No Different than Jonah

Jeremiah 17:9
The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?

I’m posting this with no finger-pointing or accusations.  Just plain truth; though somewhat softened since my godly mother, and counterfeit Christian father both dished out truth in the fashion of a railroad worker wielding a sledgehammer.
It’s also a personal note to my Christian family; many sensitive souls there contained in a body of true believers, all striving to the perfection.

*                       *                       *                       *

I’m starting this at 0530hrs after my graveyard shift.  I’m both physically and mentally tired, but this must be posted while I have the initiative to follow through with what’s been on my mind.
We’re no different than Jonah.  It’s a personal issue for me.  Some like to refer to Peter; who had said

“33 Peter answered and said unto him, Though all men shall be offended because of thee, yet will I never be offended.”

Jesus responded:

34 Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, That this night, before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice.
35 Peter said unto him, Though I should die with thee, yet will I not deny thee. Likewise also said all the disciples.

We know he subsequently did deny Him three times.

For me, this life has been “100 miles of bad road” and that mellow analogy only so as to not offend my Christian family.  As sinful creatures, we all have our breaking points. We have those “thus far and no farther”, “end of the line”, the “had it up to here” moments.
The directive from Christ in response to Peter in Matthew 18:
21 Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times?
22 Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven.

“seventy times seven”…  We FAIL!
Jonah was directed by God to Nineveh:

“…go to Nineveh, that great city, and cry against it; for their wickedness is come up before me.”

SO… most know Jonah fled, and ended up in the belly of a “great fish” (it does NOT say “whale”) and after three days the Lord delivered him.
3
And the word of the Lord came unto Jonah the second time, saying,
2 Arise, go unto Nineveh, that great city, and preach unto it the preaching that I bid thee.
3 So Jonah arose, and went unto Nineveh, according to the word of the Lord. Now Nineveh was an exceeding great city of three days’ journey.
4 And Jonah began to enter into the city a day’s journey, and he cried, and said, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown.
5 So the people of Nineveh believed God, and proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth, from the greatest of them even to the least of them.
6 For word came unto the king of Nineveh, and he arose from his throne, and he laid his robe from him, and covered him with sackcloth, and sat in ashes.
7 And he caused it to be proclaimed and published through Nineveh by the decree of the king and his nobles, saying, Let neither man nor beast, herd nor flock, taste any thing: let them not feed, nor drink water:
8 But let man and beast be covered with sackcloth, and cry mightily unto God: yea, let them turn every one from his evil way, and from the violence that is in their hands.
9 Who can tell if God will turn and repent, and turn away from his fierce anger, that we perish not?
10 And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.
4
But it displeased Jonah exceedingly, and he was very angry.

Any who think they would not copy Jonah needs to “fess up”.

I’d be just like Jonah. “Why” you may ask?
We are far from perfect as afore-mentioned.  Perhaps few really know about the Ninevehites.  Here it is; I ask those sensitive souls to bear with me. [gold font my emphasis]
Excerpt from https://www.bible-history.com/biblestudy/nineveh.html

“Because we read of the judgments upon Assyria we might tend to look upon them as some demon-possessed frothing people of whom nothing comes but evil. But the truth for Nineveh and the Assyrian Empire is true of every nation on earth. They had many kinds of people, subject to the cultural norms of the time, and doing the best they can to raise their children, survive and prosper. God through Jonah showed great mercy on its people because they repented hearing the word of God. (8th Century BC )
The Assyrians brought many scientific, philosophical and practical advances to humanity including many inventions that we take for granted today. Everyday most of us lock our doors when we leave the house, locks and keys were invented in Assyria. They also invented a system that kept time and ascribed 360 degrees to a circle. They are given credit for inventing paved roads, the first postal system, the first use of iron, the first libraries, the first plumbing, flush toilets and aqueducts. They came up with the first governmental administration of dividing of territories ruled by local governors reporting to a central authority.
The military rulers, as in many other nations, could be a brutal breed. They ruled their empire and subdued nations with absolute terror.”

“I destroyed, I demolished, I burned. I took their warriors prisoner and impaled them on stakes before their cities. Flayed the nobles, as many as had rebelled, and spread their skins out on the piles [of dead corpses] many of the captives I burned in a fire. Many I took alive; from some I cut off their hands to the write, from other I cut off their noses, ears and fingers; I put out the eyes of many of the soldiers.” (TimeFrame 1500-600 BC by Time-Life Books) Assyrian War Bulletin (1000 B.C.) http://www.public.iastate.edu/~cfford/342worldhistoryearly.html “
“I slew two hundred and sixty fighting men; I cut off their heads and made pyramids thereof. I slew one of every two. I built a wall before the great gates of the city; I flayed the chief men of the rebels, and I covered the wall with their skins. Some of them were enclosed alive in the bricks of the wall, some of them were crucified on stakes along the wall; I caused a great multitude of them to be flayed in my presence, and I covered the wall with their skins. I gathered together the heads in the form of crowns, and their pierced bodies in the form of garlands.”

This is only a small example of their wickedness and brutality. I won’t be graphic about the ritual child sacrifices they practiced, nor do we need to enmire ourselves in other perverse activities; or pagan fertility rituals.
Asking Jonah to witness to them, so they would repent and be forgiven, would be akin to asking a Holocaust survivor to go to one of their Nazi captors and forgive them for their heinous crimes – It isn’t going to happen.
Isaiah 64:6
But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.
There are two types of people in this world – Saved by grace sinners, and unrepentant sinners. ‘Nuff said.

“It Can’t Happen Here”… Oh Yes it CAN!

Despite all the warnings and admonitions in the Bible. “Christendom” throughout the centuries has engaged in persecuting God’s chosen in His name.  The demon seed of Antisemitism lives on; and is on the increase in Europe, aided by multiculturalism, and an abysmal failure to recognize the dangers posed by unfettered Muslim immigration.  Islam has, at their core, always sought to annihilate Israel.  America is NOT innocent in this attitude:

American attitudes towards Jews

Antisemitism in the United States was also indicated by national public opinion polls taken from the mid nineteen thirties to the late nineteen forties. The results showed that over half the American population saw Jews as greedy and dishonest. These polls also found that many Americans believed that Jews were too powerful in the United States. Similar polls were also taken, one of which posed that 35–40 percent of the population was prepared to accept an anti-Jewish campaign.

In a 1938 poll, approximately 60 percent of the respondents held a low opinion of Jews, labeling them “greedy,” “dishonest,” and “pushy.”^[24] 41 percent of respondents agreed that Jews had “too much power in the United States,” and this figure rose to 58 percent by 1945. In 1939 a Roper poll found that only thirty-nine percent of Americans felt that Jews should be treated like other people. Fifty-three percent believed that “Jews are different and should be restricted” and ten percent believed that Jews should be deported.^[25] Several surveys taken from 1940 to 1946 found that Jews were seen as a greater threat to the welfare of the United States than any other national, religious, or racial group.^[26]

 – Courtesy of Wikipedia –

“Antisemitism in the United States”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

KKK: Nazi salute and  Holocaust denial

“History of the Jews in the United States”

In the mid-1600s, Peter Stuyvesant, the last Dutch Director-General of the colony of New Amsterdam, sought to bolster the position of the Dutch Reformed Church by trying to reduce religious competition from denominations such as Jews, Lutherans, Catholics and Quakers. He stated that the Jews were “deceitful”, “very repugnant”, and “hateful enemies and blasphemers of the name of Christ”. He warned in a subsequent letter that in “giving them liberty we cannot (then) refuse the Lutherans and Papists”. However, religious plurality was already a legal-cultural tradition in New Amsterdam and in the Netherlands. His superiors at the Dutch West India Company in Amsterdam overruled him in all matters of intolerance.

In 1939 a Roper poll found that only thirty-nine percent of Americans felt that Jews should be treated like other people. Fifty-three percent believed that “Jews are different and should be restricted” and ten percent believed that Jews should be deported.^[30] Several surveys taken from 1940 to 1946 found that Jews were seen as a greater threat to the welfare of the United States than any other national, religious, or racial group. [4] It has been estimated that 190,000 – 200,000 Jews could have been saved during the Second World War had it not been for bureaucratic obstacles to immigration deliberately created by Breckinridge Long and others.

In a speech at an America First rally on September 11, 1941 in Des Moines, Iowa entitled “Who Are the War Agitators?”, Charles Lindbergh claimed that three groups had been “pressing this country toward war”: the Roosevelt Administration, the British, and the Jews – and complained about what he insisted was the Jews’ “large ownership and influence in our motion pictures, our press, our radio and our government.” ^[32] The antisemitism of Lindbergh is one of the subjects of the novel The Plot Against America (2004) by Philip Roth.

Unofficial antisemitism was also widespread in the first half of the century. For example, to limit the growing number of Jewish students between 1919-1950s a number of private liberal arts universities and medical and dental schools employed Numerus clausus. These included Harvard University, Columbia University, Cornell University, and Boston University^{[citation needed]}. In 1925 Yale University, which already had such admissions preferences as “character”, “solidity”, and “physical characteristics” added a program of legacy preference admission spots for children of Yale alumni, in an explicit attempt to put the brakes on the rising percentage of Jews in the student body. This was soon copied by other Ivy League and other schools^{[citation needed]}, and admissions of Jews were kept down to 10% through the 1950s. Such policies were for the most part discarded during the early 1960s.

Some cults also support conspiracy theories regarding Jews as dominating and taking over the world. These cults are often vitriolic and severely anti-semitic. For instance, the Necedah Shrine Cult from the 1950s on to the mid-1980s, has Mary Ann Van Hoof receiving antisemitic “visions” from the Virgin Mary telling her that the Rothschilds, a prominent Jewish banking family, are “mongrel yids(Jews)” bent on dominating the entire world economy through international banking. Most of the worlds problems, from poverty to world wars, are the cause of International Banking Jews and their “satanic secret society,” according to Van Hoof.[5]

American antisemitism underwent a modest revival in the late twentieth century. The Nation of Islam under Louis Farrakhan claimed that Jews were responsible for slavery, economic exploitation of black labor, selling alcohol and drugs in their communities, and unfair domination of the economy. Jesse Jackson issued his infamous “Hymietown” remarks during the 1984 Presidential primary campaign.

According to ADL surveys begun in 1964, African-Americans are “significantly more likely” than white Americans to hold antisemitic beliefs, although there is a strong correlation between education level and the rejection of anti-Semitic stereotypes.^[33]

Technology continues to blur the lines between science fiction, and reality

 

This started with a post at NOW THE END BEGINS, a Christian site.  It was about Trump; the plethora of comments, and varied points of view were discomforting to me.  I hesitate to comment on fallacious views of prophecy and the end times; suffice to say that if you choose to go there, some of the column’s comments are as scary as the post itself. ( Link HERE)

The following video was obtained there, though I used the YouTube address to embed it. We continue to blur the lines between science fiction, and reality at a frightening pace.  Other facets related to this below this video.

People are getting microchip implants in the back of their hands in an effort to make daily life a little bit easier

“And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.” Revelation 13:16,17 (KJV)

EDITOR’S NOTE: The actual Mark of the Beast cannot show up until the Antichrist comes on the scene after the Rapture of the Church. But it sure is getting close…

It’s something you’ve likely seen in the movies — it’s something you may not know is also happening in real life.  From opening doors to making contacts to sending emails — a growing group of people are all-in.

People here in the Twin Cities are embracing the extra-personal technology. Set in the far-off year of 2021 is the 1995 film “Johnny Mnemonic.”  A movie that inspired a boy named Tim Shank, growing up in Indiana.

 

By PAN member whitetiger – Shaped by Suffering

Shaped by Suffering

Posted by whtetiger on February 19, 2014  in Faith in the Public Square     (Note – a PAN discussion forum “X” )

That’s why I take pleasure in my weaknesses, and in the insults, hardships, persecutions, and troubles that I suffer for Christ.  For when I am weak, then I am strong.

— 2 Corinthians 12:10

On a recent visit to North Carolina, I drove through a town named Mocksville. I should have been born there.  Prior to becoming a Christian, I always loved to mock other people.  So when I became a follower of Jesus, I was shocked to discover that I was the one being mocked.  People were laughing at me because of my faith in Christ.

This is what happened to Paul, but in a far more intense way.  Right after his conversion, he started preaching the gospel in Damascus.  But he was so powerful and persuasive that the religious leaders wanted him dead.

The Christians found out and devised a plan to help Paul escape.  They put him into a basket and lowered it over the city wall at night.  Think of the irony! Just a short time before, he was Saul of Tarsus, the notorious persecutor of Christians.  But then the hunter became the hunted. He was getting a taste of his own medicine.

His name change from Saul to Paul offers insight into the real transformation that took place. The first king of Israel was named Saul.  In contrast, Paul means “little.”  It would be like deliberately changing your name from Spike to Squirt.  Obviously, God had changed Paul into a man of humility.

Sometimes we want God to take certain things out of our lives that cause us pain. We pray again and again for those things to be removed.  But do we ever stop to think that God is using those things in our lives to transform us and make us more like Him?

TODAY’S RADIO PROGRAM: “What God is Like? — II”

TODAY’S BIBLE READING: Numbers 5-6, Psalm 22, Acts 26

http://www.harvest.org/devotional/daily-devotions/home.html

 

 

Major papers reject pro-life ad – image of baby “too controversial”

I used the link from Political Outcast to obtain this source material. They did a good cover story; however, the photo (and object of the commentary) was left out.  Their commentary included below Live Action News.

Media

Major papers reject pro-life ad – image of baby “too controversial”

• by Caleb Parke
• July 3, 2013, 9:30 am ET

A national pro-life organization is outraged after three major American newspapers rejected a pro-life ad as “too controversial.”

The Chicago Tribune, USA Today, and the LA Times refused to run an advertisement created by Heroic Media.

The ad features a hand holding a 20- to 24-week-old baby with the quote, “This child has no voice, which is why it depends on yours. Speak Up.”

Heroic Media Executive Director Joe Young said he was shocked and angered that the media outlets were willing to talk about the issue but were unwilling to show the reality of life at 20 weeks.

“I am disturbed that these papers would run article after article promoting the notion that abortion is a victimless act without consequences,” Young said. “The fact remains, children who are unique individuals – never again to be duplicated – are being killed in the most violent way imaginable and they feel the excruciating pain of that death.”

The newspapers took issue with the image of the baby.

“It seems as though it is okay to talk about the issue in general, but when you actually put a face to the discussion, then it becomes controversial,” Young said.

Last week after the House passed the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, Heroic Media put out a statement requesting that the pro-life community contact their senators and encourage them to consider and support the Act.

“Americans deserve to know the truth about the children sentenced to die for no fault of their own and that we have a chance to spare some of them through this legislation,” Young said.

The Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act prevents an abortionist from performing an abortion at or after 20 weeks, based on empirical scientific medical evidence that proves that unborn babies can feel pain. Science shows that at eight weeks after fertilization, the unborn child reacts to touch, and at 20 weeks, the unborn baby responds to what would be felt as pain.

The image shows a 20- to 24-week-old baby in a person’s hands. Heroic Media’s goal was to show what life looks like at 20 weeks. The non-profit organization has resubmitted the ad with a different image, now one of a 20-week-old baby in utero.

The Chicago Tribune has now agreed to run the ad with the second image as long as Heroic Media indicates that it is an advertisement.

“Our hope is that the American public begins to advance this debate with both the mother and child in mind,” Young said.

Heroic Media is a non-profit whose mission is to educate the public in general and reach women facing unplanned pregnancies with life-affirming alternatives through the use of mass media, such as television commercials, internet outreach, and billboards.

“This issue, the late-term killing of developing children, is one that should be addressed in the U.S. Senate, and we encourage our fellow citizens to let their Senators know our desire to see that happen,” Young said.

About Caleb Parke

        Caleb Parke is a recent graduate of Grove City College in Pennsylvania, born and raised on a small horse farm in Findlay, Ohio. He is a nerd for faith and freedom. You can follow him on twitter (@calebparke) and connect on Facebook.         View all posts by Caleb Parke →                                     

• Follow Caleb Parke on Twitter
• Facebook

http://liveactionnews.org/major-papers-reject-pro-life-ad-image-of-baby-too-controversial/

3 Major Newspapers Refuse Pro-Life Ad:  Baby Pictures  Are “Too Controversial”

Posted  12  hours ago by Philip Hodges

A pro-life organization called Heroic Media created an ad raising awareness  of the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act that would outlaw abortions  after 20 weeks. The ad featured a baby around 20 to 24 weeks being held  in a person’s hand. The caption beside the image read:  “This child has  no voice, which is why it needs yours.”

This group wanted to purchase ad space from certain newspapers, but three  major newspapers turned them down, because the image of the small child was “too  controversial.” It was the Chicago Tribune, LA Times and USA Today  that refused to run their ad.

So, Heroic Media changed the image to be of an unborn child in utero. The  Chicago Tribune decided that that was not “too controversial” as  long as the group indicated clearly that it was an advertisement. They agreed to  run the revised ad.

I don’t get what’s so “controversial” about a very small child. One of the  things Heroic Media wanted to get across was what life looked like at 20 weeks,  which is the legal threshold defined in the pro-life bill that passed the House  recently. They wanted to impress their viewers with how much of a baby a baby  really is at 20 weeks.

Probably the newspapers were worried about their readership. Readers might be  offended that they advertised for a pro-life group using a premature born baby  instead of an unborn one. Readers might accuse the newspapers of promoting an  advertisement that appeals to the emotions of others to support a pro-life  cause. Then, they might unsubscribe. And that means less money for the  newspaper.

Remember what happened to Matt Drudge in 1999? He wanted to use a picture of  an unborn child’s hand reaching through his mother’s uterus and holding on to  the doctor’s finger. The Fox network did not allow this, because they didn’t  want him using the picture to push a pro-life message. They argued that since  the photo wasn’t of an abortion, but of an unborn child being treated for spina  bifida, it had nothing to do with abortion and therefore, should not be used.  That’s when Drudge said the network was just trying to censor him, and he  left.

Of all the horrible and vulgar things that are allowed to be published in  newspapers and television shows, one of the few things that is just “too  controversial” to publish is a picture of a very young baby. Fox’s excuse was  that the photo wasn’t really related to abortion. Give me a break. Like they  really care about an image’s relevance to their topic. If it were any other  issue, they’d simply go for the most shocking picture. That’s what helps their  viewership. Same with newspapers. But if it’s a child, and the message is a  pro-life one, then all of sudden relevance becomes very important, and besides,  baby pictures are just “too controversial.”

Read more: http://politicaloutcast.com/2013/07/3-major-newspapers-refuse-pro-life-ad-baby-pictures-are-too-controversial/#ixzz2YTc3fohA

Creation Revolution – Bug-Eye Camera, Fly Robot and other Bio-Inspired Tech

 

Bug-Eye Camera, Fly Robot and other Bio-Inspired Tech

Posted on May 9, 2013

By David Coppedge

Like a bee sees. A new digital camera gets a visit  from its inspiration in this composite image. Credit: University of  Illinois/Beckman Institute    [Photo on right – “X”]

Incredible advancements in technology are coming from the imitation of  nature, but engineers cannot yet attain animal performance.

Look like a bug:  “New Camera Inspired by Insect Eyes,”  announced Science Now.   If you thought insects with their compound eyes had inferior vision to ours,  think that no more:

An insect’s compound eye is an engineering  marvel: high resolution, wide field of view, and  incredible sensitivity to motion, all in a compact package. Now, a  new digital camera provides the best-ever  imitation of a bug’s vision, using new optical materials and  techniques.  This technology could someday give patrolling  surveillance drones the same exquisite vision as a dragonfly on the  hunt.

In the Illustra film Metamorphosis, Dr.  Thomas Emmel notes that butterflies have better color vision than humans.   They can see from infrared to ultraviolet.  And in the Illustra  film Darwin’s  Dilemma, we see that compound eyes existed in the Cambrian  multicellular animals, including trilobites and anomalocaridids….

http://creationrevolution.com/2013/05/bug-eye-camera-fly-robot-and-other-bio-inspired-tech/#ixzz2SrSFxnEV

Continue Reading on crev.info

Changing the meaning of the language

Changing the meaning of the language

By Washington Times (DC)

America is awash in doublespeak.
Words such as “marriage,” “conservatism,” “bigotry,” “tolerance” and “brave” no longer have universal meaning, and this is no accident.

When confusion replaces clarity, the devil breaks out the champagne. It’s so much easier to push people toward the abyss when the stop signs are edited to say “whatever.”

Doublespeak is “language which makes the bad seem good, the negative seem positive, the unpleasant seem unattractive, or at least tolerable,” wrote William Lutz, author of the 1996 book “The New Doublespeak.”

Washington Post reporter Theresa Vargas gave a perfect example in her recent article lauding benighted Maryland parents who are pushing for open homosexuality in the Boy Scouts. As for opponents, well, they’re only concerned about “legal liability” and “how Scout leaders will prevent same-sex dating during overnight trips.”

Yeah, that’s it – two boys sipping on straws from the same soda. Ever-vigilant to fight prudery in a debauched age, liberal journalists are utterly puritanical when it comes to this topic. Perhaps they don’t want people to think about it too much.

The prize for doublespeak goes to the Post’s “Right Turn” columnist Jennifer Rubin. Her hot buttons are “social conservatives” and the Tea Party. She frequently urges the Republican Party to throw them overboard or face oblivion.
Why stop there? In the Post’s Sunday Outlook section, she redefined conservatism itself in a full-page screed entitled “Tear Down This Icon: Why the GOP Has to Get over Ronald Reagan.” Ms. Rubin says the Gipper was in a time warp and should be discounted. “The old guard has become convinced that Reagan’s solutions to the problems of his time were the essence of conservatism – not simply conservative ideas appropriate for that era,” she writes.

Funny, you never hear Democrats disowning Franklin Roosevelt or John F. Kennedy. Republicans, on the other hand, are supposed to abandon their principles, their most reliable voting bloc and their heroes if they know what’s good for them.
Which of Reagan’s conservative views were ephemeral? Opposition to socialism and communism? Belief in American exceptionalism? Market-based economics? Belief in the sanctity of life? Suspicion of big government? Reverence for the Almighty?

Reagan’s lodestars were his faith in God, the Constitution and the strengths of a free, industrious people. Ms. Rubin urges us to cast him aside and replace him with, uh, whatever the cool people think is cool right now.

“The public face of the GOP can no longer be aging, ill-tempered Reaganites such as John McCain and Jim DeMint,” Ms. Rubin scolds, “but must give way to a diverse, media-savvy generation that understands the America we actually live in. Only then can the essence of conservatism – the promotion of personal liberty – survive, and the GOP along with it.”

It’s not surprising that someone who throws John McCain into the same basket with Jim DeMint would reduce “the essence of conservatism” to “personal liberty.” The latter is the product of a society built on God-given, unalienable rights that governments cannot create and can only secure.

Personal liberty, while profoundly important, is not an end in itself. Personal responsibility is just as important. Without it, conservatism becomes a shallow quest for self-fulfillment, a sort of New Age Conservatism. At that point, it’s a short trip to discovering one’s navel as the source of meaning.

Ronald Reagan championed industriousness, capitalism, personal sacrifice, patriotism, faith, kinship and community spirit. These things often interfere with one’s “personal liberty.” So do children, who help us to grow up and out of ourselves.
Another word often abused by doublespeak is “tolerance.” It once meant living peaceably with those who might disagree. It grew out of the biblical conception of humility before God and the command to love one’s neighbor. Now it means waging war on the moral order in pursuit of faux “equality.”

“Tolerance,” wrote G.K. Chesterton, “is the virtue of the man without convictions.” The people today who wield “tolerance” like a commissar’s bloody ax actually do not lack convictions; they just want to punish anyone who does not share theirs.
When pro basketball player Jason Collins “came out,” the media went nuts. He was toasted from coast to coast, received congratulatory phone calls from President Obama and Bill Clinton, and made magazine covers.

On May 1, Washington Post sportswriter Mike Wise joined the parade by bashing “Old Testament moral certainty” and denouncing anyone who “trumpeted their bigotry under the guise of ‘religious beliefs.'” There’s no hint in Mr. Wise’s vitriolic column that someone could possibly hold sincere, faith-based moral beliefs. Bullies like the oxymoronically named Mr. Wise are types that the Age of Tolerance is spawning by the truckload.

This brings us to our final word, which is “brave.” Mr. Collins was widely hailed as brave, but it’s the few people who dared question the wisdom of his volitional behavior who are brave.

A lynch mob is chasing ESPN the Magazine writer Chris Broussard because he reiterated classic Christian doctrine to an interviewer: “If you’re openly living in unrepentant sin, whatever it may be – not just homosexuality, [but] adultery, fornication, premarital sex, whatever it may be – I believe that’s walking in open rebellion to God and to Jesus Christ. So I would not characterize that person as a Christian, because I don’t think the Bible would characterize him as a Christian.”
Another brave soul is Redskins quarterback Robert Griffin III, who on April 30 tweeted: “In a land of freedom, we are held hostage by the tyranny of political correctness.”

Like openly devout quarterback Tim Tebow, Mr. Griffin and Mr. Broussard are the brave ones – rocks in a flood tide of insanity and cowardice.

As we watch word after word twisted into doublespeak by corrupt elites, it brings to mind George Orwell’s observation: “Political language … is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.”

Robert Knight is senior fellow for the American Civil Rights Union and a columnist for The Washington Times.

A service of YellowBrix, Inc
http://www.gopusa.com/freshink/2013/05/08/changing-the-meaning-of-the-language/?subscriber=1

Another case of Degenerative Spinal Column…Fox News Biggees Surrendering on Marriage

Home / Church  /

Fox News Biggees Surrendering on Marriage
By Steve  Pauwels / 30 March  2013

I was more disappointed than shatteringly surprised when Bill  O’Reilly and Megan Kelley essentially raised the white flag the  other night, or at least went AWOL, on the battle for authentic marriage.  Guesting on Mr. O’s eponymously titled  Factor  program  Tuesday evening, Fox News ’ fetching,  mid-afternoon anchor  volunteered, “I had an interview with Tony Perkins … What is it about calling …a  gay union a marriage that offends you? How does it hurt a traditional  …marriage?…  I didn’t hear anything articulated that was particularly  persuasive.”

To which O’Reilly, nearly exploding out of his chair, added ecstatically,   ”I agree with you a hundred percent!  … The compelling argument is on  the side of homosexuals … ‘We’re Americans, we just want to be treated like  everybody else.’ …. And to deny  that, you’ve got to have a very  strong argument … the other side hasn’t been able to do anything but thump the  Bible.”

What’s perplexing is when a national media figure who, for a decade,  has  doggedly sniffed-out pernicious “secular progressivism” abruptly takes a powder  on the “defense-of-traditional-marriage” front. Towns should be able to host a  Christmas creche and reference the word “Easter” in their school programs,  blasts Bill O – but the post-modern hijacking of marriage is no big deal?
Philosophically consistent that ain’t.

Folks regularly go on about how “smart” is Ms. Kelly. And — contrary to  self-congratulating  Leftists’ cheap shots — O’Reilly is no dummy, either;  he normally acquits himself pretty skillfully in unpacking the issues. If,  however, either of them actually buys the shabby, short-sighted humbug  they proffered in this back-and-forth? Seems they’re not quite as  bright as advertised.
The more “compelling” brief is found among the heralds of  pro-”homosexual-marriage”? Well, I suppose so —  if one  assumes sloppily splashing around unreflective chatter about  “equality” and “rights” qualifies as a “compelling” argument for officially  rejiggering what all of recorded history has confirmed to be civilization’s  bedrock institution.

First  off, the Fox talkers’ imperious dismissal of “bible thumping”  rebuttals of fake, i.e. “same-sex”,  matrimony shouldn’t be conceded.  I apologize to no one for shaping my life around the unshakable truths of  Scripture — and I’m in pretty impressive company. Most of our Founders — perhaps  all of them? — would find it alarmingly scandalous that  Judeo-Christian principles are being written out of the modern  public-policy discussion. Glance at the historic record: biblical wisdom was a  welcome and indispensable contributor to  the establishment of our Constitutional Republic — facile,  “separation-of-church-and-straight” mythology notwithstanding.

John Adams, for instance: “Americans did not invent this foundation of  society. They found it in their religion [Christianity].”
Next,  the ages ( personal experience, biology, every major religion and  reams of recent scholarship) have thumpingly ratified the  husband/wife-led family as the preferred agency for  propagating and  caring for the human species. The “state” can’t  and shouldn’t take an  interest in formally acknowledging that, Mr. O’Reilly? The U. S. Government, Ms.  Kelly, is out-of-line in endorsing it? Seriously?

I’d say common sense demands as much. And, by the way, the Constitution  comfortably permits it.
Do our founding documents explicitly authorize the Federal government to give  thumbs up to “heterosexual marriage ? Of course not — and what  pro-marriage advocate is asserting otherwise? Our Constitution/Bill of Rights,  however, do charge “general government”, in its various departments, with   raising up and maintaining military defenses, crafting tax policy,  setting immigration law, etc. In a nod to the irreplaceable union  of husband and wife as the hub of child-rearing and anchor of a stable  society, wherever public policy in these and multiple other areas intersects  with matters nuptial it may, and should, encourage the institution.

Benefits for military spouses and government employees? Tax-filing provisions  for married households? Exactly whom a legal immigrant is permitted to bring  along into the country? Any of countless scenarios in which marital status  potentially impinges on a citizen’s interaction with her government necessitates  that federal law clarify: what is a husband? wife? family? What comprises a  marriage?

These  terms have centuries-underscored meanings. Despite the caterwauling of  take-no-prisoners homosexual supremacists, leaders and lawmakers should make  distinctions based on those meanings. Practicality, in fact, obliges they do so  — as does prudence and morality.  Natural marriage plays a  demonstrably crucial, salutary role in cultivating well-ordered,  well-oiled communities. Governments wisely and rightly boost it.
Yet, blithely chirping about “equality” and “rights” overturns all of the  above, correct? Neutralizing what used to be obvious to everyone?

Okay – along that line of reasoning: VA benefits currently are accorded only  those who’ve done their duty in the armed forces but not to school teachers,  non-profit employees, plumbers. Where’s the “equality” in that? Shouldn’t they  enjoy the same government-conferred “rights” of any armed-services  member?
I smell “civilian-a-phobia”!

What “right” do the unemployed have to their “unemployment compensation” when  laboring Americans have no access to same? Can’t “unemployed” be extended to  take in the “under-employed”? The “unsatisfactorily-employed”?
Why should business owners or investors enjoy tax-breaks denied mere  weekly-paycheck earners? Sounds like a 14th Amendment  ”equal-protection”  outrage to me!!

Do some egalitarian-minded singles feel Constitutionally snubbed when the  government extends to their married peers special advantages?  What of the  spinster who insists she is devotedly “married” to her three cats – and expects  Uncle Sam to honor that status?

Ludicrous? Only by degree: the evangelists of “gay marriage”, after  all, traffick reflexively in this same species of loopy reasoning and  language hijinks. Our elected officials and courts draw lines all the time,  distinguishing one set of individuals from another based on their activities,  how they live, what they pour into society or take from it. Those formulations  long have included marriage — an arrangement once assumed beneficial to America  and thus promoted by American polity.
Suddenly, we’re arbitrarily informed that’s no longer copacetic.

Memo to Bill O’Reilly and Megan Kelly: It’s really not all that complicated;  some might actually find it downright  “compelling”.
And for the record: I didn’t thump my Bible; not  even once.

Read more:  http://clashdaily.com/2013/03/fox-news-biggees-surrendering-on-marriage/#ixzz2P7jygZ1L Get more Clash on ClashDaily.com,  Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube.

ACT! for America – ‘Destroying Western civilization from within’

NOTE – I had to re-assemble this sentence by sentence, in order to fit to my pg. Font changes were a side effect, and couldn’t be avoided. “X”

Threat and
Response—Part Four

“Civilization Jihad”

In the Muslim Brotherhood explanatory
memorandum for its strategic objectives in North America we read:

The Ikhwan [brothers] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and “sabotaging” its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.

This memorandum was approved by the Muslim Brotherhood Shura Council, and the U.S. Justice Department affirmed its authenticity when it entered the memorandum as evidence in the Holy Land Foundation terrorism financing trial.

Think about what this memorandum is saying.

• It’s calling for a “grand Jihad”;
• Its goal is to destroy Western civilization;
• They will use people in the West as enablers of their own destruction (“sabotaging its miserable house by their hands…”)

In other words, the Muslim Brotherhood believes that by using “information warfare” it can recruit Westerners to assist it in toppling Western civilization.
And the Muslim Brotherhood has been very successful at doing this.
Who are these enablers?
They include those who refuse to acknowledge jihadist ideology as the driving force behind Islamic terrorism.
Those who believe deceptive platitudes offered by groups like CAIR, ISNA, MPAC and ICNA. Those who actively work to silence critics of radical Islam by calling them “Islamophobes.”

When General Martin Dempsey publicly dressed down Lt. Colonel Matthew Dooley, who was teaching about the threat of Islamic terrorism at the National Defense University, Dempsey became a poster child for the Muslim Brotherhood’s goal of tearing us down “by our own hands.”

ACT! for America is aggressively fighting back against the Muslim Brotherhood’s “civilization jihad.”

• From the Obama administration to university professors to media personalities who flack for the Muslim Brotherhood, we are exposing their tactics and associations with Muslim Brotherhood connected organizations.
• On Capitol Hill and in state legislatures we are educating elected officials and their staffs about the Muslim Brotherhood and its strategy of using Americans to do its bidding to achieve its goal of destroying us from within. Our Director of Government Relations points congressional staff to the Muslim Brotherhood expose’ located on the ACT! for America Education website.
• We’ve launched a national campaign, “Americans United to Defend Free Speech,” to fight back against assaults on free speech by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and its enablers in our government.
• Your monthly Patriot Partner gift or single Contributing Member gift will help us continue and even expand these efforts.
• Please log on here and make either a monthly Patriot Partner contribution or a single gift Contributing Member contribution.
  Our online contribution process is safe, simple and secure.
  If you prefer to mail a check, you can print out a reply form here.
• The Muslim Brotherhood has already proven in Europe how successful its information warfare strategy can be. Just ask people like Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Woolf, ACT! for America chapter leader in Austria, who was convicted of using “hate speech.” European leaders doing the bidding of the Muslim Brotherhood are tearing down their countries by their own hands!
• Author Mark Steyn has stated he believes America is the last hope against the rising tide of global radical Islam.
• ACT! for America is on the front lines of this struggle and we need your help!
• Please visit our website today and make the most
  generous monthly Patriot Partner contribution or single Contributing Member contribution you can make.
• Or, if you prefer to mail a check, you can print out a reply form here.Help us reach today’s Spring Pledge Drive goal, and by doing so, help us continue our pushback against the Muslim Brotherhood’s “civilization jihad.”

Obama administration gives pedophilia protected status

Is there no end to the deviancy the administration will coddle?

First, it was “gays” … then lesbians … then bisexuals … then transgenders …

Time to add another letter — P for pedophilia — to the alphabet soup of groups that dare not be criticized.

And this particular group of pedophiles wants to kill us …

Army acknowledges pedophilia part of Islam

Manual warns soldiers in Afghanistan not to talk about certain subjects

byJack MinorEmail | Archive

Jack Minor is a former Marine who served under President Reagan.

A new Army manual that warns American soldiers in Afghanistan to avoid talking about certain topics has unwittingly acknowledged that Western taboos such as pedophilia are an inherent part of Islamic culture.

“By mentioning that pedophilia and women’s rights and saying that soldiers should not mention such things they are tacitly admitting that those things are indeed part of Islam,” said Robert Spencer, founder of Jihad Watch.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2012/12/army-acknowledges-pedophilia-part-of-islam/#WwTvEjsB3f4IAkgW.99