Archive for October 5th, 2006

Philadelphia schools promote ‘gay’ agenda

Thursday, October 5th, 2006

District threatens truancy charges against parents who keep kids home

The Philadelphia School District has launched a new advance in the battle to indoctrinate school children into the “gay” agenda with its announcement that October is “Gay and Lesbian History Month.”

And a report on Family News in Focus said officials there will make sure parents relinquish their children for that “education.”

“If there is a parent who wants to remove their child from school,” district spokesman Fernando Gallard told the report, “they would have to deal with the truancy regulations.”

His comments came after a number of protests erupted over the school system’s formalization of its “gay” agenda recognition.

The district reports that it already has had about 120 complaints about the recognition, even though Gallard explained there are no special activities associated with the formal recognition.

One of those complaints was from a parent who said she would keep her child home for the month, and that prompted Gallard’s threat.

School officials say they added the recognition this year “to be more inclusive” and follow a district policy requiring equity for all races and minority groups, according to Cecilia Cummings, a school community relations executive.

However, of the many minorities available for recognition, the only other groups receiving that are the Hispanic Heritage in September, African American in February and Asian Pacific American in May, officials confirmed, all three racial minorities.

“We knew that this would be controversial,” Cummings told The Philadelphia Inquirer. “When you deal with diversity, there are some hot-button issues that emerge.”

Parent Senita Watson took it a step further than many, traveling to school district headquarters to see about arrangements for her to homeschool her daughter for October.

“How can you celebrate gay and lesbian month? What are you going to teach my daughter,” she demanded. She also called on other parents to boycott the district.

Leaders within the “gay” movement have praised the school district’s decision to promote, at its own expense, their goals. A “gay” newspaper Philadelphia used the school district’s announcement for a promotion, asking a survey question on its website about whether schools should be teaching “gay” perspectives.

They already are, according to Alberta Wilson, of Faith First Education Assistant Corp. She told Family News in Focus that even elementary school phonics cards have been through the “‘gay” editing process.

“They’re teaching three syllable words, the word ‘fam-i-ly,'” she told Focus. “And on those phonics cards they have a mom and a dad, an elderly grandparent and grandfather raising children, and then they have two men and two women,” she said.

“They are teaching our young children that this is acceptable and that they should tolerate it. It is an outrage; it’s against God, and God is not pleased.”

One e-mail about the situation gave rise to a new perspective on the issue.

“Whatever happened to the separation of church and the state, that liberals keep harping about? Everyone knows, or should know that homosexuality is one of the tenets of the church of the devil. So, why is it that the devil’s tenets can be espoused in school, but not the word of God?”

“Besides, is there a month for heterosexuality?”

Cummings said school officials have heard such questions over and over, but the district hasn’t made plans for any such balancing recognition.

And Peter LaBarbera, president of the conservative Americans for Truth, told Baptist Press in promoting homosexual rights “by definition you have to undermine people’s religious rights and religious beliefs.

“If you have a gay history month, you’re basically saying, ‘This is a wonderful part of American history – homosexual history – let’s celebrate it and let’s teach the kids that this is like civil rights.’ Are they going to teach the role that homosexual behavior had in the onset of HIV and AIDS?”

Original Link.

Grieving Amish raise money for killer’s family

Thursday, October 5th, 2006

This is what Christianity is all about.

In what’s being called a stunning example of “the imitation of Christ,” the Amish community devastated by the cold-blooded murder of five of its schoolgirls is raising money for the killer’s family.

Amish residents of rural Lancaster County, Pa., have started a charity fund to help not only the victims’ families – but also the mass-murderer’s widow and children, reports the New York Times today. The killer, Charles Carl Roberts IV, 32, committed suicide at the end of Monday’s attack, in which he shot 10 girls. Five of them, aged 7 to 13, died.

Dwight Lefever, a spokesman for the Roberts family, said an Amish neighbor comforted the killer’s family and extended forgiveness to them after the shooting, the Associated Press reports.

Explaining the Amish way, Gertrude Huntington, an expert on children in Amish society, told the AP that Roberts’ Amish neighbors would probably be very supportive of the killer and his wife, “because judgment is in God’s hands: ‘Judge not, that ye be not judged.'”


Reacting to the Amish outpouring of support for the killer’s family, columnist Rod Dreher writes: “Yesterday on NBC News, I saw an Amish midwife who had helped birth several of the girls murdered by the killer say that they were planning to take food over to his family’s house. She said – and I paraphrase closely – “This is possible if you have Christ in your heart.”

And Journalist Tom Shachtman, who wrote a book on Amish culture called “Rumspringa: To Be or Not to Be Amish,” told the New York Times: “This is imitation of Christ at its most naked. If anybody is going to turn the other cheek in our society, it’s going to be the Amish.”

He said, “I don’t want to denigrate anybody else who says they’re imitating Christ, but the Amish walk the walk as much as they talk the talk.”

Added Huntington, “They know their children are going to heaven. They know their children are innocent … and they know that they will join them in death. The hurt is very great,” she told the Associated Press. “But they don’t balance the hurt with hate.”

Original Article.

Abstinence-Only Sex Ed ‘Puts Young People at Risk,’ Group Says

Thursday, October 5th, 2006

OK, so let me get this straight. The only method of preventing sexually transmitted diseases and unwanted pregnancy that is 100% effective, somehow ‘puts young people at risk’?
I think that’s Lib speak for “We want more funding and these Fundies are taking too much of the government cash cow. I want a new car this year and the Fundies are getting in my way”.

( – A liberal group that promotes sex education said abstinence-only-before-marriage education programs “put young people at risk.”

According to the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the U.S. (SIECUS), abstinence-only “curricula are riddled with messages of fear and shame, gender stereotypes and medical misinformation that put young people at risk.”

“Over the past six years – since President Bush came into office – almost 800 million federal dollars have been spent on abstinence-only-until-marriage programs. President Bush is seeking an additional $204 million in Fiscal Year 2007 alone,” SEICUS said in a statement.

“We hope this information will give educators, policymakers, community leaders and parents the true picture of what our nation’s young people are, and in many cases, are not learning with respect to their health,” said William Smith, vice president for public policy at SIECUS.

“Curricula that instill fear and shame in young people, disparage condom use, perpetuate gender stereotypes and contain anti-abortion messages have no place in any program for school-aged young people, let alone programs sanctioned by the federal government and paid for with hard-earned tax dollars,” Smith said.

“SIECUS believes in time-tested and proven evidence that finds teaching abstinence alongside other issues, not in isolation from them, provides the best long term outcomes for youth,” he added.

But Janice Crouse, senior fellow at the conservative organization Concerned Women for America, called the group’s objections to abstinence-only programs “ridiculous and contrived.”

Crouse told Cybercast News Service that SEICUS complains “about the federal money that is funding abstinence education” when in actuality, “the money going to abstinence education is a pittance compared to the funds underwriting the leftist ‘comprehensive’ sex education programs.”

“Yet the results of abstinence programs are overwhelmingly more positive than the results that harmed so many teens when the sex ed programs for teens implied that teens would inevitably succumb to their hormones and offered only condoms for their protection,” Crouse said.

“Obviously, leftist sex education programs have been around longer and thus have more evaluations on record from the peer-reviewed journals which they dominate,” said Crouse.

“But there is no way to avoid acknowledging the fact that teen sexual activity and teen pregnancies are down since abstinence education became more widespread,” she concluded.

The concept espoused by the left that teens are so animalistic that they have no ability to control themselves sexually is offensive to me and should be offensive to everyone else as well. The argument that “they are going to do it anyway” is no argument at all.

Original Link.

Anti-Gay Kansas Church Cancels Protests at Funerals for Slain Amish Girls

Thursday, October 5th, 2006

What a bunch of bottom feeders. Can you believe this?
Please, please, please do not think that Christians are supposed to act like this. This so called “Baptist Church” is a cult, pure and simple. They are not Christians in any sense of the word.
I have rebuked them numerous times on this blog and will continue to do so until they stop their blatant disregard of Jesus’ teachings. Whereas there is a lot of sin in everyone’s lives, the Bible teaches us to love the sinner and help them turn from their sin. This so called “church” has lost sight of that, if they ever even had sight of it to begin with.

The controversial anti-homosexual Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kan., has canceled its plans to stage a protest at the funerals of the five Amish girls executed in their Pennsylvania school, a church official said Wednesday.

Shirley Phelps-Roper, the daughter of church’s pastor, told the group canceled the protests in exchange for an hour of radio time Thursday on syndicated talk-show host Mike Gallagher’s radio program.

“We’re not going to any of the Amish funerals — that’s the agreement we’re making — that we won’t go to any of them,” Phelps-Roper told

On Tuesday, the church posted a flyer touting the demonstrations in response to the attendance of Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, who has spoken out against the church publicly. Both Amish and non-Amish residents of Lancaster County — where the shooting took place — have vowed to not allow any protesters anywhere near the funeral services; Rendell called the church members “insane.”

Phelps-Roper, daughter of Rev. Fred Phelps, said the church had planned to cancel the protests if given media time on radio and television as a platform to espouse Westboro’s beliefs.

Gallagher said that church officials would have to sign a document making them liable for the airtime if they broke their promise not to demonstrate.

“It’s awful for me to give up an hour of my radio show … but I think it’s worth the sacrifice to keep them away,” Gallagher said.

But she defended the church’s initial decision to protest at the Amish girls’ funerals.

“Those Amish people, everyone is sitting around talking about those poor little girls — blah, blah, blah — they brought the wrath upon themselves,” Phelps-Roper said, adding that the Amish “don’t serve God, they serve themselves.” (is that calling the kettle black or what? -ed.)


Donald Kraybill, a professor of sociology at Elizabethtown College in Lancaster County, Pa., calls the church’s plans a publicity stunt.

“I don’t think there’s any connection between the Amish incident and their agenda. They just want to get in the spotlight,” Kraybill said. “It’s giving them national attention and it’s a cheap and easy and really terrible way to gain some visibility.”

The church’s latest flyer, posted on its Web site notes these protests will be against Rendell for “slanderous” statements against the church.

Westboro’s latest rhetoric is in line with the other beliefs of it’s 70 church members, who hold that the deaths of U.S. troops are God’s punishment for America’s tolerance of homosexuality.

Original Link.
Previous Post.

Fatah member: Abbas recognition of Israel political

Thursday, October 5th, 2006

No Really? You think? Wake up people!! This is old news for most of us.
Koran 47:34 says “Therefore do not falter or sue for peace when you have gained the upper hand.”

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’ stated recognition of Israel’s right to exist is part of a “political calculation” aimed at ultimately destroying the Jewish state, a terror group leader and member of Abbas’ Fatah party told WND in an interview.

The leader said the Fatah party does not recognize Israel and that any final accord that doesn’t include flooding the Jewish state with millions of Palestinians will not be supported by the Fatah party and will lead to Palestinian civil war.

“The base of our Fatah movement keeps dreaming of Tel Aviv, Haifa, Jaffa and Akko,” said Abu Ahmed, Fatah member and leader of the al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades in the northern Gaza Strip. “There is no change in our position. Abbas recognizes Israel because of pressure that the Zionists and the Americans are exercising on him. We understand this is part of his obligations and political calculations.

The Brigades is the declared “military wing” of Abbas’ Fatah party. Together with the Islamic Jihad terror group, the Brigades has taken responsibility for every suicide bombing inside Israel the past two years, including an attack in Tel Aviv this past April that killed an American teenager and nine Israelis. The Brigades also has carried out scores of deadly shooting and rocket attacks against Israeli civilians in recent months.

Brigades leaders are members of Fatah. The terror group’s founder, Marwan Barghouti, is an elected Fatah official and is largely considered one of the most popular Fatah figures. Several top Brigades members serve in Abbas’ Force 17 personal security detail.

Abbas and Hamas the past few months have been negotiating the possibility of forming a national unity government in part to end international sanctions imposed on the Palestinian Authority after Hamas won the majority of parliamentary seats earlier this year. But the unity talks reportedly fell through because of Hamas’ refusal to recognize Israel’s right to exist.

Fatah and Hamas have been clashing in Gaza and the West Bank the past few days.

The US and Europe label Hamas a terror group, while Fatah largely is considered “moderate,” in part for its purported willingness to accept Israel. The U.S. has given large sums of financial aid and weapons to Fatah since late Palestine Liberation Organization leader Yasser Arafat signed the Oslo Peace Accords with the Jewish state in 1993.

Abu Ahmed explained Fatah itself has never officially recognized Israel.

“It is the PLO, which is a separate entity, that recognized Israel,and this was a step, a tactical step that had as its goal to bring the resistance and the revolution closer to the lands of Palestine,” Abu Ahmed said.

The PLO was the official governing body of the Palestinians until the A was formed following the Oslo Accords. Subsequent Israeli-Palestinian agreements were signed officially by the Fatah-led PA but not by Fatah as a party.

Still, Fatah leaders, including Abbas, have made scores of statements recognizing the Jewish state.

But Abu Ahmed commented, “There is an opportunistic class at the head of the Fatah leadership that for personal and political interests says it accepts the existence of Israel. There is no change in our official position. Fatah as a movement never recognized Israel. It is the PLO who did so for the reasons I mentioned.”

Original Link.
All emphasis mine. -ed.

“Total Silence” by Bruce Thornton

Thursday, October 5th, 2006

I’ve been reading one of the great works of recent history, Robert Conquest’s Reflections on a Ravaged Century. His chapter on “Soviet Myths and the Western Mind” is particularly fascinating, and ripe with parallels to our own battles today against Islamic jihad.


For centuries now the jihadists have been telling us that they hate the infidel West because it stands in the way of fulfilling Allah’s mandate “to fight all men until they say ‘There is no god but Allah.’” Last year a letter surfaced from Al Qaeda’s second-ranking leader Ayman al Zawahri, in which the current jihadist terror in Iraq was cast as part of the long war between the “true faith” and “atheism” and “polytheism,” the latter Islamic code for Christianity. “The victory of Islam,” Zawahri wrote, “will never take place until a Muslim state is established in the manner of the Prophet in the heart of the Islamic world . . . . The goal in this age is the establishment of a caliphate in the manner of the Prophet.”

Zawahiri, moreover, is entirely consistent with a long line of jihadist theoreticians whose writings on jihad had little to do with local events. The Ayatollah Khomeini, founder of the Iranian Islamic Republic that today represents the most important and powerful state sponsor of jihad, wrote in 1942, “Those who study jihad will understand why Islam wants to conquer the whole world. All the countries conquered by Islam or to be conquered in the future will be marked for everlasting salvation.”

Rather than a modern distortion, Khomeini’s thinking was in line with earlier Islamic scholars like Ibn Khaldun (d. 1406): “‘In the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the [Muslim] mission and [the obligation to] convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force.’” Or Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 1328): “‘Since lawful warfare is essentially jihad and since its aim is that the religion is God’s entirely and God’s word is uppermost, therefore according to all Muslims, those who stand in the way of this aim must be fought.’”

Likewise Muslim Brotherhood member Sayyid Qutb rooted his own jihadist thinking in Islamic tradition by referencing the eighth-century writer Ibn Qayyim: “This legal formulation [regarding the relationship of Muslims to other groups] is based on the principle that Islam — that is, submission to God — is a universal message with which the whole of mankind should accept or make peace. No political system or material power should put hindrances in the way of preaching Islam.” And if such “hindrances” exist, Islam then “has no recourse but to remove them by force.”


Western “insults” to Islam — which most of the time are, as in the cartoon controversy or the Pope’s recent remarks, exercises in the precious Western value of free speech — are decried by apologists. Yet the rankest anti-Semitic and anti-Christian slander in Muslim lands, most of it emanating from government-sanctioned media or the religious establishment, are mostly ignored. A punk who rolls a pig’s head into a mosque gets much more attention and condemnation than a Muslim who shoots a pregnant Jewish woman or who rams his car into “infidels.” The genocide in Darfur — a race- and faith-based persecution — is never linked to Islam, and the Muslim world is rarely called to account for their total silence about this human catastrophe.

Meanwhile, the American attempt to create freedom and democracy for Muslims in Iraq is condemned as vicious imperialist aggression. Such critics may think that their willingness to ignore the blatant sins of the “other” even as they use a microscope to find the sins of their own culture is a sign of intellectual sophistication. But in actual fact it is, as with the earlier apologists for communist tyranny, a “morbid affliction,” to use Conquest’s phrase — and a sign of Western spiritual corruption in the eyes of the jihadist enemy.

Original Link.

“Reaping the Whirlwind” by Hal Lindsey

Thursday, October 5th, 2006

On Monday, ten little girls were shot in the head during a shooting spree in a one-room school house in Lancaster, Pa., in the heart of Amish country. At the time of this writing, at least five of the little girls have died, and four more remain in extremely critical condition. Only one is expected to survive.

The horrific news follows an upsetting few weeks during which a Wisconsin school principal was gunned down by a 15-year-old student, and an adult gunman held six girls hostage in a Colorado school, before killing a 16-year-old girl and then himself.

Earlier, on Sept. 21, three high school seniors in Green Bay, Wis., were charged with conspiracy to commit homicide for allegedly planning to attack a school with guns and bombs. The Monday morning shooting is the forty-first school shooting attack to take place world-wide since 1996, when a Moses Lake, Washington student opened fire in his algebra class and killed two students and a teacher.

Since then, of course, the incidents of school shootings became all too common. The most famous have become indelibly linked with this murderous phenomenon. Jonesboro, Arkansas. The Columbine massacre. Santee, California. But children are increasingly the targets of their peers. Crazed gunmen like Duane Morrison, who took six girls hostage in Bailey Colorado last week shooting one in the head before taking his own life are unusual. Most of the school shooting incidents involve students as both shooters and victims.

What is the cause for such violence? Nobody seems to know. Is there any way to find some correlation? In the case of US school shootings, we might be able to find some hint. It was the practice in US schools of opening classes with prayer for most of its history.

Beginning in 1962, a series of Supreme Court decisions outlawed this practice, claiming it was in conflict with the 1st Amendment. To any thinking person, this is ridiculous. The relevant part of the 1st Amendment is in two parts.

The first part says, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” The Supreme Court finds in that clause a prohibition of any mention of the word God in the public arena. Including public schools.

If a school in Missouri wants to open the school day with voluntary prayer, how does this involve Congress? If a courthouse in Kentucky wants to display a copy of the Ten Commandments, how does this involve Congress? Congress didn’t mandate the Missouri school open with prayer. Congress didn’t order the Kentucky courthouse to display the Ten Commandments.

And it is that only half of the so-called ‘establishment’ clause that is used to justify removing the acknowledgment of God from all public places in America. Even if there weren’t two parts to the so-called establishment clause, this first one is clearly ridiculous. Making it more ridiculous is the second half: “Or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

So let’s look at both halves as the Founders wrote it, separated by a comma. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

The reasoning itself is completely topsy turvy. As noted, voluntary school prayer is not mandated by Congress. There is no law implied or understood here. To challenge a law, or be convicted of violating it, there must first be a law to challenge or violate. You can’t be hauled into court as a criminal unless a law is broken. And it is the job of the prosecutor to explain how.
If there is no law, then there is no violation. It is enough to make one’s head spin. Not only is there NOT a law, but the 1st Amendment forbids Congress (or anyone else) from prohibiting the free exercise of religion.

So keep Congress from passing a law it didn’t pass, it prohibits the practice the Amendment clearly says it is there to preserve. School kids are NOT allowed to hear about God in public. They are carefully shielded from seeing any display of the Ten Commandments.

They are forbidden to pray – even if they want to, as a method of preserving their right to pray freely. And there are entire organizations out there dedicated to ensuring the freedom of religion by prohibiting anyone from practicing it. It makes me dizzy.

Kids are killing each other because the Supreme Court forbids them to learn, “Thou Shalt Not Kill.” Is there a connection between kids who kill their classmates and schools who aren’t allowed to teach them the commandment that says “Thou Shalt Not Kill?”

Is this even a question?

Original Link.
See my article “What Does the U.S. Constitution Actually Say About Religion?