Archive for April 19th, 2010

California State Assembly Basically Declaring Public Schools “Morality-Free Zones”

Monday, April 19th, 2010

The homosexual activist, in California, are pushing harder than ever to indoctrinate the children, that almost any deviant sexual behavior is good and “normal”. They may soon have a law in place prohibiting anyone in schools from even pointing out the problems with homosexuality and other sexual deviant behavior.

In the opinion of a traditional values leader in California, the state assembly has taken more action to declare that public schools are “morality-free zones.”

The latest measure, ACR 82, is the sixth passed by the California legislature, and according to Randy Thomasson, president of, that amounts to “school sexual indoctrination.” Though it is disguised as creating “discrimination-free zones,” he points out the bill has caused a great deal of controversy.

“[Under the legislation] homosexuality, bisexuality, and transsexuality must be positively spoken or written about and not ever negatively spoken or written about or deemed to be negatively spoken or written about,” he explains.

Did you catch that? One will not even be allowed to point out the negative effects of homosexuality without risking punishment. Religious arguments aside, we have shown, on this blog, numerous times, the negative physical and mental problems that are associated with homosexuality and other deviant sexual behaviors. Under this law, those scientific FACTS won’t even be allowed.

Thomasson adds that a student, teacher, or parent who speaks about traditional family values on campus could face a complaint or mandatory counseling, “but it’s not limited to that. Suspension, detention, [and] other types of reprimand can certainly be in the mix here, and the hammer can certainly come down hard, depending on the district.”

Original Link.

“A Darkening Mood” by Michael G. Mickey

Monday, April 19th, 2010

Is it just me or is there a somber mood overtaking the United States of America these days, one as darkening in spirit as the volcanic ash cloud presently grounding thousands of aircraft in Europe?

I don’t know about everyone but I’m certainly hearing from a lot of people who are sorrowed, bewildered and frustrated by the leadership we presently have in Washington, most of it a direct result of the man occupying the Oval Office at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Barack Hussein Obama.

Hardly a day goes by, or so it seems, that President Obama fails to do something that endangers our nation, emboldens our enemies, or angers our God. A few recent examples would be:

  • acting as though obtaining a nuclear weapon free world is a realistic goal, especially when Iran, the world’s #1 state sponsor of radical Islamic terrorism, is nearing nuclear weapon possession.
  • stating that America is a military superpower, “whether we like it or not“, as though that’s a bad thing when radical Islam is on the verge of going nuclear.
  • instructing the Health and Human Services Department to draft rules requiring federally subsidized hospitals to grant all patients, including gay and lesbian partners, the right to designate people who can visit and consult with them at “crucial moments”, an unapologetic attempt to normalize in our society sexual relationships which God has strictly forbidden and explicitly condemned.
  • trying to figure out “how best to balance support for Israel against other American interests.” In other words, trying to figure out how best to throw Israel – the apple of God’s eye – under the bus!

It’s the last topic I’m interested in focusing on today, the prophetic implications of which have oft been detailed here (Zechariah 12:3, Genesis 12:2-3) but are worth discussing again in light of recent events.

No sooner did President Obama paint what seemed to be a picture of the United States going the route of appeasing Israel’s enemies (as opposed to standing arm-in-arm with its ally Israel) than Secretary of State Hillary Clinton began imploring Israel to make concessions to the Palestinians in the interest of advancing the Obama administration’s goal of bringing peace to the Middle East, the strategy of which I will be the first to admit is little more than a continuation of the previous administration’s approach to the problem, minus the overt disrespect recently shown to Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu during a visit to Washington.

Where Secretary of State Clinton is concerned, the stance she’s presently taking isn’t the one she took before accepting her current role in the Obama administration and it’s stirring up trouble for Israel, as highlighted in an Israel National News article:

When Clinton served as senator of New York she supported Israel’s position, stating that Jerusalem’s status as Israel’s undivided capital “must never be questioned.” However, since her appointment as President Barack Obama’s secretary of state, Clinton has changed her position in favor of the PA, and recently called the construction of housing in the Jewish neighborhood of Ramat Shlomo “insulting”.

Following the Obama administration’s insistence that Israel cease construction in much of Jerusalem, the PA took up the same demand and PA leaders have now stated that they will not hold direct talks with Israel as long as Jews are allowed to build in areas once under Jordanian control – including historically Jewish neighborhoods such as the Old City.

I don’t have to tell anyone who has ever read Zechariah 12:3 or Genesis 12:2-3 and understands that Almighty God says what He means and means what He says that the Obama administration is playing with fire where its foreign policy toward Israel is concerned.

God has promised us (promised us) that all (even the mighty United States of America) that burden themselves with Jerusalem will be “cut to pieces” for their disrespect of God’s everlasting covenant with the Jewish people. Is it any wonder, therefore, that conservative Christians, already having been labeled as potential right-wing extremists by Team Obama, are suffering from an ever-darkening mood in relation to how it views its leadership in Washington? I don’t think so.

If God’s Word is true – and all conservative Christians believe it is with good cause – the Obama administration’s foreign policy toward Israel potentially poses an existential threat to our nation, which is ironic considering the Obama administration views conservative Christians as an existential threat to their agenda.

There is little more to say on this topic aside from the cold, hard truth. Like it or not, believe it or not, if we continue on the course we’re presently on as a nation, hanging Israel out to dry in defiance of the Most High God’s will, the United States of America is doomed. Period. That’s something the Obama administration might want to consider the next time they’re trying to figure out “how best to balance support for Israel against other American interests”, not one of which matters if God’s hand of protection is lifted off our nation at a dangerous moment in world history like the one we presently find ourselves in!

President Obama said, as referred to earlier, the United States is a superpower “whether we like it or not”, the very statement of which leads me to believe he’d just as soon see us be something else, perhaps a banana republic. If that’s his end game as some people suspect is the case, picking a fight with God could go a long way toward achieving it as a narcissistic world leader reminiscent of President Obama found out the hard way a long, long time ago.

Exodus 5:1-2:

1. And afterward Moses and Aaron went in, and told Pharaoh, Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, Let my people go, that they may hold a feast unto me in the wilderness.

2. And Pharaoh said, Who is the LORD, that I should obey his voice to let Israel go? I know not the LORD, neither will I let Israel go.Who is the Lord that the great Barack Obama should obey His voice as recorded in Zechariah 12:3, eh?

The last words of William Tyndale, who printed the first English version of the New Testament, prior to being strangled and burned at the stake, were, “Lord, open the eyes of the King of England.”

Lord, please open the eyes of the man who considers himself King of the United States of America – Barack Hussein Obama.

Original Link.

Court to Hear Arguments on Campus Christian Group

Monday, April 19th, 2010

We’ll need to keep an eye on this case. Whereas it’s not getting much attention from the media, the crux of the case could be monumental to the religious community. The ruling will have a far reaching effects.

WASHINGTON (AP) — In a case that pits nondiscrimination policies against freedom of religion, the Supreme Court is grappling with whether universities and colleges can deny official recognition to Christian student groups that refuse to let non-Christians and gays join.

The high court was to hear arguments Monday from the Christian Legal Society at the University of California’s Hastings College of the Law. The Christian group said its constitutional freedoms of speech, religion and association were violated when it was denied recognition as a student group by the San Francisco-based school.

The group has made this argument at several universities around the nation with mixed results. The high court’s decision could set a national standard for universities and colleges to follow when Christian and other groups that want to exclude certain people apply for money and recognition from the school.

Hastings said it turned the Christian Legal Society down because all recognized campus groups, which are eligible for financing and other benefits, may not exclude people due to religious belief, sexual orientation and other reasons.

The Christian group requires that voting members sign a statement of faith. The group also regards “unrepentant participation in or advocacy of a sexually immoral lifestyle” as being inconsistent with the statement of faith.

The 30-member Hastings group sued in federal court after it was told in 2004 that it was being denied recognition because of its policy of exclusion. Federal courts in San Francisco, including the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, rejected the group’s assertions that the law school’s policy violated its constitutional rights.

According to a society news release, it invites all students to its meetings.

“However, CLS voting members and officers must affirm its Statement of Faith,” the release said. “CLS interprets the Statement of Faith to include the belief that Christians should not engage in sexual conduct outside of a marriage between a man and a woman.”

The Christian Legal Society has chapters at universities nationwide and has sued other universities on the same grounds. It won at Southern Illinois University, when the university settled with the group in 2007 and recognized its membership and leadership policies.

But a federal judge in Montana said in May 2009 that the University of Montana law school did not discriminate against the Christian Legal Society when it refused to give the group Student Bar Association money because of its policies.

Lawyers for the student group say it’s only fair that groups with different viewpoints are treated equitably by university officials.

“In an earlier era, public universities frequently attempted to bar gay rights groups from recognized student organization status on account of their supposed encouragement of what was then illegal behavior,” Michael McConnell, a society lawyer, said in court papers. “The courts made short shrift of those policies.” McConnell argues: “The shoe is now on the other foot in much of academia. The question here is whether such groups as CLS will receive comparable First Amendment protection.”

The California university said it requires all registered student organizations to be nondiscriminatory if they want to operate on campus, regardless of viewpoint.

Groups that support gay rights “cannot exclude students who believe homosexuality is morally wrong any more than CLS is permitted to exclude students who believe it is not,” university lawyer Gregory Garre said in court papers.

Original Link.

Poll: Trust in Big Government Near Historic Low

Monday, April 19th, 2010

People are finally being pushed outside of their comfort zones by the government takeover of more and more facets of our lives. Most people are “ho-hum” about things until those things start to impact their lives directly. People are starting to wake up to the fact that Washington, specifically Obama, Pelosi and Reid are impacting almost all of us with their liberal policies; and people don’t like it.

WASHINGTON — Nearly 80 percent of Americans say they can’t trust Washington and they have little faith that the massive federal bureaucracy can solve the nation’s ills, according to a survey from the Pew Research Center that shows public confidence in the federal government at one of the lowest points in a half-century.

The poll released Sunday illustrates the ominous situation facing President Barack Obama and the Democratic Party as they struggle to maintain their comfortable congressional majorities in this fall’s elections. Midterm prospects are typically tough for the party in power. Add a toxic environment like this and lots of incumbent Democrats could be out of work.

The survey found that just 22 percent of those questioned say they can trust Washington almost always or most of the time and just 19 percent say they are basically content with it. Nearly half say the government negatively effects their daily lives, a sentiment that’s grown over the past dozen years.

This anti-government feeling has driven the tea party movement, reflected in fierce protests this past week.

“The government’s been lying to people for years. Politicians make promises to get elected, and when they get elected, they don’t follow through,” says Cindy Wanto, 57, a registered Democrat from Pennsylvania who joined several thousand for a rally in Washington on April 15 — the tax filing deadline. “There’s too much government in my business. It was a problem before Obama, but he’s certainly not helping fix it.”

Majorities in the survey call Washington too big and too powerful, and say it’s interfering too much in state and local matters. The public is split over whether the government should be responsible for dealing with critical problems or scaled back to reduce its power, presumably in favor of personal responsibility.

About half say they want a smaller government with fewer services, compared with roughly 40 percent who want a bigger government providing more. The public was evenly divided on those questions long before Obama was elected. Still, a majority supported the Obama administration exerting greater control over the economy during the recession.

“Trust in government rarely gets this low,” said Andrew Kohut, director of the nonpartisan center that conducted the survey. “Some of it’s backlash against Obama. But there are a lot of other things going on.”

And, he added: “Politics has poisoned the well.”

The survey found that Obama’s policies were partly to blame for a rise in distrustful, anti-government views. In his first year in office, the president orchestrated a government takeover of Detroit automakers, secured a $787 billion stimulus package and pushed to overhaul the health care system.

Original Link.