ is to bash them but rather to show them the nature of Christ – the way Christ said to present himself – and that is through love, understanding and the presentation of the gospel to them.”
Lindsey argued, however, his program is not shown in the Middle East.
“My show is produced for the Western world and for Christians who are at the most risk from radical Islam,” he said.
Lindsey has been associated with TBN since its inception in the early 1970s.
He told WND that he has “no ax to grind” with TBN, saying, “I’ve been happy with my opportunities for ministry at TBN. I’m thankful for the platform TBN gave me. I will speak at the gates of hell as long as they don’t tell me what to say. But it appears that they are now telling me what not to say – so sadly, it’s time to move on.”
Lindsey also announced that he is taking his popular television program to other outlets beginning in early February. His new half-hour news and commentary series will be called “The Hal Lindsey Report.” A new video version of it will also be streamed on
Lindsey’s website.
When the New York Times surveyed all book sales for the decade of the 1970s, it found that Lindsey’s had far outsold all other authors. His “Late Great Planet Earth” alone sold more than 32 million copies.

Israel rejects Pat Robertson funding

Wednesday, January 11th, 2006

Sometimes the “reap what we sow” doesn’t always work out like we think it will, huh Pat? Maybe you need to look to the Word of God for some examples of when to speak and when to stay quiet.

Tourism Minister Avraham Hirchson has shunned US evangelical leader Pat Robertson shortly before the two were to sign a major funding deal for the Galilee Christian Heritage Center after Robertson suggested that Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s stroke was a punishment from God for the Gaza Strip withdrawal, The Jerusalem Post has learned.
“The minister has very strong views on this and cannot accept what was said,” Tourism Ministry spokesman Ido Hartuv said. “We reconsidered the deal and realized that we cannot sign with Robertson or anyone who supports his views.”
Hartuv stressed that this was an attack on Robertson and his comments rather than a rejection of the evangelical community as a whole, which has become a target group for Israeli tourism in 2006.
Robertson lost favor with the ministry when he said on his popular 700 Club TV show that “God considers the land to be his… For any prime minister of Israel who decides he is going to carve it up and give it away he says, ‘No, this is mine.'”
The charismatic broadcaster led a group of evangelical Christians who have agreed to raise more than $50 million to build the Heritage Center on a 14-dunam plot of land on the shores of the Sea of Galilee.
Hirchson, who has been a close ally of Sharon throughout the disengagement period and was among the first Likud members to defect with him to form Kadima, was scheduled to sign the agreement with Robertson committing the government to provide the land and infrastructure for the project and the evangelicals the funding.
While Hirchson pulled the plug on Robertson, the project is going ahead as planned and looking for alternative avenues of finance.

Read the rest of the article here.
Read the original post here.

A Response to Andy Concerning My Post “Coming Soon: ‘Polyamorist Rights’?

Wednesday, January 11th, 2006

In regards to my post “Coming Soon: ‘Polyamorist Rights’?”, I received a comment from Andy, who thought that maybe I was confused about what the Bible says about polygamy. Here is his comment and my response.

Andy said…
Yeah, the sky is falling, blah blah blah.
Hey, i’m in a homosexual relationship and it’s not “anything goes as long as it feels good”. Trust me. Like many relationships it can be trying at times, but that’s what love and companionship are about: taking the great with the not so great.
And I really don’t see what your problem is with men having multiple wives…many parts of the bible talk about them matter of factly. Or have you forgotten to read you bible?

My response to Andy:
Thanks so much for commenting on my site.
To answer your question, yes, I spend time every day in the Word of God seeking Him and what He expects of me. Let’s go to the Word to see what He says about polygamy.

In Genesis 2:24, it says “For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.” So here God establishes one man, leaving his parents and marrying one woman.

But in Genesis 4:19, we find this: “Lamech took to himself two wives: the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other, Zillah.” Mankind quickly perverted the concept of marriage to allow for multiple wives. This did not come from God, but was decided by man.

In Deuteronomy 17:14-20 we see the rules that God set for choosing a king. The king is supposed to be an example of what is good and right in a people.
When you enter the land which the LORD your God gives you, and you possess it and live in it, and you say, ‘I will set a king over me like all the nations who are around me,’ you shall surely set a king over you whom the LORD your God chooses, one from among your countrymen you shall set as king over yourselves; you may not put a foreigner over yourselves who is not your countryman.
Moreover, he shall not multiply horses for himself, nor shall he cause the people to return to Egypt to multiply horses, since the LORD has said to you, ‘You shall never again return that way.’
He shall not multiply wives for himself, or else his heart will turn away; nor shall he greatly increase silver and gold for himself.
Now it shall come about when he sits on the throne of his kingdom, he shall write for himself a copy of this law on a scroll in the presence of the Levitical priests.
It shall be with him and he shall read it all the days of his life, that he may learn to fear the LORD his God, by carefully observing all the words of this law and these statutes, that his heart may not be lifted up above his countrymen and that he may not turn aside from the commandment, to the right or the left, so that he and his sons may continue long in his kingdom in the midst of Israel

In providing another example of what God expects in a leader 1 Timothy 3:2 says:
An overseer, then, must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, prudent, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not addicted to wine or pugnacious, but gentle, peaceable, free from the love of money.”

Another example of leadership is in 1 Timothy 3:12. It says:
Deacons must be husbands of only one wife, and good managers of their children and their own households.”

And one more example from Titus 1:5-6:
For this reason I left you in Crete, that you would set in order what remains and appoint elders in every city as I directed you, namely, if any man is above reproach, the husband of one wife, having children who believe, not accused of dissipation or rebellion.”

My point here is that time after time we see that the leadership of the church was to only have one wife. The leadership was to be the example to the rest of the church of what He expected of His people. It is safe to say that polygamy is not acceptable according to the Bible. Look at one example of what happens to a polygamist king in 1 Kings 11:1-11:

Now King Solomon loved many foreign women along with the daughter of Pharaoh: Moabite, Ammonite, Edomite, Sidonian, and Hittite women, from the nations concerning which the LORD had said to the sons of Israel, “You shall not associate with them, nor shall they associate with you, for they will surely turn your heart away after their gods.” Solomon held fast to these in love.
He had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines, and his wives turned his heart away.
For when Solomon was old, his wives turned his heart away after other gods; and his heart was not wholly devoted to the LORD his God, as the heart of David his father had been.
For Solomon went after Ashtoreth the goddess of the Sidonians and after Milcom the detestable idol of the Ammonites.
Solomon did what was evil in the sight of the LORD, and did not follow the LORD fully, as David his father had done.
Then Solomon built a high place for Chemosh the detestable idol of Moab, on the mountain which is east of Jerusalem, and for Molech the detestable idol of the sons of Ammon.
Thus also he did for all his foreign wives, who burned incense and sacrificed to their gods.
Now the LORD was angry with Solomon because his heart was turned away from the LORD, the God of Israel, who had appeared to him twice, and had commanded him concerning this thing, that he should not go after other gods; but he did not observe what the LORD had commanded.
So the LORD said to Solomon, “Because you have done this, and you have not kept My covenant and My statutes, which I have commanded you, I will surely tear the kingdom from you, and will give it to your servant