Archive for December 9th, 2008

Manger Scene to Feature 2 Josephs, 2 Marys at Homosexual Festival

Tuesday, December 9th, 2008

A “gay” Dutch group has plans to hijack a traditionally Christian holiday by hosting its own “Pink Christmas” festival – complete with church services and a homosexual Nativity featuring two Josephs and two Marys.

Amsterdam’s ProGay will put on a 10-day festival with parties, an open-air market, homosexual movies and ice skating. The group has even scheduled church services for Christmas day, the Associated Press reports.

Frank van Dalen, ProGay chairman, told reporters his group is hosting the event to boost “choices for homosexual men and women” during Christmas week.

“Right now, there’s not much to do,” he said.

The celebration will promote homosexuality and religion, van Dalen said.

However, an organization named Christians for Truth claims the “gay” manger scene “mocks the core concepts of evangelism.”

“By putting Joseph and Mary down as homosexuals, a cracked human fantasy is being tacked on to history from the Bible,” the group said in a statement.

The live Nativity is scheduled to begin Dec. 21. Van Dalen told the AP that Christians should not take offense to the festival, because it is only intended to be a “wink” at heterosexual assumptions and promote Amsterdam as a “gay” capital.

“Christmas is about more than religion, it’s also about love and families, not to mention shopping,” he said. “Two men or two women can form a family too these days, even one with a child.”

The Netherlands legalized same-sex unions in 2001, and “gays” are allowed to adopt. The Dutch Cabinet participated in an Amsterdam “gay” pride boat parade Aug. 2. Van Dalen attended the event and said he was very pleased with “Christian participation.” Several masses were held on that day.

“So far Orthodox Christians believed in two separate worlds, as if homosexuality is not part of their own closed society,” van Dalen said. “This boat proves them wrong.”

Original Link.

“The Meaning of Mumbai” by Thomas Sowell

Tuesday, December 9th, 2008

Will the horrors unleashed by Islamic terrorists in Mumbai cause any second thoughts by those who are so anxious to start weakening the American security systems currently in place, including government interceptions of international phone calls and the holding of terrorists at Guantanamo?

Maybe. But never underestimate partisan blindness in Washington or in the mainstream media where, if the Bush administration did it, then it must be wrong.

Contrary to some of the more mawkish notions of what a government is supposed to be, its top job is the protection of the people. Nobody on 9/11 would have thought that we would see nothing comparable again in this country for seven long years.

Many people seem to have forgotten how, in the wake of 9/11, every great national event– the World Series, Christmas, New Year’s, the Super Bowl– was under the shadow of a fear that this was when the terrorists would strike again.

They didn’t strike again here, even though they have struck in Spain, Indonesia, England and India, among other places. Does anyone imagine that this was because they didn’t want to hit America again?

Could this have had anything to do with all the security precautions that liberals have been complaining about so bitterly, from the interception of international phone calls to forcing information out of captured terrorists?

Too many people refuse to acknowledge that benefits have costs, even if that cost means only having no more secrecy when making international phone calls than you have when sending e-mails, in a world where computer hackers abound. There are people who refuse to give up anything, even to save their own lives.

A very shrewd observer of the deterioration of Western societies, British writer Theodore Dalrymple, said: “This mental flabbiness is decadence, and at the same time a manifestation of the arrogant assumption that nothing can destroy us.”

There are growing numbers of things that can destroy us. The Roman Empire lasted a lot longer than the United States has lasted, and yet it too was destroyed.

Millions of lives were blighted for centuries thereafter, because the barbarians who destroyed Rome were incapable of replacing it with anything at all comparable. Neither are those who threaten to destroy the United States today.

The destruction of the United States will not require enough nuclear bombs to annihilate cities and towns across America. After all, the nuclear destruction of just two cities was enough to force Japan to surrender– and the Japanese had far more willingness to fight and die than most Americans have today.

Read the rest of the article here.

“The Death of the Pro-Life Movement” by Dr. Paul Kengor

Tuesday, December 9th, 2008

The victory for Barack Obama and the Democratic Party on Tuesday is the death of the pro-life movement as we know it. The pro-life movement has sought to reverse abortion through legislative action and the courts, and made tremendous gains throughout eight years of George W. Bush, just enough to place the nation at a turning point. Unfortunately, it failed to turn the corner, to the close deal, on November 4, 2008, in large part because of the remarkable unpopularity of President Bush. This terrifically pro-life president will now see his pro-life legacy vanish very quickly.

The nation now faces the once unthinkable approval of the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA), which Barack Obama says will be the “first thing” he signs as president. FOCA will nationalize abortion, superseding and overturning abortion restrictions in every state. In the words of NARAL Pro-Choice America, the act would “codify Roe v. Wade into law and guarantee a woman’s right to choose in all 50 states.” Or, as the National Organization for Women excitedly proclaims, FOCA would “sweep away hundreds of anti-abortion laws [and] policies.” In one stroke, this bill, introduced in Congress in April 2007—and co-sponsored by Obama—will wipe out all the fully bipartisan abortion restrictions passed by Democratic and Republican legislatures over the past 35 years.

Obama made that promise in a July 17, 2007 speech to Planned Parenthood, a group that he calls a “safety-net provider.” As Obama made clear in that speech, he views abortion-delivery services as basic government services—services in support of a woman’s “fundamental right” to an abortion. With the huge majority he will enjoy from an overwhelmingly Democratic Congress, President Obama will get what he wants.

Obama’s defenders tried to explain away his votes in Illinois rejecting medical care for newborns who survive abortions. With FOCA, that shouldn’t matter, since it eliminates state restrictions regardless.

President Obama will also likely secure taxpayer funding of abortion, government-provided abortion for women in the military, American money to international abortion groups like the UNFPA, federal funding of embryonic research, repeal of the Hyde Amendment, and much more.

In essence, we’re looking at the strong possibility of unrestricted, taxpayer-funded abortion through the entirety of a mother’s pregnancy. There will be no Republican legislative body that can check this. Such change promised by Obama is unprecedented in presidential history.

All of that will happen before President Obama even begins appointing pro-choice judges. If I may hazard a prediction, I believe Obama will have not only four years to mold the courts but eight years. He’s the first Democrat since LBJ to win over 50 percent of the vote. Not even Bill Clinton did that. Add in the fact that an astoundingly sympathetic media will protect him, that the economy will fully recover by 2012, that Iraq will not be a liability for him, and you have a two-term presidency in the making.

Read the rest of the article here.

Newsweek: Bible OK With Same-Sex ‘Marriage’

Tuesday, December 9th, 2008

Lisa Miller [Newsweek’s religion editor] claims that “traditional marriage,” as currently defined by moral and social conservatives today, did not exist in biblical times. “First, while the Bible and Jesus say many important things about love and family, neither explicitly defines marriage as between one man and one woman,” she writes. “And second, as the examples above illustrate, no sensible modern person wants marriage — theirs or anyone else’s — to look in its particulars anything like what the Bible describes.”

She had previously cited Abraham’s adultery with his concubine Hagar as well as Jacob’s two wives, with whom he had his sons, the leaders of the twelve tribes of Israel. OneNewsNow turned to Matt Barber at Liberty Counsel for his assessment. “This is biblical relativism on steroids,” he contends. “You know, scripture says woe to those who call evil good and good evil, and I say woe to Newsweek for even printing this drivel.”

“Christ was very clear as to marriage. He said it is between a man and a woman,” Barber points out. “The Apostle Paul in the New Testament points out that homosexuality is one of the sexual sins among which, if people engage in that sin, they cannot, quote, ‘inherit the kingdom of God.'”

Original Link.

‘Call in Gay’ Day Protests Bans on Homosexual ‘Marriage’

Tuesday, December 9th, 2008

I think it’s a really bad idea to take time off frivolously during an economic downturn. This is pretty frivolous.

Organizers of “Day Without a Gay” — scheduled to coincide with International Human Rights Day and modeled after similar work stoppages by Latino immigrants — also are encouraging people to perform volunteer work and refrain from spending money.

Sean Hetherington, a West Hollywood comedian and personal trainer, dreamed up the idea with his boyfriend, Aaron Hartzler, after reading online that a few angry homosexual-rights activists were calling for a daylong strike to protest California voters’ passage last month of Proposition 8, which reversed this year’s state Supreme Court decision allowing same-sex “marriage.” The couple thought it would be more effective and less divisive if people were asked to perform community service instead of staying home with their wallets shut. Dozens of nonprofit agencies, from the National Women’s Law Center in Washington to a Methodist church in Fresno collecting food for the homeless, have posted opportunities for volunteers on the couple’s website.

“We are all for a boycott if that is what brings about a sense of community for people,” said Hetherington, 30, who plans to spend Wednesday volunteering at an inner-city school. “You can take away from the economy and give back in other ways.”

Original Link.

Pakistan Arrests 20 Mumbai Suspects, Won’t Extradite to India

Tuesday, December 9th, 2008

Pakistan is already making a huge mistake in it’s dealings with India over the Mumbai terrorist. They should turn the terrorist over to India immediately.

Pakistan will not hand over to India captured terror suspects believed to be responsible for last month’s deadly attacks on Mumbai, Pakistan’s foreign minister said Tuesday, insisting the nation will try militants under its own laws.

Pakistan intensified its crackdown on the militant group suspected in the Mumbai attacks by arresting 20 more people Tuesday.

A senior Pakistani security official said troops raided at least five more offices of militant group Lashkar-e-Taiba in Pakistan’s portion of the disputed region of Kashmir in the past 24 hours.

Security forces were acting on information gleaned from Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi, an alleged mastermind of the attacks who was picked up in the same region on Sunday.

“The arrests are being made for our own investigations,” said Islamabad’s Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi told Sky News. “Even if allegations are proved against any suspect, he will not be handed over to India.

“We will proceed against those arrested under Pakistani laws,” Qureshi said.

Original Link.