Archive for April 18th, 2007

Supreme Court Upholds Ban on “Partial Birth” Abortions

Wednesday, April 18th, 2007

Updates at the bottom.

Praise be to God!! CNN just sent this email:

“– U.S. Supreme Court in a 5-4 ruling upholds a law banning what some call “partial birth” abortions.”

I’ll have more details as they become available.

Update: 09:26 04/18/07:
Fox News is reporting on this now.

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court upheld the nationwide ban on a controversial abortion procedure Wednesday, handing abortion opponents the long-awaited victory they expected from a more conservative bench.

The 5-4 ruling said the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act that Congress passed and President Bush signed into law in 2003 does not violate a woman’s constitutional right to an abortion.

The opponents of the act “have not demonstrated that the Act would be unconstitutional in a large fraction of relevant cases,” Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in the majority opinion.

The decision pitted the court’s conservatives against its liberals, with President Bush’s two appointees, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, siding with the majority.

Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia also were in the majority.

It was the first time the court banned a specific procedure in a case over how — not whether — to perform an abortion.

CNN follows with this report:
Supreme Court upholds law limiting controversial abortion procedure

WASHINGTON (CNN) –The Supreme Court Wednesday upheld a controversial congressional law banning a specific abortion procedure critics call “partial birth,” a ruling that could portend enormous social, legal, and political implications for the divisive issue.

The sharply divided 5-4 ruling could prove historic, and offer a possible signal of the new Roberts court’s willingness to someday revisit the basic right to abortion guaranteed in the 1973 Roe v. Wade case.

At issue now is the constitutionality of a federal law banning a type of abortion typically performed by doctors in the middle to late second trimester. The legal sticking point was that the law lacked a “health exception” for a woman who might suffer serious medical complications, something the justices have said in the past is necessary when considering abortion restrictions. (Posted 10:21 a.m.)

Gun Control Advocates Use VT Killing to Advance Agenda

Wednesday, April 18th, 2007

Well, I knew it wouldn’t take long for the gun control advocates to start using the Virgina Tech killings to try to advance their anti-gun agenda.
The bodies are hardly cold before we start to hear how gun control laws are too lax and if we had stronger ones, this never would have happened. The usual mantra although where it started kind of surprised me.
Spiegel Online has examples of articles from news organizations from all over Europe condemning our gun laws and blaming them for this horrible shooting.
As has been seen repeatedly, not only in these countries, but in cities here in the U.S. that have passed similar anti-gun laws, the criminals continue to get guns, while the law abiding people remain unable to defend themselves.
Unlike the anti-gun advocates, who barely waited until the bodies were cool before parading our their agenda, I’ll not dishonor the victims by arguing this issue at this time.
But think on this:
What if an instructor or student had been armed that day? Is it not conceivable that the outcome of this tragedy could have been different?

With a view to Monday’s deadly shooting rampage at Virginia Tech, European newspapers are blaming the lack of gun control measures in the United States and implying that Charlton Heston is indirectly responsible for the scope of the killings.

Across the continent on Tuesday, European media rubber-neck at Monday’s massacre in the United States. Most seem to agree about one thing: The shooting at Virginia Tech is the result of America’s woeful lack of serious gun control laws. In the strongest editorialized image of the day, German cable news broadcaster NTV flashed an image of the former head of the National Rifle Association, the US gun lobby: In other words, blame rifle-wielding Charlton Heston for the 33 dead.

Papers reserve their sharpest criticism for the 2004 expiration of a 10-year ban on semi-automatic weapons under the then Republican-controlled Congress. Others comment on the pro-gun lobbying activities of Heston’s NRA. Some papers also draw analogies between school shootings and Muslim fundamentalist suicide bombers.

Original Link.

University Convocation Told of Allah, Buddha, Dalai Lama, But Not Jesus

Wednesday, April 18th, 2007

It is sad that even in the face of such a terrible tragedy, people are unwilling to use the name of Jesus in a school setting. See how it is already to ingrained in people’s psychic that even Christian ministers and our Christian president refrain from calling on the name of Jesus in public.

Speakers at the Virginia Tech convocation yesterday called on Allah and Buddha in their efforts to minister to the survivors, family and friends of victims of the shooting massacre at the school – but Jesus wasn’t mentioned by name.

President Bush did offer a biblical message of hope, when he suggested the school community that lost 32 members to the shootings by an out-of-control resident alien student find “comfort in the grace and guidance of a loving God.”

But even he didn’t bring Jesus, the only hope of comfort and future life for Christians, into the memorials.

“I’m sitting here watching the convocation service at VT,” wrote a WND reader who was given anonymity. “Five minutes ago they had four representatives from the local ‘religious community.’ The Muslim specifically invoked Allah’s blessings… and he didn’t shy away from saying the name of Allah. The Jewish rep asked for God’s blessings. Buddha was represented. The only name that [was] omitted, of course, Jesus Christ.”

And another WND reader cited the speakers, in order:

* “1st Speaker: A Muslim cleric invoking the name of Allah and quoting the Quran.”

* “2nd Speaker: A Buddhist Community Leader preaching that mankind is basically ‘good.'”

* “3rd Speaker: A Female speaker from the Jewish Community quoting Ecclesiastes: ‘There is a time for everything.'”

* “4th Speaker: A Liberal Lutheran Minister talking about ‘healing,’ etc. and how everyone needs to come together (blah, blah, blah…).”

“BUT NOT ONE EVANGELICAL CHRISTIAN PASTOR/PREACHER. NO INVOCATION OF THE NAME OF CHRIST JESUS,” the reader said.

Yet another reader wondered why a Muslim cleric was the first member of the clergy to deliver remarks.

“By the prominence of the Muslim speaker in the service are we to assume that Virginia Tech is mainly a Muslim student body?

Original Link.

Pray for the Families and Friends of the Victims at Virgina Tech

Wednesday, April 18th, 2007

VT Mourning
The mourning over the lose of 32 students and teachers at Virgina Tech continues as new facts concerning the shooter surface.
Michael Mickey at Rapture Alert has a post that sites an anonymous source, close to the case, as saying:

“Cho — who arrived in the United States as boy from South Korea in 1992 and was raised in suburban Washington, D.C., where his parents worked at a dry cleaners — left a note in his dorm room that was found after the bloodbath.

A law enforcement official who read Cho’s note described it Tuesday as a typed, eight-page rant against rich kids and religion. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the media.

“You caused me to do this,” the official quoted the note as saying.

Cho indicated in his letter that the end was near and that there was a deed to be done, the official said. He also expressed disappointment in his own religion, and made several references to Christianity, the official said.”

Please continue to pray for all of the people involved in this terrible tragedy.

Syria to Israel: “Accept Arab Peace Plan or We’ll Attack You”

Wednesday, April 18th, 2007

The basis of this threat from Syria is their wish to have the Golan Heights returned to them.
During the Six Day War, back in 1967, Israel took the Golan Heights from Syria. In 1981, Israeli government passed a law officially making it a part of Israel.
Now before you start calling “foul” on Israel, it’s important to understand what was happening in the Golan Heights before the war in 1967.
Strategically, the Golan Heights are approximately 3,000 feet (1,000 m) above neighboring Israel. This area was used often to shell Israeli civilian farming communities. Forgive this “tongue and cheek” comment, but it could almost be described like this:
“Hey Mohamed, we have some extra 105mm artillery shells this week. Let’s drive up to the Heights and shoot them at those pesky civilian Jewish farmers in the valley.”
During the Six Day War, the shelling increased significantly.
Israel took the Heights in order to stop the indiscriminate shelling of their civilians.
With the sophistication of today’s modern weaponry, Israel cannot afford to allow Syria to have the Golan Heights back. There is no reason to believe that Syria would not immediately resume firing on civilian targets within hours of receiving the Heights.

Syrian Information Minister Mohsen Bilal threatened on Monday evening to return the Golan Heights to Syrian hands “by way of resistance if Israel [rejects] the Arab peace initiative.”

Bilal did not elaborate, but some analysts raised the possibility of either a full scale conventional war or a terror campaign in the Golan as one of the means to undertake a mukawama (“resistance” in Arabic).

After saying that “Syria wishes to revive the peace process with Israel with the help of US and Russian mediators,” Bilal immediately added a threat, saying that “if Israel [rejects] the Arab peace initiative, the only way to get the Golan Heights back would be the way of resistance.”

Bilal’s belligerent remarks followed on the heels of a visit by Syrian-born American businessman Abe Suleiman to Jerusalem last week.

Suleiman promised the Knesset’s Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee that “peace with Syria could be achieved within six months.”

George Jabour, a Syrian member of parliament, said Suleiman was speaking on his own behalf and was in no way affiliated with the Syrian leadership. “Suleiman has zero credibility in the eyes of Syrians,” Jabour said.

Bilal echoed Jabour’s statements in an interview he gave on Syrian TV on Saturday, quoted by SANA (the Syrian Arab News Agency). He said that all the Syrian people stood behind President Bashar Assad’s leadership for the achievement of just and comprehensive peace in the region.

He defined this “just and comprehensive peace” as the restoration of the “whole occupied Syrian Golan,” what remained of the Lebanese territories under occupation, and the establishment of a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital. Bilal also demanded the recognition of the Palestinian refugees’ right to return to their homeland.

While Bilal echoed the tenets of the Arab peace initiative, rejected by Israel wholesale, his demands went beyond the more recent Saudi initiative, which remains vague on the question of the right of return.

Original Link.

(U.K.) Polygamous Husbands Can Claim Cash for Their Harems

Wednesday, April 18th, 2007

The U.K. continues to surrender to Islam. Now they are offering benefits (free cash) to polygamous husbands (who are primarily Muslim) for the extra wives they have. This is a benefit (cash) that is not offered to people who don’t have extra wives.
Read on…

Polygamous husbands settling in Britain with multiple wives can claim extra benefits for their “harems” even though bigamy is a crime in the UK, it has emerged.

Opposition MPs are demanding an urgent change in the law, claiming that the Government is recognising and rewarding a custom which has no legal status and which is “alien” to this country’s cultural traditions.

Officials said yesterday a review was now under way into whether the state should continue to pay out income support, jobseeker’s allowance and housing and council tax benefits to ‘extra’ spouses.

Islamic law allows a man to take up to four wives, providing he can provide for them fairly and equally. But British law only ever recognises one spouse, while bigamy is punishable by up to seven years in jail.

However, if a husband and his wives arrive and settle in Britain having wed in a country where polygamy is legal, then the UK benefits system recognises his extra wives as dependents and pays them accordingly.

The Department of Work and Pensions admitted yesterday it had no figures on how many families are claiming for multiple wives.

Official DWP guidelines on housing and council tax benefit states: “If you were legally married to more than one partner under the laws of a country that permits this, then your relationship is called a polygamous marriage.

“In this case your household consists of you and any partners who live with you and to whom you are married.”

Officials were unable to say when the rules were brought in, claiming they had “evolved over decades”.

Tory MP for Monmouth David Davies condemned the arrangements as “appalling”, and called for an immediate halt to the payments.

He said: “People who come to this country must be prepared to abide by our laws and rules. Polygamy is completely alien to our cultural and legal tradition, and it’s disgraceful that our benefits system is recognising and rewarding it.

“Why are some people in Government falling over themselves to undermine every tradition that has made this country what it is?”

Mr Davies warned that human rights laws and equality regulations could open the door for gays to demand similar recognition for multiple partnerships, with groups of men or women presenting themselves as polygamous “families”.

Hugh McKinney, of the National Family Campaign, said: “Polygamy has never been tolerated under Britain’s legal system.

“People arriving from another country should conform to our laws rather than the other way around.”

There are thought to be thousands of polygamous marriages in Britain not recognised in law – mostly within the Muslim community.

Muslim couples are only married in the eyes of the state if they undergo a register office wedding as well as a Nikah, or religious ceremony.

A spokesman for the Muslim Council of Britain said it was quite common for men here to undergo more than one Nikah with different wives. This does not count as bigamy since only the first marriage is legally recognised.

A DWP official insisted the rules did not “reward” polygamy, as second wives receive less in benefits than single women. A single person can claim just under £60 per week in jobseeker’s allowance, while couples receive up to £92.80, but each ‘additional spouse’ in a polygamous marriage receives an extra £33.65.

Original Link.