Archive for November 29th, 2006

Prophecy of Scripture

Wednesday, November 29th, 2006

12 So I will always remind you of these things, even though you know them and are firmly established in the truth you now have. 13 I think it is right to refresh your memory as long as I live in the tent of this body, 14 because I know that I will soon put it aside, as our Lord Jesus Christ has made clear to me. 15 And I will make every effort to see that after my departure you will always be able to remember these things.

16 We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. 17 For he received honor and glory from God the Father when the voice came to him from the Majestic Glory, saying, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.” 18 We ourselves heard this voice that came from heaven when we were with him on the sacred mountain.

19 And we have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. 20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. 21 For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

2 Peter 1:12-21 (New International Version)

Jesus has promised to return. That is fact, testified by many who followed Him while He was here on earth. I am convinced more than ever that we are in the final “season” before the Lord’s return.
Christians, we must be vigilant and hold to the truth of the Bible, God’s Word.
It will happen. With a shout, and all of His faithful will be caught up in the air!! Keep Looking Up!!

Iranian President Sends Letter to U.S. People; Readers Become Nauseous

Wednesday, November 29th, 2006

Well, at least I did. What a joke! As if Ahmadinejad cares about Americans. He has called us “The Great Satan” and called for us to be attacked and killed more often than not.
There are a few people who will read this and actually believe him, but I’d hazard a guess that the majority will see him for what he is; a madman terrorist bent on our destruction.
Here is a copy of his letter, you have the stomach to get through it.

Sharia (Islamic) Law is Spreading as Authority Wanes

Wednesday, November 29th, 2006

This is an interesting article from the U.K. We in the United States, often think that this type of thing cannot happen over here. We are so vey wrong in that respect.

Islamic sharia law is gaining an increasing foothold in parts of Britain, a report claims.

Sharia, derived from several sources including the Koran, is applied to varying degrees in predominantly Muslim countries but it has no binding status in Britain.

However, the BBC Radio 4 programme Law in Action produced evidence yesterday that it was being used by some Muslims as an alternative to English criminal law. Aydarus Yusuf, 29, a youth worker from Somalia, recalled a stabbing case that was decided by an unofficial Somali “court” sitting in Woolwich, south-east London.

Mr Yusuf said a group of Somali youths were arrested on suspicion of stabbing another Somali teenager. The victim’s family told the police it would be settled out of court and the suspects were released on bail.

A hearing was convened and elders ordered the assailants to compensate their victim. “All their uncles and their fathers were there,” said Mr Yusuf. “So they all put something towards that and apologised for the wrongdoing.”

Although Scotland Yard had no information about that case yesterday, a spokesman said it was common for the police not to proceed with assault cases if the victims decided not to press charges.

However, the spokesman said cases of domestic violence, including rape, might go to trial regardless of the victim’s wishes.

Mr Yusuf told the programme he felt more bound by the traditional law of his birth than by the laws of his adopted country. “Us Somalis, wherever we are in the world, we have our own law,” he said. “It’s not sharia, it’s not religious — it’s just a cultural thing.”

Sharia’s great strength was the effectiveness of its penalties, he said. Those who appeared before religious courts would avoid re-offending so as not to bring shame on their families.

Some lawyers welcomed the advance of what has become known as “legal pluralism”.

Dr Prakash Shah, a senior lecturer in law at Queen Mary University of London, said such tribunals “could be more effective than the formal legal system”.

In his book Islam in Britain, Patrick Sookhdeo, director of the Institute for the Study of Islam and Christianity, says there is an “alternative parallel unofficial legal system” that operates in the Muslim community on a voluntary basis.

“Sharia courts now operate in most larger cities, with different sectarian and ethnic groups operating their own courts that cater to their specific needs according to their traditions,” he says. These are based on sharia councils, set up in Britain to help Muslims solve family and personal problems.

Sharia councils may grant divorces under religious law to a woman whose husband refuses to complete a civil divorce by declaring his marriage over. There is evidence that these councils are evolving into courts of arbitration.

Faizul Aqtab Siddiqi, a barrister and principal of Hijaz College Islamic University, near Nuneaton, Warwicks, said this type of court had advantages for Muslims. “It operates on a low budget, it operates on very small timescales and the process and the laws of evidence are far more lenient and it’s less awesome an environment than the English courts,” he said.

Mr Siddiqi predicted that there would be a formal network of Muslim courts within a decade.

“I was speaking to a police officer who said we no longer have the bobby on the beat who will give somebody a slap on the wrist.

“So I think there is a case to be made under which the elders sit together and reprimand people, trying to get them to change.”

Original Link.

NJ Lawmaker Pushes For Traditional Marriage Definition

Wednesday, November 29th, 2006

I like this comment from New Jersey state senator Gerald Cardinale:
“The court does not have the authority – as I read the constitution – to order the legislature to pass a bill. They can do a lot of things, but they are not the whole government.”
I think that a lot of people are products of our liberal education system and therefore mistakenly believe that the court has more power then it really has. The courts are just one branch of three equal parts of government.
Good Luck to you, Senator. We are praying for your success.

( – A New Jersey state senator is pushing for a constitutional amendment that will limit marriage to a union between one man and one woman.

Republican Gerald Cardinale’s move follows a New Jersey Supreme Court ruling that gave the state’s legislature six months to allow same-sex couples to “marry” or to enter into civil unions that hold the same legal benefits as marriage.

“The court does not have the authority – as I read the constitution – to order the legislature to pass a bill,” Cardinale said. “They can do a lot of things, but they are not the whole government.”

“We’re dealing with a decision of the New Jersey Supreme Court, and the court has indicated that we need to do certain things within a certain period of time, so I thought this was a good thing to do in response to the court decision.”

Cardinale told Cybercast News Service that the proposed amendment would “clearly set forth that marriage is a term, or a state, that can only be applied to a union of one man and one woman, and add that to our constitution so that it is not subject to the vagaries of the personal biases of a judge’s decision in the future.”

Original Link.

Cintas Warned Against Firing Immigrant Force

Wednesday, November 29th, 2006

More liberal Dems trying to protect people who break the law by threatening the people who are upholding the law.
Good Job Folks!! (sarcasm)
Thanks to your votes, we have several more years of this nonsense to put up with!!

A Mississippi Democrat in line to become chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee has warned the nation’s largest uniform supplier it faces criminal charges if it follows a White House proposal to recheck workers with mismatched Social Security numbers and fire those who cannot resolve the discrepancy in 60 days.
Rep. Bennie Thompson said in a letter to Cintas Corp. it could be charged with “illegal activities in violation of state and federal law” if any of its 32,000 employees are terminated because they gave incorrect Social Security numbers to be hired.
“I am deeply troubled by Cintas’ recent policy change regarding the Social Security Administration’s ‘no match’ letters,” Mr. Thompson said in the Nov. 2 letter. “It is my understanding that hundreds of Cintas’ immigrant workers have received these letters. I am extremely concerned about any potentially discriminatory actions targeting this community.”
In June, President Bush proposed new guidelines concerning “no-match” letters from the Social Security Administration, saying he wanted to make it easier for employers to verify workers’ eligibility and continue to hold them accountable for those they hire.
The Department of Homeland Security followed up on that announcement yesterday, formally releasing new regulations to help businesses comply with hiring requirements intended to reduce the hiring of illegal aliens — including setting guidelines for businesses when handling “no-match” letters from the Social Security Administration.
The proposed regulation is subject to a 60-day public comment period.
“Most businesses want to do the right thing when it comes to employing legal workers,” said Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff. “These new regulations will give U.S. businesses the necessary tools to increase the likelihood that they are employing workers consistent with our laws.
“They also help us to identify and prosecute employers who are blatantly abusing our immigration system.”
But Mr. Thompson called the “no-match” letters a threat to workers who fail to reverify their information and called Cintas’ actions a “rash enactment of a proposed DHS regulation.” He said that by implementing “this incomplete regulation,” Cintas could be in violation of federal immigration law.
The seven-term congressman also said before the proposal becomes law, it must go through a rule-making process, “which could radically change the regulation or kill it all together.”
Cintas has issued letters to 400 employees in five states telling them they will be indefinitely suspended if they cannot resolve their mismatched Social Security number within 60 days.
“Cintas, like all employers, has a legal obligation to ensure all employees are legally authorized to work in the U.S.,” the firm said in a statement. “Cintas has not terminated any employees due to the Social Security mismatches and plans to continue its policy of placing these employees on indefinite leave until they produce the required documentation.”

Original Link.

Suit Claims Detroit Police Trampled Pro-Lifers’ Rights at Super Bowl Protest

Wednesday, November 29th, 2006

It’s sad to see the police acting in this way. At least be fair and make eveyone leave or let everyone stay. Don’t single out any one group because of their message.

(AgapePress) – In Michigan, a lawsuit has been filed against the Detroit Police Department by pro-life supporters who claim their constitutional rights were violated outside the Super Bowl. The lawsuit filed by the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) claims the police singled out and squelched pro-lifers’ speech last February as the championship game took place.

Ted Hoppe is an attorney working with the ADF on the lawsuit. He points out that he finds the facts of the case, as well as their broader implications for freedom of expression in the public square, more than a little disturbing.

“Our clients were demonstrating in favor of pro-life issues on the streets and sidewalks near the stadium when they were confronted by the City of Detroit Police,” Hoppe notes. “They were told that they couldn’t stand there with the signs that they had, that they had to leave and they had to take their signs down and get out of the area.”

This challenge from the local authorities created “a kind of a tough situation” for the pro-lifers, the attorney points out. After all, he contends, “There were a lot of other people up there with signs conveying other messages; so this was clearly an action directed by the City of Detroit Police at our clients’ pro-life message that day.”

Hoppe says the officers did not approach any of the other people who were carrying signs with other messages during the Detroit incident. “I think one of the concerns that comes out of this case is one that we see throughout the country,” he notes, “and that is the situation where police officers are acting in ways that are contrary to … what most Americans would understand are just basic First Amendment principles, like the right to free speech.”

Constitutional rights must be protected, the ADF affiliate insists. “We need to send a message to the police up in Detroit that free speech is a right that all Americans have, not just a select few,” he says.

The lawsuit filed by ADF on the pro-lifer demonstrators’ behalf seeks unspecified damages. Also, Hoppe adds, the suit requests that the court find that the actions of the Detroit Police violated the pro-life demonstrators’ constitutional rights.

Original Link.