The End of Christian America The percentage of self-identified Christians has fallen 10 points in the past two decades. How that statistic explains who we are now—and what, as a nation, we are about to become.
By Jon Meacham | NEWSWEEK
Published Apr 4, 2009
From the magazine issue dated Apr 13, 2009
It was a small detail, a point of comparison buried in the fifth paragraph on the 17th page of a 24-page summary of the 2009 American Religious Identification Survey. But as R. Albert Mohler Jr.—president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, one of the largest on earth—read over the document after its release in March, he was struck by a single sentence.
For a believer like Mohler—a starched, unflinchingly conservative Christian, steeped in the theology of his particular province of the faith, devoted to producing ministers who will preach the inerrancy of the Bible and the Gospel of Jesus Christ as the only means to eternal life—the central news of the survey was troubling enough: the number of Americans who claim no religious affiliation has nearly doubled since 1990, rising from 8 to 15 percent. Then came the point he could not get out of his mind: while the unaffiliated have historically been concentrated in the Pacific Northwest, the report said, "this pattern has now changed, and the Northeast emerged in 2008 as the new stronghold of the religiously unidentified." As Mohler saw it, the historic foundation of America's religious culture was cracking.
"That really hit me hard," he told me last week. "The Northwest was never as religious, never as congregationalized, as the Northeast, which was the foundation, the home base, of American religion. To lose New England struck me as momentous." Turning the report over in his mind, Mohler posted a despairing online column on the eve of Holy Week lamenting the decline—and, by implication, the imminent fall—of an America shaped and suffused by Christianity.
"A remarkable culture-shift has taken place around us," Mohler wrote. "The most basic contours of American culture have been radically altered. The so-called Judeo-Christian consensus of the last millennium has given way to a post-modern, post-Christian, post-Western cultural crisis which threatens the very heart of our culture." When Mohler and I spoke in the days after he wrote this, he had grown even gloomier. "Clearly, there is a new narrative, a post-Christian narrative, that is animating large portions of this society," he said from his office on campus in Louisville, Ky.
There it was, an old term with new urgency: post-Christian. This is not to say that the Christian God is dead, but that he is less of a force in American politics and culture than at any other time in recent memory. To the surprise of liberals who fear the advent of an evangelical theocracy and to the dismay of religious conservatives who long to see their faith more fully expressed in public life, Christians are now making up a declining percentage of the American population.
According to the American Religious Identification Survey that got Mohler's attention, the percentage of self-identified Christians has fallen 10 percentage points since 1990, from 86 to 76 percent. The Jewish population is 1.2 percent; the Muslim, 0.6 percent. A separate Pew Forum poll echoed the ARIS finding, reporting that the percentage of people who say they are unaffiliated with any particular faith has doubled in recent years, to 16 percent; in terms of voting, this group grew from 5 percent in 1988 to 12 percent in 2008—roughly the same percentage of the electorate as African-Americans. (Seventy-five percent of unaffiliated voters chose Barack Obama, a Christian.) Meanwhile, the number of people willing to describe themselves as atheist or agnostic has increased about fourfold from 1990 to 2009, from 1 million to about 3.6 million. (That is about double the number of, say, Episcopalians in the United States.)
While we remain a nation decisively shaped by religious faith, our politics and our culture are, in the main, less influenced by movements and arguments of an explicitly Christian character than they were even five years ago. I think this is a good thing—good for our political culture, which, as the American Founders saw, is complex and charged enough without attempting to compel or coerce religious belief or observance. It is good for Christianity, too, in that many Christians are rediscovering the virtues of a separation of church and state that protects what Roger Williams, who founded Rhode Island as a haven for religious dissenters, called "the garden of the church" from "the wilderness of the world." As crucial as religion has been and is to the life of the nation, America's unifying force has never been a specific faith, but a commitment to freedom—not least freedom of conscience. At our best, we single religion out for neither particular help nor particular harm; we have historically treated faith-based arguments as one element among many in the republican sphere of debate and decision. The decline and fall of the modern religious right's notion of a Christian America creates a calmer political environment and, for many believers, may help open the way for a more theologically serious religious life.
Let's be clear: while the percentage of Christians may be shrinking, rumors of the death of Christianity are greatly exaggerated. Being less Christian does not necessarily mean that America is post-Christian. A third of Americans say they are born again; this figure, along with the decline of politically moderate-to liberal mainline Protestants, led the ARIS authors to note that "these trends … suggest a movement towards more conservative beliefs and particularly to a more 'evangelical' outlook among Christians." With rising numbers of Hispanic immigrants bolstering the Roman Catholic Church in America, and given the popularity of Pentecostalism, a rapidly growing Christian milieu in the United States and globally, there is no doubt that the nation remains vibrantly religious—far more so, for instance, than Europe.
Still, in the new NEWSWEEK Poll, fewer people now think of the United States as a "Christian nation" than did so when George W. Bush was president (62 percent in 2009 versus 69 percent in 2008. Two thirds of the public (68 percent) now say religion is "losing influence" in American society, while just 19 percent say religion's influence is on the rise. The proportion of Americans who think religion "can answer all or most of today's problems" is now at a historic low of 48 percent. During the Bush 43 and Clinton years, that figure never dropped below 58 percent.
Many conservative Christians believe they have lost the battles over issues such as abortion, school prayer and even same-sex marriage, and that the country has now entered a post-Christian phase. Christopher Hitchens —a friend and possibly the most charming provocateur you will ever meet—wrote a hugely popular atheist tract a few years ago, "God Is Not Great." As an observant (if deeply flawed) Episcopalian, I disagree with many of Hitchens's arguments—I do not think it is productive to dismiss religious belief as superstitious and wrong—but he is a man of rigorous intellectual honesty who, on a recent journey to Texas, reported hearing evangelical mutterings about the advent of a "post-Christian" America.
To be post-Christian has meant different things at different times. In 1886, The Atlantic Monthly described George Eliot as "post-Christian," using the term as a synonym for atheist or agnostic. The broader—and, for our purposes, most relevant—definition is that "post-Christian" characterizes a period of time that follows the decline of the importance of Christianity in a region or society. This use of the phrase first appeared in the 1929 book "America Set Free" by the German philosopher Hermann Keyserling.
The term was popularized during what scholars call the "death of God" movement of the mid-1960s—a movement that is, in its way, still in motion. Drawing from Nietzsche's 19th-century declaration that "God is dead," a group of Protestant theologians held that, essentially, Christianity would have to survive without an orthodox understanding of God. Tom Altizer, a religion professor at Emory University, was a key member of the Godless Christianity movement, and he traces its intellectual roots first to Kierkegaard and then to Nietzsche. For Altizer, a post-Christian era is one in which "both Christianity and religion itself are unshackled from their previous historical grounds." In 1992 the critic Harold Bloom published a book titled "The American Religion: The Emergence of the Post-Christian Nation." In it he cites William James's definition of religion in "The Varieties of Religious Experience": "Religion … shall mean for us the feelings, acts, and experiences of individual men in their solitude, so far as they apprehend themselves to stand in relation to whatever they consider the divine."
Which is precisely what most troubles Mohler. "The post-Christian narrative is radically different; it offers spirituality, however defined, without binding authority," he told me. "It is based on an understanding of history that presumes a less tolerant past and a more tolerant future, with the present as an important transitional step." The present, in this sense, is less about the death of God and more about the birth of many gods. The rising numbers of religiously unaffiliated Americans are people more apt to call themselves "spiritual" rather than "religious." (In the new NEWSWEEK Poll, 30 percent describe themselves this way, up from 24 percent in 2005.)
Roughly put, the Christian narrative is the story of humankind as chronicled in the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament—the drama of creation, fall and redemption. The orthodox tend to try to live their lives in accordance with the general behavioral principles of the Bible (or at least the principles they find there of which they approve) and anticipate the ultimate judgment of God—a judgment that could well determine whether they spend eternity in heaven or in hell.
What, then, does it mean to talk of "Christian America"? Evangelical Christians have long believed that the United States should be a nation whose political life is based upon and governed by their interpretation of biblical and theological principles. If the church believes drinking to be a sin, for instance, then the laws of the state should ban the consumption of alcohol. If the church believes the theory of evolution conflicts with a literal reading of the Book of Genesis, then the public schools should tailor their lessons accordingly.
If the church believes abortion should be outlawed, then the legislatures and courts of the land should follow suit. The intensity of feeling about how Christian the nation should be has ebbed and flowed since Jamestown; there is, as the Bible says, no thing new under the sun. For more than 40 years, the debate that began with the Supreme Court's decision to end mandatory school prayer in 1962 (and accelerated with the Roe v. Wade ruling 11 years later) may not have been novel, but it has been ferocious. Fearing the coming of a Europe-like secular state, the right longed to engineer a return to what it believed was a Christian America of yore.
But that project has failed, at least for now. In Texas, authorities have decided to side with science, not theology, in a dispute over the teaching of evolution. The terrible economic times have not led to an increase in church attendance. In Iowa last Friday, the state Supreme Court ruled against a ban on same-sex marriage, a defeat for religious conservatives. Such evidence is what has believers fretting about the possibility of an age dominated by a newly muscular secularism.
"The moral teachings of Christianity have exerted an incalculable influence on Western civilization," Mohler says. "As those moral teachings fade into cultural memory, a secularized morality takes their place. Once Christianity is abandoned by a significant portion of the population, the moral landscape necessarily changes. For the better part of the 20th century, the nations of Western Europe led the way in the abandonment of Christian commitments. Christian moral reflexes and moral principles gave way to the loosening grip of a Christian memory. Now even that Christian memory is absent from the lives of millions."
Religious doubt and diversity have, however, always been quintessentially American. Alexis de Tocqueville said that "the religious atmosphere of the country was the first thing that struck me on arrival in the United States," but he also discovered a "great depth of doubt and indifference" to faith. Jefferson had earlier captured the essence of the American spirit about religion when he observed that his statute for religious freedom in Virginia was "meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and the Mahometan, the Hindoo and infidel of every denomination"—and those of no faith whatever. The American culture of religious liberty helped create a busy free market of faith: by disestablishing churches, the nation made religion more popular, not less.
America, then, is not a post-religious society—and cannot be as long as there are people in it, for faith is an intrinsic human impulse. The belief in an order or a reality beyond time and space is ancient and enduring. "All men," said Homer, "need the gods." The essential political and cultural question is to what extent those gods—or, more accurately, a particular generation's understanding of those gods—should determine the nature of life in a given time and place.
If we apply an Augustinian test of nationhood to ourselves, we find that liberty, not religion, is what holds us together. In "The City of God," Augustine —converted sinner and bishop of Hippo—said that a nation should be defined as "a multitude of rational beings in common agreement as to the objects of their love." What we value most highly—what we collectively love most—is thus the central test of the social contract.
Judging from the broad shape of American life in the first decade of the 21st century, we value individual freedom and free (or largely free) enterprise, and tend to lean toward libertarianism on issues of personal morality. The foundational documents are the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, not the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament (though there are undeniable connections between them). This way of life is far different from what many overtly conservative Christians would like. But that is the power of the republican system engineered by James Madison at the end of the 18th century: that America would survive in direct relation to its ability to check extremism and preserve maximum personal liberty.
Religious believers should welcome this; freedom for one sect means freedom for all sects. As John F. Kennedy said in his address to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association in 1960: "For while this year it may be a Catholic against whom the finger of suspicion is pointed, in other years it has been, and may someday be again, a Jew—or a Quaker—or a Unitarian—or a Baptist … Today I may be the victim—but tomorrow it may be you—until the whole fabric of our harmonious society is ripped."
Religion has been a factor in American life and politics from the beginning. Anglican observance was compulsory at Jamestown, and the Puritans of New England were explicitly hoping to found a New Jerusalem. But coerced belief is no belief at all; it is tyranny. "I commend that man, whether Jew, or Turk, or Papist, or whoever, that steers no otherwise than his conscience dares," said Roger Williams.
By the time of the American founding, men like Jefferson and Madison saw the virtue in guaranteeing liberty of conscience, and one of the young republic's signal achievements was to create a context in which religion and politics mixed but church and state did not. The Founders' insight was that one might as well try to build a wall between economics and politics as between religion and politics, since both are about what people feel and how they see the world. Let the religious take their stand in the arena of politics and ideas on their own, and fight for their views on equal footing with all other interests. American public life is neither wholly secular nor wholly religious but an ever-fluid mix of the two. History suggests that trouble tends to come when one of these forces grows too powerful in proportion to the other.
Political victories are therefore intrinsically transitory. In the middle of the 19th century, the evangelist Charles Grandison Finney argued that "the great business of the church is to reform the world—to put away every kind of sin"; Christians, he said, are "bound to exert their influence to secure a legislation that is in accordance with the law of God."
Worldly success tends to mark the beginning of the end for the overtly religious in politics. Prohibition was initially seen as a great moral victory, but its failure and ultimate repeal show that a movement should always be careful what it wishes for: in America, the will of the broad whole tends to win out over even the most devoted of narrower interests.
As the 20th century wore on, Christians found themselves in the relatively uncontroversial position of opposing "godless communism," and the fervor of the Prohibition and Scopes-trial era seemed to fade a bit. Issues of personal morality, not international politics, would lay the foundations for the campaign for Christian America that we know as the rise of the religious right. The phenomenon of divorce in the 1960s and the Roe decision in 1973 were critical, and Jimmy Carter's born-again faith brought evangelical Christianity to the mainstream in 1976.
Growing up in Atlanta in the '60s and '70s, Joe Scarborough, the commentator and former Republican congressman, felt the fears of his evangelical parents and their friends—fears that helped build support for the politically conservative Christian America movement. "The great anxiety in Middle America was that we were under siege—my parents would see kids walking down the street who were Boy Scouts three years earlier suddenly looking like hippies, and they were scared," Scarborough says. "Culturally, it was October 2001 for a decade. For a decade. And once our parents realized we weren't going to disappear into dope and radicalism, the pressure came off. That's the world we're in now—parents of boomers who would not drink a glass of wine 30 years ago are now kicking back with vodka. In a way, they've been liberated."
And they have learned that politics does not hold all the answers—a lesson that, along with a certain relief from the anxieties of the cultural upheavals of the '60s and '70s, has tended to curb religiously inspired political zeal. "The worst fault of evangelicals in terms of politics over the last 30 years has been an incredible naiveté about politics and politicians and parties," says Mohler. "They invested far too much hope in a political solution to what are transpolitical issues and problems. If we were in a situation that were more European, where the parties differed mostly on traditional political issues rather than moral ones, or if there were more parties, then we would probably have a very different picture. But when abortion and a moral understanding of the human good became associated with one party, Christians had few options politically."
When that party failed to deliver—and it did fail—some in the movement responded by retreating into radicalism, convinced of the wickedness and venality of the political universe that dealt them defeat after defeat. (The same thing happened to many liberals after 1968: infuriated by the conservative mood of the country, the left reacted angrily and moved ever leftward.)
The columnist Cal Thomas was an early figure in the Moral Majority who came to see the Christian American movement as fatally flawed in theological terms. "No country can be truly 'Christian'," Thomas says. "Only people can. God is above all nations, and, in fact, Isaiah says that 'All nations are to him a drop in the bucket and less than nothing'." Thinking back across the decades, Thomas recalls the hope—and the failure. "We were going through organizing like-minded people to 'return' America to a time of greater morality. Of course, this was to be done through politicians who had a difficult time imposing morality on themselves!"
Experience shows that religious authorities can themselves be corrupted by proximity to political power. A quarter century ago, three scholars who are also evangelical Christians—Mark A. Noll, Nathan O. Hatch and George M. Marsden—published an important but too-little-known book, "The Search for Christian America." In it they argued that Christianity's claims transcend any political order. Christians, they wrote, "should not have illusions about the nature of human governments. Ultimately they belong to what Augustine calls 'the city of the world,' in which self-interest rules … all governments can be brutal killers."
Their view tracks with that of the Psalmist, who said, "Put not thy trust in princes," and there is much New Testament evidence to support a vision of faith and politics in which the church is truest to its core mission when it is the farthest from the entanglements of power.
The Jesus of the Gospels resolutely refuses to use the means of this world—either the clash of arms or the passions of politics—to further his ends. After the miracle of the loaves and fishes, the dazzled throng thought they had found their earthly messiah. "When Jesus therefore perceived that they would come and take him by force, to make him a king, he departed again into a mountain himself alone." When one of his followers slices off the ear of one of the arresting party in Gethsemane, Jesus says, "Put up thy sword." Later, before Pilate, he says, "My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight." The preponderance of lessons from the Gospels and from the rest of the New Testament suggests that earthly power is transitory and corrupting, and that the followers of Jesus should be more attentive to matters spiritual than political.
As always with the Bible, however, there are passages that complicate the picture. The author of Hebrews says believers are "strangers and exiles on the earth" and that "For here we have no lasting city, but seek the city which is to come." In Romans the apostle Paul advises: "Do not be conformed to this world." The Second Vatican Council cited these words of Pius XII: the Catholic Church's "divine Founder, Jesus Christ, has not given it any mandate or fixed any end of the cultural order. The goal which Christ assigns to it is strictly religious … The Church can never lose sight of the strictly religious, supernatural goal."
As an archbishop of Canterbury once said, though, it is a mistake to think that God is chiefly or even largely concerned with religion. "I hate the sound of your solemn assemblies," the Lord says in Amos. Religion is not only about worshipping your God but about doing godly things, and a central message of the Gospels is the duty of the Christian to transform, as best one can, reality through works of love.
"Being in the world and not of it remains our charge," says Mohler. "The church is an eternal presence in a fallen, temporal world—but we are to have influence. The Sermon on the Mount is about what we are to do—but it does not come with a political handbook."
How to balance concern for the garden of the church with the moral imperatives to make gentle the life of the world is one of the most perplexing questions facing the church. "We have important obligations to do whatever we can, including through the use of political means, to help our neighbors—promoting just laws, good order, peace, education and opportunity," wrote Noll, Hatch and Marsden. "Nonetheless we should recognize that as we work for the relatively better in 'the city of the world,' our successes will be just that—relative. In the last analysis the church declares that the solutions offered by the nations of the world are always transitory solutions, themselves in need of reform."
Back in Louisville, preparing for Easter, Al Mohler keeps vigil over the culture. Last week he posted a column titled "Does Your Pastor Believe in God?," one on abortion and assisted suicide and another on the coming wave of pastors. "Jesus Christ promised that the very gates of Hell would not prevail against his church," Mohler wrote.
"This new generation of young pastors intends to push back against hell in bold and visionary ministry. Expect to see the sparks fly." On the telephone with me, he added: "What we are seeing now is the evidence of a pattern that began a very long time ago of intellectual and cultural and political changes in thought and mind. The conditions have changed. Hard to pinpoint where, but whatever came after the Enlightenment was going to be very different than what came before." And what comes next here, with the ranks of professing Christians in decline, is going to be different, too.
Apr 6 08:58 AM US/Eastern
By TOM RAUM
Associated Press Writer
ANKARA, Turkey (AP) - Barack Obama, making his first visit to a Muslim nation as president, declared Monday the United States "is not and will never be at war with Islam."
Calling for a greater partnership with the Islamic world in an address to the Turkish parliament, Obama called the country an important U.S. ally in many areas, including the fight against terrorism. He devoted much of his speech to urging a greater bond between Americans and Muslims, portraying terrorist groups such as al Qaida as extremists who did not represent the vast majority of Muslims.
"Let me say this as clearly as I can," Obama said. "The United States is not and never will be at war with Islam. In fact, our partnership with the Muslim world is critical ... in rolling back a fringe ideology that people of all faiths reject."
The U.S. president is trying to mend fences with a Muslim world that felt it had been blamed by America for the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
Al Jazeera and Al Arabiyia, two of the biggest Arabic satellite channels, carried Obama's speech live.
Obama said the partnership between the U.S. and the Muslim world is critical in rolling back what he called a fringe ideology that people of all faiths reject.
"America's relationship with the Muslim world cannot and will not be based on opposition to al Qaida," he said. "We seek broad engagement based upon mutual interests and mutual respect."
"We will convey our deep appreciation for the Islamic faith, which has done so much over so many centuries to shape the world for the better, including my own country," Obama said.
Obama also said, to a round of applause, that the United States supports Turkey becoming a member of the European Union.
April 6th, 2009, 21:01
vector7
Re: The End of Christian America
latest email today from ''world net daily''
President Barack Obama has just nominated federal Judge David Hamilton, who has issued controversial rulings (banning public prayers offered "in Jesus name," and hastening the abortion of unborn children), to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals (the same court that has reversed his aggressive decisions for many years).
Judge Hamilton is the worst of Obama's 15 new liberal appeals court appointees. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals covers Wisconsin, Indiana and Illinois. Since most cases never reach the Supreme Court, the federal appellate circuits often provide the last word on cases affecting life and liberty.
READ THE FACTS:
The Judicial Confirmation Network quickly opposed Hamilton's nomination, stating that "President Obama's first nominee to the federal appeals courts -- specifically the appeals court based in Chicago -- is an ultra-liberal named David Hamilton who is a former fundraiser for ACORN and former leader of the Indiana chapter of the ACLU. He was nominated to the district court bench by President Clinton even though he had no judicial experience and was rated as 'not qualified' by the American Bar Association
Hamilton ruled in 2005 to ban the practice of opening the chamber's business with prayers mentioning Jesus Christ or using terms such as "Savior." He said that amounted to state endorsement of a religion. (But he ruled prayers to "Allah" were perfectly lawful.)
ANTI-JESUS, BUT PRO-ALLAH?
Judge Hamilton wrote: "The injunction orders the Speaker...that the prayers should not use Christ's name or titleor any other denominational appeal...If those offering prayers in the Indiana House of Representatives choose to use the Arabic 'Allah'...the court sees little risk that the choice of language would advance a particular religion or disparage others."
In other words, Judge Hamilton ruled the words "Jesus" or "Christ" are illegal words, prohibited for public speech, banned by the First Amendment, which somehow prohibits freedom of religious expression, and makes Christian prayers ILLEGAL in a public forum. (What crazy version of the First Amendment is he reading?)
Thank God, I took action in 2007 and provided legal arguments to the Indiana Attorney General who appealed to the 7th Circuit Court and WE WON a 2-1 decision overruling Hamilton, restoring the right to pray "in Jesus name" in Indiana.
ANTI-LIFE BUT PRO-ABORTION?
In 2003, Judge Hamilton struck down part of an Indiana law on abortion. The reasonable law had required abortion clinics to simply give women information about alternatives to abortion in the presence of a physician or nurse, 18 hours before the procedure, until Hamilton ruled to hasten abortions. But thank God, the 7th Circuit Court also reversed Hamilton's bad decision in that case.
If confirmed now Hamilton will sit on that 7th Circuit Court (the same court that frequently overruled him) with terrible power to rule the heartland with his anti-life, anti-liberty, anti-Christian agenda.
April 7th, 2009, 02:58
Ryan Ruck
Re: The End of Christian America
Quote:
Originally Posted by vector7
"We will convey our deep appreciation for the Islamic faith, which has done so much over so many centuries to shape the world for the better, including my own country," Obama said.
I'm not really sure that the United States could ever lay claim to having been a Christian nation.
That the right to worship in one's way was guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.
That Christian religious leaders lament that people are moving away from the type of worship they feel (or believe) is the only way to worship is in itself lamentable.
Much of what we read and hear from the more vocal religious leaders is to put Christ as one's head or ruler of the heart. But then they add rules and regulations (which are often more than not to get around putting Christ as one's head or ruler of the heart) to signify as to who is really a Christian or not.
And, the majority of the religious leaders do themselves no favors when they start attacking each other or the general public or even the government.
Similarly, when the Christ commissioned his disciples to go spread the word, he additionally told them not to argue the case but to move on and find people who were willing to listen.
The founders of our Constitution, and thereby the Republic, tried to ensure that religion and government remain separate entities. We can go around and around as to the letter of that philosophy (e.g., prayer in a public school, which affects not just the Christians), and we have the Constitution-right to bicker among ourselves.
But when President Obama or anyone else connected to the Federal government tells the world that the United States is not a Christian nation, it is not an attack on America, as some would like to reword the meaning of what he is saying. In the area of politics--and here is where I wish to keep it--because what I think of the President and the man occupying the White House is a non-sequitur--the expression is designed to separate the philosophy and rights guaranteed within the our nation from nations that adamantly express themselves as Islamic, Hindu, Buddhist, or whatever, which do operate from a theocracy point of view. (But at the same time, these leaders are not fooled, as they act more from a dictatorial POV; the people are the ones who are fooled.)
President Obama is expressing something that I believe most Americans can enjoin: the era of "we versus them" in a religious context has to end, if we are ever going to be able to end war and start getting along.
April 7th, 2009, 14:45
Aplomb
Re: The End of Christian America
Obama has said a lot of things that are attacks on America. This is one more. Yet, as we all know, actions speak louder than words. Judeo-Christian America now "bows to Islam" as demonstrated by her representative of sorts. And that same representative selected to power one who, like himself, has a long-time record for the liberal immoral view that he applies to the law of our land. "If confirmed now Hamilton will sit on that 7th Circuit Court (the same court that frequently overruled him) with terrible power to rule the heartland with his anti-life, anti-liberty, anti-Christian agenda."He is ensuring that our country is changed and we are legally forced to live as he wishes. Right before our eyes, our freedoms are being removed. This is not a matter of all peoples being free to worship, we enjoy that freedom. This is not about balancing things out. The only way to get along with bullies is to give in to their demands. If we are not going to let that certain bully religion dictate to us their Sharia terms, then by default, we are at odds with them, we are at war with them until we submit. I submit that not all of us are going to accept this agreement to live at peace by the transforming our nation into one of secular liberal communistic dhimmis, followed years later by the institution of government mandated Sharia law. Patriotic Americans see the writing on the wall.
April 8th, 2009, 03:49
wallis
Re: The End of Christian America
Aplomb, your fears are probably very real, and they should be addressed in a public forum.
Islam declared war on the world, essentially, long before Obama took office. I am not necessarily homing in on just the terrorists, which even to most Moslems is a terrible thing. This "religion of peace" is just as fervent in converting the world to the "right" religion as Christianity was during the Midde Ages.
There is an old Chinese saying: "Before one can become fast friends, he must fight the other." Respect of the other must be reciprocated. So, when we view a leader acting more like the other culture, we Americans feel like this leader is being un-American or kowtowing. When, in another perspective, it is building a two-way street where respect is both given and taken: leads to communication.
There will also be a continuation of debate and conflict over what is "right" within the Christian community. What I would like to see is: that the Christian community stop bickering and cooperating before claiming that the United States is going to hell in a handbasket because (and then fill in your favorite or the favorite immorality of the day).
I feel that the opinion that God will smite America because of its immorality is stretching at the least. Empires through history endured for long periods, and they were as immoral as they come.
I read too much rhetoric that expounds on the theme that if people do not worship or believe in God in a certain way, that this very God will send horrible punishments that will result in destruction. This is very Jewish in concept and was preached since the 8th Century B.C. as the reason why the Israel state was destroyed (and eventually the Judah state).
I was taught (and I still firmly believe this) that God will not be doing the destruction. People have that capacity to do it to themselves. But if one person prays, then God is there to act and save the situation.
It will not be because not enough people believe in God or follow a prescribed set of rules to identify oneself as God-fearing that will not bring down the United States.
It will not be one man (some like to create a human-like anti-Christ to depict such a scenario) that will change America from its very secular, capitalist philosophy to something very destructive, such as extreme socialism or a form of communism. It will be the very apathy of the people who populate the United States and call it "home."
So, you are very right in bringing up your fears. And, I have great hope in the American people that they will not just roll over and accept changes that are, in the long run, unacceptable. The police forces, the military forces, and others who have the power of the gun are people, too. I cannot imagine that the hundereds of thousands of Americans who are sworn to protect America and its people will suddenly turn into automatons and abandon the very principles of this country. [I'm thinking right now of those Germans who, like the proverbial Adam and Eve, simply blamed their hierarchy and were just "following orders."]
By Michael D. Shear and Kevin Sullivan
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, April 7, 2009; A01
ANKARA, Turkey, April 6 -- President Obama made his most direct outreach to Muslims around the world Monday, telling Turkey's Grand National Assembly that the United States "is not and never will be at war with Islam."
"Our partnership with the Muslim world is critical in rolling back a violent ideology that people of all faiths reject," Obama told the assembly. "The future must belong to those who create, not those who destroy. That is the future we must work for, and we must work for it together."
Obama's speech focused primarily on the U.S. relationship with Turkey. But he also used it as a chance to continue his outreach to Muslims and to signal an approach to the region based more on pragmatism than ideology. He sidestepped a campaign pledge to label as genocide the 1915 mass killing of Armenians by the Ottoman Empire and promised the Turks a broader relationship than one focused solely on combating terrorism.
During his campaign, Obama consistently played down connections to Islam, rarely mentioning his middle name, Hussein, or his childhood years in an Indonesian state school. The tactic helped fuel false Internet-driven rumors that Obama, a Christian, had once been Muslim. But in his appearance Monday, the president noted the contributions that Muslim Americans have made to the United States, saying that many Americans "have Muslims in their family, or have lived in a Muslim-majority country."
"I know," Obama said, drawing applause from the lawmakers, "because I am one of them."
Obama's message to Muslims echoed President George W. Bush, who frequently praised Islam as a religion of peace and humanitarian values that had been distorted by extremists who killed in its name. But Bush's invasion of Iraq, imprisonment of Muslims at Guantanamo Bay, isolation of Iran, and support for Israel in its relations with the Palestinians and in the war with Hezbollah made many in Islamic nations believe that his administration was hostile to their religion.
Obama has reached out to Iran, ordered the closing of the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, and taken an early interest in resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict with the appointment of a Middle East envoy. His aides have outlined a new approach to Muslim countries that would reach beyond confronting terrorism to include a set of mutual interests on trade, education and health care.
Prior to the president's speech Monday, a senior administration official speaking on background said Obama believes the relationship between the United States and Turkey "can be something of a model for America's relationship with the Muslim world." The official said Obama is committed to "rebuilding that relationship based on mutual interests and respect" and "comprehensive engagement with Muslim peoples" grounded in "a deep appreciation for the Islamic faith." Another senior White House official said Obama will continue the outreach in the coming months by traveling to a Muslim country to deliver a speech on Islam.
After several stops in Europe, Obama told lawmakers here that Turkey, governed by a moderate Islamist administration, could serve as a bridge between west and east. He pledged to support Turkey's halting efforts to join the European Union and urged a continuation of new laws that extend democratic protections to all of its people, including ethnic minorities. In Istanbul on Tuesday, he plans to visit the Blue Mosque and Hagia Sophia, a Byzantine basilica converted into a mosque 650 years ago. Today it is a museum.
"I know there have been difficulties these last few years. I know that the trust that binds us has been strained, and I know that strain is shared in many places where the Muslim faith is practiced," Obama told the lawmakers.
"We will listen carefully, bridge misunderstanding, and seek common ground," he added. "We will be respectful, even when we do not agree. And we will convey our deep appreciation for the Islamic faith, which has done so much over so many centuries to shape the world for the better -- including my own country."
Boulevards here were lined with Turkish and American flags, and security was tight for Obama's visit. Several hundred police officers in riot gear contained protesters, while police water-cannon trucks stood ready. Hundreds more police ringed the parliament building. Helicopters flew overhead and snipers manned rooftops as Obama's motorcade entered the sprawling grounds.
There were relatively small protests on the streets of the Turkish capital, with one group carrying an effigy of Obama, dressed in a blue blazer and khaki pants, then throwing it to the ground and kicking it to pieces.
"Obama wants to use Turkish soldiers in Afghanistan as shields for American soldiers," said Burak Gunes, 21, an international relations student at a local university. "America killed millions of people in Iraq, so the Turkish people do not have any tolerance for the United States of America."
Dogu Ergil, a professor of political science at Ankara University, said the protesters "represent nothing" of mainstream Turkish thinking.
"There are fringe groups everywhere who think America is the devil," he said, noting that a recent opinion poll showed that 52 percent of Turks had a favorable opinion of Obama. "If he wanted to be a candidate, he could be elected and become the next president of Turkey!"
Obama appeared to succeed in avoiding controversy with his hosts on an issue of great sensitivity to Turks. As a presidential candidate, he pledged that, if elected, he would label the mass killing of Armenians by the Ottoman government more than 90 years ago a "genocide." But he declined to do so Monday.
Standing next to President Abdullah Gul here, Obama said, "I have not changed my views" on the issue and added that he supported talks underway between the governments of Turkey and Armenia to establish official diplomatic relations and address historical grievances, including the killing of between 1 million and 1.5 million Armenians by the government of the Ottoman Empire during and just after World War I. The president never said the word "genocide."
"I know there's strong views in this chamber about the terrible events of 1915," Obama said later in his speech before the Turkish parliament. "And while there's been a good deal of commentary about my views, it's really about how the Turkish and Armenian people deal with the past."
As a senator, Obama signed letters to then-President Bush demanding that he recognize "the mass slaughter of Armenians as genocide." Joining him on those letters were Vice President Biden and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, both senators at the time.
Speaking after Obama in their joint news conference, Gul said: "It is not a legal or political issue, it's a historical issue." He said Turkey has suggested that a "joint history commission be established and that we would agree to the results or the conclusions of this commission."
Armenian-Americans reacted cautiously to Obama's comments. "The President's willingness to raise his commitment to recognizing the Armenian Genocide, even indirectly, in his remarks before the Turkish Parliament represents a step in the right direction, but far short of the clear promise he made as a candidate that he would, as President, fully and unequivocally recognize this crime against humanity," Aram Hamparian, executive director of the Armenian National Committee of America, said in a statement. "We expect that the President will, during Genocide Prevention Month this April, stand by his word."
Obama also reiterated U.S. support for the creation of an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel, a goal jeopardized by continuing Israeli settlement construction in the occupied territories and deep divisions within the Palestinian national movement.
Obama acknowledged Turkey's helpful role as mediator in Syrian-Israeli peace talks, which have yet to yield results after more than a year. He called on Turkey's leaders, who like many Muslims were angry over the scope of Israel's assault on the Gaza Strip last year, to show the same support for an Israeli-Palestinian peace process that at the moment appears dormant.
"We must extend a hand to those Palestinians who are in need, while helping them strengthen their own institutions," he said. "We must reject the use of terror, and recognize that Israel's security concerns are legitimate."
Obama arrived in Ankara on Sunday night from Prague to begin the final leg of his first overseas trip. Appearing before reporters with Gul, Obama said the two countries are key allies and called Turkey "a true partner" in the fight against al-Qaeda and the broader threat of terrorism.
"The world has come too far to let this region backslide, and to let al-Qaeda terrorists plot further attacks," he said.
Staff writer Scott Wilson in Washington contributed to this report.
(CNSNews.com) – President Obama has named to his faith-based advisory council a self-professed Christian who holds that the New Testament's teaching that homosexual behavior is unnatural and wrong--which is found in St. Paul's letter to the Romans--“is not true."
The appointee, Harry Knox, has also said that Obama's decision to invite the Rev. Rick Warren to say a prayer at the Inauguration "tainted" the ceremony and that Pope Benedict XVI is a "discredited leader."
Harry Knox, a professed gay Christian who is director of the religion and faith program at the Human Rights Campaign, a homosexual rights group, was named to President Obama's Advisory Council on Faith Based and Neighborhood Partnerships on Monday. The advisory council gives federal grants to faith-based organizations.
The appointment came after Knox criticized Obama prior to the Inauguration for selecting Warren, a California megachurch pastor and best-selling author, to deliver the invocation. Writing in The Huffington Post blog, Knox said to Obama, “We don’t feel hopeful anticipation of a new day in our country, and we don’t feel optimism. We feel betrayed.”
Knox said in the December article that Warren’s invocation would make the Jan. 20 Inauguration a “tainted” event because Warren supported the ballot initiative in California to amend the state constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman.
On the PBS News Hour in December, Knox said that Warren “has in fact leveraged homophobia to get ahead in his career. … This is the worst possible choice the president could have made. This is a divisive choice. … We said to the president-elect today in very strong language, the strongest we can think of and be respectful of the office, you have really slapped us. And we want you to think about that and think very hard what your actions will be going forward because this very symbolic, early decision has sent the exact wrong message.”
Knox could not be reached for comment Tuesday.
Knox is one of 25 members of the advisory board of the White House Office Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. Obama announced the formation of the office in early February, a continuation of a similar office started by President George W. Bush to issue federal grants to faith-based, non-profit charitable organizations.
Other members include Bishop Charles Blake of the Church of God in Christ in Chicago; the Rev. Peg Chemberlin, president-elect of the National Council of Churches USA; Dr. Frank Page, president emeritus of the Southern Baptist Convention; the Rev. Jim Wallis, president of the liberal Christian group Sojourners; and the Rev. Joel C. Hunter of Northland Church in Longwood, Fla.
Knox has been a long-time gay activist focusing on the faith community. He previously worked for the New York-based Freedom to Marry group, for Georgia Equality and Equality Florida. He has won awards from liberal religious organizations.
In a debate with the Rev. Gino Jennings recorded Nov. 28, 2004 at the First Church of Our Lord Jesus Christ in Philadelphia, the two men sparred over various biblical verses references homosexual behavior.
This included the Book of Romans, in which St. Paul wrote, “Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen. Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.”
After reading the scripture, Jennings asked, “Do you believe that? That if a man lie with a man or a woman with a woman it is against nature?”
“I do not believe it,” answered Knox, who at the time was the program director for the group Freedom to Marry.
Jennings responded, “So this is a lie?”
Knox affirmed, “That is not true.”
“Paul did not have any idea of the kind of love that I feel for a partner when I am partnered. He didn’t know what that was about,” Knox said. “The straight man, the heterosexual man who got the privilege of writing the book, the educated, rich, heterosexual man, Paul, who got to write the book, didn’t think it was natural because for him it must not have been.”
Jennings later responded that Paul was not the sole author of the writings. “So you are saying Paul was just closed-minded. I totally disagree because the book says this, the book tells us that all scripture, all of the scripture, not some of it, but all scripture are given by the inspiration of God,” said Jennings.
Before starting at the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) in 2005, Knox also worked as development director of Equality Florida and was the executive director of Georgia Equality. While in Georgia, his groups successfully lobbied corporations such as Coca-Cola, Bell South, Delta, and Cingular to extend same-sex benefits to employees.
At the HRC, Knox established a weekly preaching resource that provides scriptural commentary to pastors interested in homosexual perspectives on the Bible. He also helped create a network of 22 “progressive state clergy coalitions” around the country, according to the HRC Web site.
Knox has the potential to be a polarizing figure, said the Rev. Louis Sheldon, chairman of the conservative Traditional Values Coalition.
“Everything he says will be front-page news,” Sheldon told CNSNews.com. “He will be a political liability to the president. All the good that the faith-based office does will get buried by a loose cannon that fires over the bow. But that’s what Obama wants.”
Last month, Knox was quoted in a gay newspaper criticizing the pope and the Catholic group Knights of Columbus, mainly because the Knights supported the traditional marriage amendment to the California constitution.
Knox told the San Francisco-based gay newspaper the Bay Area Reporter, “The Knights of Columbus do a great deal of good in the name of Jesus Christ, but in this particular case, they were foot soldiers of a discredited army of oppression.” In the newspaper, he included among the “discredited leaders” Catholic bishops and Pope Benedict XVI, as “A pope who literally today said condoms don't help in control of AIDS."
In a brief interview Monday with CNSNews.com, Knox stood by his comments on the pope.
“The pope needs to start telling the truth about condom use,” Knox told CNSNews.com. “We are eager to help him do that. Until he is willing to do that and able, he’s doing a great deal more harm than good--not just in Africa but around the world. It is endangering people’s lives.”
The pope’s comments were mischaracterized by Knox, said Catholic League President Bill Donohue.
“When Pope Benedict XVI recently said that condoms are not the answer to HIV/AIDS, he was simply voicing common sense: the promiscuous distribution of condoms has coincided with a precipitous increase in HIV/AIDS,” Donohue said in a statement Tuesday. “But to gay activists like Knox, the pope is a liar. Indeed, he instructed the pope to ‘start telling the truth about condom use,’ holding the Holy Father accountable for ‘endangering people’s lives.’ He never explained how calls for abstinence could possibly jeopardize anyone’s life.”
In 2000, Knox won the Cordle Award for Promoting God’s Diversity, and the Lancaster Theological Seminary’s 2005 Robert V. Moss Medal for Excellence in Ministry.
April 10th, 2009, 04:34
samizdat
Re: The End of Christian America
I haven't seen much of any tv this century. I'm still trying to figure out who beavis and butthead are. Below is some real slime, on Fox channel. I dont know what to make of it. http://www.nmatv.com/video/1807/Family-Guy
Family Guy used to be very funny. Now, it is no where near as entertaining though it has it's moments. It seems that since it has come back on the air, Seth MacFarlane feels the need to forcefully inject his hard left ideology into the show and then beat the viewers about the head with it. This really takes away from the little remaining humor left in the show.
What is most odd about MacFarlane is that he was supposed to be on one of the doomed 9/11 flights (American Flight 11) that went into the WTC but missed the flight because of a hangover and incorrect departure time. But rather than take a hard look at reality because of 9/11 (like Dennis Miller) and his brush with death, he seems to have gone into some kind of "ultra denial mode" where he feels the need to spew exaggerated amounts of Liberalism instead. I'm sure someone could write an interesting psychological profile on him.
April 10th, 2009, 13:23
Aplomb
Re: The End of Christian America
Knox. Africa is not America. The guy speaks of Paul not understanding his issue. Yet he doesn't realize that he is doing the very thing with speaking against the Pope, who does know the cultural difference in Africa. As far as his sexual activity being normal, for him it may be normal. Sin is normal to the sinner. That doesn't mean it is natural. I'm not asking him to believe what the Bible says, but what human anatomy says. That's hard to miss.
April 10th, 2009, 17:15
samizdat
Re: The End of Christian America
The easter egg roll has alloted affirmative action tickets to gay families. That's impossible. TRUE oxymoron.
AP
Last updated: 10:33 am
April 8, 2009
Posted: 2:30 am
April 8, 2009
WASHINGTON -- The White House is allocating tickets for the upcoming Easter Egg Roll to gay and lesbian families as part of the Obama administration's outreach to diverse communities.
Families say the gesture shows that the administration values them as equal to other families. And for many, being included in the annual tradition -- dating to 1878 -- renews hope of more support in their quest for equal rights.
"The Obama administration actually reached out to us as an organization and said we want gay families there and they are an important part of the American family fabric," said Jennifer Chrisler, head of the Boston-based Family Equality Council, which is now involved in Monday's event.
"We feel so welcomed and embraced," said Colleen Gillespie of Brooklyn, a professor at NYU's School of Medicine, who is attending with her wife and their two daughters. "I think we can just go as a family and enjoy it."
http://www.lifenews.com/hoy1.jpgOakland, CA (LifeNews.com) -- A pro-life pastor in Oakland, California who was convicted of helping women outside abortion centers find life-affirming alternatives has been released after spending 18 days in jail. Reverend Walter Hoye was charged with violating an anti-free speech ordinance Oakland officials put in place to target him. Oakland officials had enacted the law that prohibited contact within eight feet of women entering abortion businesses without their consent. Last month, Hoye began serving a 30 day sentence and he received three years probation as well as a requirement to pay a $1,000 fine and a $130 restitution fee. He was ordered to stay 100 feet away from any abortion center in the city of the Oakland. Judge Stuart Hing of the Alameda Superior Court denied the defense motion to stay the sentence pending appeal. After serving two and a half weeks of the sentence, Hoye was released on Tuesday and was met by a large contingent of pro-life supporters. Dion Evans, pastor of Alameda's Chosen Vessels Christian Church and on hand to greet Hoye, told the Contra Costa Times that the Oakland anti free speech ordinance has backfired. That's because he says more pro-life advocates will turn up at area abortion centers to help women. "They would have been in a better position if they would have left him alone. They picked on one man on one street, one day a week trying to reach one woman at a time with one sign for one hour," he said. "Now a mobilization has come together because they've created an unjust law. People like myself who have been cheerleading are not on the sidelines anymore. We're now in the game." Hoye made good use of his time in prison and regularly talked with inmates about pro-life issues, but also led six men to adopt the Christian faith. His wife Lori said pro-life advocates visited Hoye in prison, including Salvatore Joseph Cordileone, the Diocese of Oakland's bishop-designate. "He visited Walter Hoye because he respects Hoye's affirmation of the value of human life," said Diocese spokesman Mike Brown. But Nancy Nadel, the Oakland council member who drafted the ordinance, complained to the Tribune about the pro-life people. "Even though there are more people out there and they're noisy and annoying," she said. The potential news of a conviction on what Hoye considered an unjust law didn't get him down. At a hearing on February 19, Judge Hing stated that he had not intended to impose any fine or jail time on Rev. Hoye if he would agree to stay away from the abortion center. Reverend Hoye refused to agree not to offer alternatives to abortion-minded women. "If you are reading this email then it can only mean that I have been incarcerated," he told LifeNews.com in an email sent by his attorneys. "I will be back. Thank you all so much! May God bless you and keep you always." Dozens in the African-American and pro-life communities from around the nation who came out in support of Rev. Hoye were outraged by the sentence. “It is absolutely incredible that in America an individual can be sentenced to jail for engaging in peaceful free speech activity on a public sidewalk,” Allison Aranda, an attorney for the Life Legal Defense Foundation, told LifeNews.com. “Rev. Hoye is being singled out for particularly harsh punishment because he refused to agree not to offer help to women considering abortion. Where is the justice in that?” Hoye is an African-American pastor who feels a special calling to work for the end of the targeting of black Americans by abortion. According to 2004 statistics from the National Center for Health Statistics, about 37 percent of pregnancies among black women end in abortion, compared with 12 percent for non-Hispanic white women and 19 percent for Hispanic women. As part of his efforts, he stands in front of an abortion clinic in Oakland with leaflets offering abortion alternatives and a sign reading, “Jesus loves you and your baby. Let us help.” Hoye spent 40 days fasting prior to beginning the jail sentence, which made Bill May, the chairman of the pro-life Catholics for the Common Good, describe him as slight and gaunt as he was calmly led from the Alameda County courtroom. When he returns to the streets to help women, Hoye will have one less abortion center to visit. That's because the nation's oldest abortion center, located in Oakland, has been forced to close because of financial issues. Related web sites: Life Legal Defense Foundation - http://www.lldf.org
April 11th, 2009, 04:38
samizdat
Re: The End of Christian America
This isn't directly related to the demise of Christianity in America, but likely a key component of devious Chinese Communist party "great thrust forward". Where do they plan to go with 1 baby, predominant male society? If their population keeps going down, the pla will become defunct and old. Their plan from the 80's is now ripe. Plenty of single one child boys longing for a wist of action and reward. I think it's a stupid plan. The ccp may jumpstart them into a world class riot, but these kids and people in general are not that stupid. Some will get smart, get saved and find Jesus. Others will simply refuse to bow down to uncle mao. This was a very dumb plan by the commies.
THEIR GOVERNMENT AT WORK China's 1-child policy now threatens crime wave Study cites 'real risk' from men unable to find partners
A new study published by BMJ, which used to be known as the British Medical Journal, has documented a worsening problem on which WND has been reporting for 12 years: the domination of males in a Chinese society that encourages the abortion of unborn daughters.
The new report says males under the age of 20 outnumbered females by more than 32 million and warned, "China will see very high and steadily worsening sex ratios in the reproductive age group over the next two decades."
One of the authors, Therese Hesketh, told the Associated Press that translates into a huge threat of criminal activity.
"If you've got highly sexed young men, there is a concern that they will all get together and, with high levels of testosterone, there may be a real risk, that they will go out and commit crimes," said Hesketh, a lecturer at University College in London.
A commentary in the BMJ said the China policy of limiting families to one child "is one of the most controversial policies ever implemented."
"It has reduced the fertility rate and has helped raise living standards for most people in China, but it has been heavily criticized for violating human rights and having many negative social consequences, one of which is an excess number of male births," the commentary said.
Chinese families often use abortion – or actual infanticide – to eliminate daughters in favor of sons. Some estimates suggest there have been hundreds of millions of deaths because of the policy.
BMJ said the result is a "discouraging picture of very high and worsening male to female ratios … in China." It also said the study confirmed the "imbalance" can be attributed at least partly to the one-child policy.
The average number of children in Chinese families has fallen from 5.9 to 1.7 over the last four decades. "This large reduction in the fertility rate, whether by choice or by coercion, has inevitably increased the male to female ratio because of the preference for sons and the availability of contraception and sex selective measures."
Besides the potential for additional crime, social problems are expected to peak because of the millions of men who ultimately will be unable to find a mate.
"Nothing can be done now to prevent this imminent generation of excess men," the report warned.
While China still reported 119 male births for every 100 girls, industrialized nations around the world reported a ratio of 107-to-100.
Hesketh told AP the availability of technologies, such as sonograms, that reveal the gender of an unborn child, has led to a rise in abortions to eliminate daughters.
The review assessed populations in China's 2,861 counties.
"Overall sex ratios were high across all age groups and residency types, but they were highest in the 1-4 years age group, peaking at 126 … in rural areas. Six provinces had sex ratios of over 130 in the 1-4 age group. The sex ratio at birth was close to normal for first order births but rose steeply for second order births, especially in rural areas, where it reached 146 (143 to 149). Nine provinces had ratios of over 160 for second order births," the report said.
"Sex selective abortion accounts for almost all the excess males," it said. Two year agos HBO aired a special on the issue. When the special was broadcast, WND founder and editor Joseph Farah wrote that what he in 1997 dubbed "gendercide" was one of the first big stories he broke for WND.
"It came about when the World Health Organization issued a report saying more than 50 million women were estimated to be 'missing' in China. These women had not run away. They had not been kidnapped. They did not just disappear," he wrote.
"Their lives had been snuffed out before they ever really began – victims of institutionalized killing and neglect of girls due to Beijing's population control program that limits parents to one child."
"Later, I believe I was the first reporter in the world to notice another disturbing trend resulting directly from the coercive one-child policy. Back in 2004, I noticed what appeared to be an epidemic of child kidnappings in China," he wrote.
WND has reported Chinese adults desperate for children have fueled a major criminal industry in child kidnappings. So great is the shortage of young women in China, many men are taking to "purchasing" foreign "brides" – sometimes actually sex slaves. The price for Burmese women – many of whom are desperate because of poverty – is between $600 and $2,400, depending on youth and beauty.
Some Chinese couples who want a boy simply choose to abandon female infants to die. Desperate couples without a son sometimes resort to buying one on the black market.
The U.S. military is confirming that it has destroyed some Bibles belonging to an American soldier serving in Afghanistan.
Reuters News says the Bibles were confiscated and destroyed after Qatar-based Al Jazeer television showed soldiers at a Bible class on a base with a stack of Bibles translated into the local Pashto and Dari languages. The U.S. military forbids its members on active duty -- including those based in places like Afghanistan -- from trying to convert people to another religion.
Reuters quotes Maj. Jennifer Willis at the Bagram Air Base, north of Kabul, who said "I can now confirm that the Bibles shown on Al Jazeera's clip were, in fact, collected by the chaplains and later destroyed. They were never distributed."
According to the military officials, the Bibles were sent through private mail to an evangelical Christian soldier by his church back home. Reuters says the soldier brought them to the Bible study class where they were filmed.
The Chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, told a Pentagon briefing Monday that the military's position is that it will never "push any specific religion."
The Pentagon under the Obama Administration has just acknowledged seizing and burning the privately owned Bibles of American soldiers serving in Afghanistan. The Bibles had been printed in the local Pashto and Dari languages, and sent by private donors to American Christian soldiers and chaplains, for distribution to American troops on overseas military bases during optionally-attended Christian worship services. Had the Bibles not been seized and destroyed, they could have legally been given as gifts during off-duty time to Afghani citizens who welcome our troops in their homes, as an expression of American gratitude for Afghani hospitality, promoting the democratic ideals of freedom of religion and freedom of the press.
But the Muslim controlled Al Jazeera television network obtained video footage of the Bibles, held by American soldiers while listening to a chaplain on the Bagram Air Base (inside the base chapel) whose sermon encouraged outreach and personal evangelism. The American values of freedom of religion, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, and freedom of Christian speech offended some extremist Muslim groups, and angered a small group of American atheists, who demanded the chaplain be punished for "proselytizing" because he simply repeated Jesus' words to "Go and make disciples of all nations" in church.
IT'S NOT PROSELYTIZING, IT'S EVANGELISM:
The video proves the chaplain properly explained U.S. Central Command's General Order Number One, which prohibits "proselytizing" (forcing religious conversions using military weapons) but fully permits soldiers of any religion to engage in non-threatening "evangelism" (voluntary conversations about their faith) and legally allows giving private gifts, including books, to Afghani citizens during off-duty hours in their unofficial capacity. The Al Jazeera film-maker Brian Hughes also admitted the Bibles could have been useful in helping soldiers learn the Pashto and Dari languages of the Afghan people.
Instead, the privately owned Bibles were confiscated and destroyed. Caving in to pressure from the Muslims and Atheist groups, the U.S. military spokesman Maj. Jennifer Willis told Reuters reporters, "I can now confirm that the Bibles shown on Al Jazeera's clip were, in fact, collected by the chaplains and later destroyed. They were never distributed." When questioned about the authenticity of the Al Jazeera video, U.S. Army Colonel Greg Julian admitted the Al Jazeera reporting was biased against the American Christians: "Most of this is taken out of context ... this is irresponsible and inappropriate journalism."
GENERAL DOUGLAS MACARTHUR ENCOURAGED EVANGELISM
After World War II, in order to carry out the democratization of Japan, Five-Star General Of The Army Douglas MacArthur brought Christian leaders to the country to meet with Emperor Hirohito and encouraged mass distribution of Bibles to the population. MacArthur later stated to a visiting American churchman, "We must have ten thousand Christian missionaries and a million Bibles to complete the occupation of this land."
(Source: Rodger R. Venzke, Confidence In Battle - Inspiration In Peace, 1977, p.24-25.)
But today, instead of confronting Muslim and Atheist enemies of religious liberty, President Obama's Four-Star Admiral Chairman Of The Joint Chiefs Mike Mullen now appears to defend the destruction of the soldiers' privately owned Bibles, stating during a Pentagon briefing that the military's position is that it will never "push any specific religion." He did not address the possibility that by seizing and burning privately owned Bibles, the Obama Administration is now enforcing state atheism upon our troops.
(After you sign the petition, please donate generously to help us defend religious liberty for our military. Part of your donation will go toward shipping Pashto Bibles to Afghanistan.)
ATHEISTS JOIN MUSLIM EXTREMISTS AGAINST LIBERTY
Aggressive anti-Christian secularist Mikey Weinstein immediately demanded the chaplain in the video be court-martialed for encouraging voluntary evangelism in church, despite the Pentagon's claim that same chaplain somehow assisted in confiscating the Bibles. I can personally attest, as the former Navy Chaplain who endured court-martial in 2006 for praying "in Jesus name" in uniform outside of Sunday chapel, (but was later vindicated by Congress), that anti-Christian forces are powerfully at work in some parts of the U.S. military.
But together, we fought back and won! Over 300,000 Americans, 85% of polled citizens, and 75 Congressmen agreed with me, so the entire Congress rescinded the same anti-Jesus policy the Navy enforced during my court-martial, restoring liberty to other chaplains who pray publicly "in Jesus name." (That victory on Capitol Hill cost my 16-year career and pension, and was not grandfathered back to my case.) Angered by our victory, the enemies of religious liberty won't be satisfied until every Christian is silenced, and every chaplain booted from the military like I was, for the "crime" of worshiping in public.
COURT-MARTIAL THE ARMY CHIEF OF CHAPLAINS?
The favorite new ploy of Mikey Weinstein's anti-Christian group (Military Religious Freedom Foundation) is to frighten troops into silence by "demanding the court-martial" of any soldier or chaplain who talks publicly about his or her faith. For example, incredibly, Weinstein recently demanded the Army court-martial their Chief of Chaplains Major General Douglas Carver, because Chaplain Carver issued a proclamation calling for a day of prayer and fasting for our troops.
The Chief of Chaplains' proclamation called for voluntary prayer by chaplains of all diverse faiths to act "in keeping with your religious traditions," and support our troops who face difficult traumas, pressures and temptations toward suicide. Carver consulted with two senior Jewish chaplains before issuing the proclamation.
But Mikey Weinstein claims that no chaplain can encourage prayer or Bible reading without violating what he pretends is a Constitutional mandate separating church from state. "These inciteful actions are grossly offensive to not only Muslims in Afghanistan and across the world, but to all those who hold faith in the U.S. Constitution," said Weinstein of the troops' Bibles.
Ironically Weinstein's own web-site contains pictures of atheist soldiers, soliciting donations for Weinstein while wearing their full dress uniform, without any legal disclaimer that their anti-Christian views do not represent the views of the U.S. military.
WILL CONGRESS PROTECT CHAPLAINS RIGHTS?
We can report without bias that in June 2009, the U.S. Congress will again consider a bi-partisan bill supporting military chaplains rights, co-sponsored by two North Carolina Congressmen, Mike McIntyre (D-NC) and Walter Jones (R-NC), in the House Armed Services Committee. The pro-chaplain bill, H.R. 268, would simply guarantee military chaplains of all diverse faiths the right to pray publicly according to the dictates of their conscience. You can read the details in my article about that bill, which was published by the Washington Times on 7 May 09, here.
To pass that bill into law, the two North Carolina Congressmen will first need several more co-sponsors, and the blessing of the House Armed Services Committee. Then they'll need some bi-partisan Senators to initiate a Senate version. Will your own Congressman or Senator co-sponsor religious freedom for chaplains? Perhaps you might call your own Congressman at 202-225-3121, to voice your opinion about H.R. 268.
But remember, 100 emails = 10 phone calls = 1 fax in political capital, since the Congressional staffers must handle each paper and usually write a reply. So please join our automated fax-petition campaign first, and we will fax all 435 Congressmen on your behalf.
Then please forward this email to your own pastor, and to all your military friends, and download here a church flyer that pastors can copy and distribute. But first, take action right now! I pray you will not hesitate, but sign the petition and WE WILL FAX your petition right away, automatically to all 435 Congressmen.
(After you sign the petition, please donate generously to help us defend religious liberty for our military. Part of your donation will go toward shipping Pashto Bibles to Afghanistan.)
President Obama is distancing himself from the National Day of Prayer by nixing a formal early morning service and not attending a large Catholic prayer breakfast the next morning.
All Mr. Obama will do for the National Day of Prayer, which is Thursday, is sign a proclamation honoring the day, which originated in 1952 when Congress set aside the first Thursday in May for the observance.
For the past eight years, President George W. Bush invited selected Christian and Jewish leaders to the White House East Room, where he typically would give a short speech and several leaders offered prayers.
Obama White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said Tuesday that the president is simply reverting back to pre-Bush administration practice.
"Prayer is something the president does every day," he said. "We're doing a proclamation, which I know that many administrations in the past have done."
Pressed by reporters as to the lack of a formal ceremony, Mr. Gibbs said the proclamation was Mr. Obama's choice.
"That's the way the president will publicly observe National Prayer Day - privately, he'll pray as he does every day," Mr. Gibbs said.
Shirley Dobson, chairwoman of the National Day of Prayer Committee, said the group was "disappointed in the lack of participation by the Obama administration."
"At this time in our country's history, we would hope our president would recognize more fully the importance of prayer," said Mrs. Dobson, who occupied a prominent seat in the front row for the ceremonies during the Bush administration.
Although the annual East Room events started with Mr. Bush, President Reagan hosted a Rose Garden event in 1982 and President George H.W. Bush scheduled a breakfast in 1989.
President Clinton did not host any special observances, according to the National Day of Prayer task force.
Some evangelicals said they were not surprised by Mr. Obama's decision.
"For those of us who have our doubts about Obama's faith, no, we did not expect him to have the service," said Wendy Wright, president of Concerned Women for America. "But as president, he should put his own lack of faith aside and live up to the office."
Referencing a remark the president made at a recent press conference in Turkey that Americans "do not consider ourselves a Christian nation," she added: "That was projecting his own beliefs, but not reflecting what the majority of Americans feel. It's almost like Obama is trying to remake America into his own image. This is not a rejection of Shirley Dobson; it's a rejection of the concept that America is a spiritual nation and its foundation is Judeo-Christian."
David Brody, White House correspondent for the Christian Broadcasting Network, said in a column that, "within the conservative evangelical community, there was never any real expectation that the White House would hold an event."
However, the White House did host an April 9 Passover Seder for family and friends - the first time a president has hosted that Jewish religious meal.
But the president passed up the fifth annual National Catholic Prayer Breakfast, scheduled for the Washington Hilton and expected to have 1,300 participants.
Joe Cella, a spokesman for the effort, said the White House never asked for Mr. Obama to attend.
Mr. Bush did ask to come and always made a few brief remarks. But the new president, Mr. Cella said, would not have been allowed to speak because of a 2004 directive from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops saying that public figures who have taken positions opposing Catholic doctrine should not be publicly honored.
"We'd host him graciously, but we'd not give him a platform to speak," Mr. Cella said.
All major presidential candidates were invited to attend last year, he added, but none responded.
For this year's prayer breakfast, Catholic members of the administration have been invited. They include Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shaun Donovan and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano.
None has responded, Mr. Cella said.
The keynote speech will be given by Archbishop Raymond Burke, the former St. Louis prelate who now heads the Signatura, the Vatican's top court. He has recommended that pro-choice Catholic politicians such as Mrs. Sebelius not be allowed to receive Communion.
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia is scheduled to speak.
Despite the White House snub, National Day of Prayer ceremonies are still slated from 9 a.m. to noon in the Cannon House Office Building on Capitol Hill. Speakers include former NFL all-pro running back Shaun Alexander and Dick Eastman of Every Home for Christ.
An estimated 40,000 coordinators and volunteers will host locally organized events nationwide at courthouses, state capitols, city halls, parks and school flagpoles.
Nathan Diamant, an Orthodox Jewish leader who has attended National Day of Prayer events in the East Room, said co-religionists should not find fault with the president.
"While some will no doubt criticize the Obama White House for this decision, we think that is inappropriate," he said, "and, moreover, not in keeping with the purpose of the observance which is to unify Americans through a national moment of reflection and aspiration to higher purposes."
Last fall, the Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation sued Mrs. Dobson and the Bush administration over the National Day of Prayer.
The lawsuit, which has been changed to name Mr. Obama and Mr. Gibbs, the press secretary, says state governors and the U.S. government should not follow task-force directives on themes, wording, prayers and Scriptures for the event.
• Christina Bellantoni contributed to this report.
May 6th, 2009, 16:47
MinutemanCO
Re: The End of Christian America
Quote:
"Prayer is something the president does every day," he said. "We're doing a proclamation, which I know that many administrations in the past have done."
Pressed by reporters as to the lack of a formal ceremony, Mr. Gibbs said the proclamation was Mr. Obama's choice.
"That's the way the president will publicly observe National Prayer Day - privately, he'll pray as he does every day," Mr. Gibbs said.
My guess is five times a day while bowing toward Mecca.
MADISON, Wis. — The White House is planning a muted observance of Thursday's National Day of Prayer, a response that has disappointed both Christian conservatives and an atheist group that wants to end the tradition.
Congress established the day in 1952 and in 1988 set the first Thursday in May as the day for presidents to issue proclamations asking Americans to pray.
White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said President Barack Obama would issue such a proclamation Thursday but not hold any public events with religious leaders as President George W. Bush did.
Obama's decision drew a rebuke from the National Day of Prayer Task Force, a private group that promotes prayer events around the country. The task force estimates 2 million Americans attended more than 40,000 events marking the day last year.
"We are disappointed in the lack of participation by the Obama administration," said task force chairwoman Shirley Dobson, wife of Focus on the Family founder James Dobson. "At this time in our country's history, we would hope our President would recognize more fully the importance of prayer."
The debate over the day has landed in federal court in Wisconsin. The Obama administration has asked a judge to dismiss a lawsuit filed by the Freedom From Religion Foundation, which claims the day violates the separation of church and state.
In a rare alliance, 31 mostly Republican members of Congress and a prominent Christian legal group are joining the administration to fight the lawsuit.
Freedom From Religion Foundation Co-Director Annie Laurie Gaylor welcomed Obama's more scaled back observance but said she has been shocked by his administration's strong defense of the day in court.
The Madison-based group of 12,000 atheists and agnostics filed the lawsuit near the end of Bush's second term. It asks a judge to declare the law unconstitutional and to order presidents and governors to stop issuing prayer proclamations.
The Obama administration asked U.S. District Judge Barbara Crabb to dismiss the case in March. The administration argued the group has no legal standing to sue, said the tradition's roots date to 1775 and that most presidents have invoked faith in a higher power.
It also said the day does not promote religion and argued that preventing presidents from issuing a proclamation would unfairly restrict how they communicate with Americans.
Moves to create two Florida license plates with images of a crucified Jesus on one, and a stained glass window and cross on another, have died in the Florida legislature.
Both plates had come under blistering criticism from Americans United for Separation of Church and State and the American Civil Liberties Union. The Associated Press reported that bills to create the plates died at the end of the regular legislative session on Friday.
State Sen. Gary Siplin, an Orlando Democrat, had proposed the plate with "a picture of my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ." The plate portrayed an image of Jesus' head lowered under the weight of a crown of thorns.
Siplin was not available Monday for comment.
Gov. Charlie Crist, a Republican, had earlier said he would support the plate. "If they (critics) don't want one, they don't have to buy one," Crist told The St. Petersburg Times.
Florida drivers are able to purchase more than 100 specialized license plates. Proceeds, which normally run between $15 and $25, support various causes and groups.
The other plate, proposed by state Sen. Ronda Storms, a Republican from Brandon, would have depicted a stained glass window, cross and the words "I Believe." A district court has temporarily halted the production of similar plates in South Carolina.
"License plates are not a license for the government to prefer one religion over others," said the Rev. Barry Lynn, executive director of the Washington-based Americans United. "I'm glad the legislature in Florida seems to have finally realized that."
Hawaii's state Senate overwhelmingly approved a bill Wednesday to celebrate "Islam Day" -- over the objections of a few lawmakers who said they didn't want to honor a religion connected to Sept. 11, 2001.
HONOLULU -- Hawaii's state Senate overwhelmingly approved a bill Wednesday to celebrate "Islam Day" -- over the objections of a few lawmakers who said they didn't want to honor a religion connected to Sept. 11, 2001.
The Senate's two Republicans argued that a minority of Islamic extremists have killed many innocents in terrorist attacks.
"I recall radical Islamists around the world cheering the horrors of 9/11. That is the day all civilized people of all religions should remember," said Republican Sen. Fred Hemmings to the applause of more than 100 people gathered in the Senate to oppose a separate issue -- same-sex civil unions.
The resolution to proclaim Sept. 24, 2009, as Islam Day passed the Senate on a 22-3 vote. It had previously passed the House and now goes to Republican Gov. Linda Lingle.
The bill seeks to recognize "the rich religious, scientific, cultural and artistic contributions" that Islam and the Islamic world have made. It does not call for any spending or organized celebration of Islam Day.
"We are a state of tolerance. We understand that people have different beliefs," said Sen. Will Espero, a Democrat. "We may not all agree on every single item and issue out there, but to say and highlight the negativity of the Islamic people is an insult to the majority" of believers "who are good law-abiding citizens of the world."
But Republican Sen. Sam Slom argued that the United States has become too sympathetic toward Islamic extremists.
"I don't think there's any country in the history of the world that has been more tolerant than the United States of America, and because of that tolerance, we've looked the other way a lot of times, and many thousands of our citizens have been killed by terrorists," said Slom, a Republican.
The lone Democrat voting against the bill opposed it on church-state separation fears.
Former GOP congressman takes on swine flu response, amnesty, free speech
Posted: May 07, 2009
1:00 am Eastern
WorldNetDaily
Swine flu has been confirmed by laboratory tests in 1,516 patients in 22 countries, according to the WHO. Mexico has reported 942 cases, including 29 deaths, while the U.S. has 403 cases and two deaths.
Despite the increasing number of U.S. cases, President Obama is solidly against closing the U.S.-Mexico border to contain the outbreak, likening such a move to "closing the barn door after the horses are out."
Former Republican Rep. Tom Tancredo of Colorado disagrees: "The problem is you cannot necessarily contain it, but what you're trying to do is minimize the impact, of course, and reduce the number of people coming into the country with it."
Tancredo believes the administration's refusal to act is also indicative of a "desire on the part of many people to eliminate borders."
"I know it sounds strange, but I assure you that there are people committed to a North American Union just like a European Union, where you have not just an economic arrangement – low tariffs or no tariffs – but you actually have a political arrangement like the European Parliament, which now collects taxes and passes laws."
Tancredo spoke with Greg Corombos of Radio America/WND. The audio of the exchange is embedded here:
Tancredo, an outspoken opponent of illegal immigration, is also concerned about Obama's plans for immigration "reform" and the popular president's desire to facilitate "amnesty" for millions of illegal aliens living in the U.S.
"You have to admit, he is a cult leader and the cult will go with him anywhere he wants to go.
"You just don't know about the size of the cult, how big it is, if it's shrinking or growing, but he is a cult leader and you have to realize that he's not just a political figure, he is truly a cult leader."
And what does Tancredo think about a recent protest by college students that forced him to shut down his speech at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill?
"It says that the people who have always claimed to be for the right to free speech are anything but ... they are total hypocrites."
America has become a morally ]bankrupt society that embraces intolerance against Christians, including a new push for "hate crimes" legislation, according to one pastor who believes it's all because church leaders have failed to do their jobs.
But this Memorial Day weekend he is calling ministers to fight for those freedoms – from their pulpits.
"Pastors, if you wonder who is to blame for America's slide from the 'Ozzie and Harriet' morality of yesteryear to the 'Brokeback Mountain' immorality of today, look in the mirror," said Pastor Paul Blair of Fairview Baptist Church in Edmond, Okla.
Blair is founder of a group called Reclaiming Oklahoma for Christ, an outreach to pastors that encourages church leaders to take a stand against the spread of immorality in American culture. He is urging pastors across the nation to stop being silent and muster the courage to speak out against efforts to criminalize Christianity. He said church leaders have abandoned the prophetic call and have chosen instead to be CEOs of competitive church businesses rather than proclaiming "faith in Christ alone and repentance from sin."
"Pastors used to speak strongly about issues – like when Billy Sunday led a crusade, and the next thing you know, liquor was outlawed. So they made a difference," he said. "The year 1954 is when pastors began to grow timid because, all of the sudden, they had this misguided notion that they might lose their tax exemption if they made too much noise."
Shortly after ministers grew silent, prayer and Bible reading were taken out of schools. The sexual revolution immediately followed, along with Roe v. Wade. Now, he said, attacks on Christian liberty and morality have become more brazen and coordinated than ever – with widespread movements to legalize homosexual marriage, the Department of Homeland Security's efforts to profile Christians as "potential terrorists" and strategies to silence pastors through hate crimes legislation.
Blair's video on the criminalization of Christianity may be seen below.
As WND has reported, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Act of 2009 would provide special protections to homosexuals but leave Christian ministers open to prosecution should their teachings be linked to any subsequent offense, by anyone, against a homosexual.
A hearing on the act, already approved by the U.S. House as H.R. 1913 and pending in the Senate as S. 909, is expected in the Senate Judiciary Committee soon.
Under a comparable law in Sweden, a minister was sentenced to 30 days in jail for preaching from Leviticus. Similar state laws have resulted in similar results. In Philadelphia several years ago, a 73-year-old grandmother was reported to have been jailed for trying to share Christian tracts with people at a homosexual festival.
WND columnist Dave Welch, founder and executive director of the U.S. Pastor Council and Houston Area Pastor Council, has warned, "Hate crimes legislation, which assigns different levels of punishment for the same crime, is a perversion of equal justice on its face. Compound that injustice by criminalizing the preaching of Scripture as "hate speech" and therefore evil, while protecting unimaginable and abominable sexual behaviors as good, and we are building a perfect storm for national calamity."
Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of letters have been dispatched to members of the U.S. Senate suggesting that the bill is the wrong way for the country to move. WND columnist Janet Porter, who also heads the Faith2Action Christian ministry, launched the campaign to send thousands of letters to every senator by overnight delivery.
To date, at least 4,500 people have participated, dispatching 450,000 letters to members of the Senate.
But now Blair is stepping up the effort by calling on "patriot pastors" to lead their congregations in three areas: 1) evangelizing and leading people to Christ to change the culture 2) educating people about the truth of America's Christian heritage and real threats like the Hate Crimes Prevention Act and 3) contacting elected representatives by writing letters and participating in petition drives.
His church is planning a special Memorial Day weekend sermon where he will bring in a 150-foot crane to fly the American flag as he warns his congregation of attacks on freedom.
"We absolutely will be addressing the fact that freedom isn't free," he said. "We'll talk about the great sacrifice that was paid for the liberty we enjoy and how there are attacks on that liberty not just abroad, but here at home."
Ministers should never underestimate their roles in preserving America's freedom, Blair said. According to President John Adams, colonial pastors were the single group most responsible for America's independence.
"They were the best educated of citizens, understood the precious value of liberty from tyranny and taught their congregations a true biblical worldview," he said. "As Pastor John Witherspoon, a signer of the Declaration and member of Congress, recognized, 'There is not a single instance in history, in which civil liberty was lost, and religious liberty preserved.'"
Patriot pastors led in the great spiritual revival of the 18th century known as the Great Awakening, Blair noted. And patriot pastors educated their communities and led them in the fight for liberty in America.
"Thank God that our patriot pastors of yesteryear weren't trained with a modern seminary education," he said.
Representatives told Blair if they get five calls on a particular issue, they take notice. So, he would like to see what would happen if hundreds or thousands of people called lawmakers.
"Just think, if pastors would get up on their pulpits and teach folks about how the issues of today are going to affect them and then lead them, we can make a difference," he said. "The problem is we don't hear the truth. We don't hear it in the media, we don't hear it in schools and our pastors have been taught to remain silent."
But Blair said he intends to change that.
"Brethren, it's our turn," he said. "As we reflect this Memorial Day weekend on the great price paid for the liberty that we enjoy, let us not lose that same liberty on ourwatch. Join with a group of patriot pastors across our nation and teach your flock about this dangerous hate crimes legislation and lead them in combating this brazen effort to criminalize Christianity in America."
HAHN, Germany — As President Obama prepared to leave Washington to fly to the Middle East, he conducted several television and radio interviews at the White House to frame the goals for a five-day trip, including the highly-anticipated speech Thursday at Cairo University in Egypt.
In an interview with Laura Haim on Canal Plus, a French television station, Mr. Obama noted that the United States also could be considered as “one of the largest Muslim countries in the world.” He sought to downplay the expectations of the speech, but he said he hoped the address would raise awareness about Muslims.
“Now, I think it’s very important to understand that one speech is not going to solve all the problems in the Middle East,” Mr. Obama said. “And so I think expectations should be somewhat modest.”
He previewed several themes and objectives for the speech, which aides said the president intended to tinker with — and rewrite — aboard Air Force One during his 12-hour flight to Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
“What I want to do is to create a better dialogue so that the Muslim world understands more effectively how the United States, but also how the West thinks about many of these difficult issues like terrorism, like democracy, to discuss the framework for what’s happened in Iraq and Afghanistan and our outreach to Iran, and also how we view the prospects for peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians,” Mr. Obama said.
The president said the United States and other parts of the Western world “have to educate ourselves more effectively on Islam.”
“And one of the points I want to make is, is that if you actually took the number of Muslim Americans, we’d be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world,” Mr. Obama said. “And so there’s got to be a better dialogue and a better understanding between the two peoples.”
The speech on Thursday has many intended audiences, but among them are the young people in Cairo and beyond.
“I think the most important thing I want to tell young people is that, regardless of your faith, those who build as opposed to those who destroy I think leave a lasting legacy, not only for themselves but also for their nations,” Mr. Obama said. “And the impulse towards destruction as opposed to how can we study science and mathematics and restore the incredible scientific and knowledge — the output that came about during centuries of Islamic culture.”
The president is flying Air Force One directly from Washington to Riyadh. The White House press corps — traveling on a chartered United 767 — is refueling in Hahn, Germany.
LOS ANGELES, June 5 /Christian Newswire/ -- A professor at the government-funded University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) has prohibited a graduating student from saying "I want to thank my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ," in her own graduation speech.
Christina Popa just posted the proof emails on her facebook page, showing how other students are permitted to have their speeches read aloud at a pre-graduation ceremony, and Christina would also be allowed, but only if she didn't mention Jesus.
Instead, UCLA Biology Professor Dr. Pamela Hurley deliberately censored Christina's proposed speech, and emailed back to Christina saying: "UCLA is a public university where the doctrine of separation of church and state is observed," and the professor proposed a censored version of Christina's proposed speech, deleting any reference to Jesus Christ.
When Christina objected, Dr. Hurley threatened, "If you prefer, Christina, I can read none of what you wrote. I am very sorry that this is a problem for you."
Links to the proof emails, and a petition to the UCLA Chancellor, Gene Block and Provost, Scott Waugh (for concerned citizens to sign and forward widely), may be found at this web-site:
Christina Popa has consulted attorneys but is not yet available for public comment.
Chaplain Gordon James Klingenschmitt, the former Navy Chaplain who was punished for praying publicly "in Jesus name" (but was later vindicated by Congress), issued the following statement:
"I am not Christina's personal spokesman, but I admire her courage. Jesus is not an illegal word, and UCLA has no business censoring her speech, especially if they claim to celebrate 'academic freedom.' Instead, Dr. Hurley has terribly misapplied her own twisted idea of the separation of church and state. As a Government school, UCLA has absolutely no right to prohibit Christina's freedom of religious expression, and she's earned the right to speak her own words at her own graduation. UCLA is crossing the line of separation, not Christina, and we pray UCLA will repent of their anti-Christian discrimination."
(AP) Former President Bill Clinton said Saturday that Americans should be mindful of the nation's changing demographics, which led to the election of Barack Obama as president.
He told an Arab-American audience of 1,000 people that the U.S. is no longer just a black-white country, nor a country that is dominated by Christians and a powerful Jewish minority, given the growing numbers of Muslims, Hindus and other religious groups here.
Clinton said by 2050 the U.S. will no longer have a majority of people with European heritage and that in an interdependent world "this is a very positive thing."
Speaking in a hotel ballroom to the Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee during its annual convention, Clinton also praised Obama's speech in Cairo, Egypt, that was focused on the Arab world.
Clinton told the audience that it's important that they push government leaders for a resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He cited an experience in 1993 when he failed to persuade many Jewish-American and Arab-American business people to invest in the Palestinian areas because violence and bombings had deterred them.
"It just took one more bus bomb or one more rocket or one more incident and then people got scared of losing their money," he said.
As the U.S. continues to push for peace in the area, "I think it's really important to give the Palestinian people something to look forward to," Clinton said to loud applause.
Clinton, who wasn't paid for his speech, spoke in a wide-ranging 35-minute address that focused on people's identity in an interdependent world. He said the U.S. can't rely on its military might in global relations."It has to begin by people accepting the fact that they can be proud of who they are without despising who someone else is," he said.
Last Thursday, a swarm of police officers descended on Michael Salman's northwest Phoenix home. Armed officers herded Salman, his wife Suzanne, their five young daughters, and their visiting friends into the living room — and kept them under watch for 90 minutes while other city officials searched the grounds.
And here's the crazy part: The officials weren't looking for drugs, weapons, or stolen property.
They were looking for evidence that Michael and Suzanne Salman are holding church services in their backyard.
Sounds unbelievable, right? The First Amendment assures us that the government cannot interfere with the "free exercise" of religion.
Surely, it's none of the city's business who worships where, or when.
But that's exactly what the city of Phoenix was investigating last week.
One of the visitors in the Salmans' home that day, Sam Atallah, came here from Syria for graduate school and now has a Christian ministry focusing on his fellow Middle Easterners. Atallah couldn't believe his own eyes: Seven or eight police officers held the family and their guests at bay. When Suzanne had to leave the room to change her baby's diaper, she was escorted by a cop. When Michael Salman initially demurred at producing a key to an outbuilding, the cops threatened to break down the door.
All because they're holding church services?
"If you tell somebody in the Middle East that this happened, they can't believe you," Atallah says. "We came to America to get away from this kind of persecution."
Even some officers on the scene seemed uncomfortable.
"In the 12 years I've been a police officer, I've never been on an administrative search warrant like this, okay?" one officer told the Salmans that day, according to a videotape of the incident. "They had to take it to this level, which I've never seen before."
Police Detective James Holmes was on the scene. He tells me the police were summoned by zoning officials to help serve an administrative warrant. Typically, the city would take that step only if it had previously been denied access by the homeowner, he says.
But Salman says he never turned city officials away from his home — a fact that a city spokesman ultimately confirmed. That makes the warrant, and the police presence, reek of overreach.
As is usually the case, the backstory is more complicated. After talking to city officials, touring the property, and looking at records, it's pretty clear that this is not just an issue of religious freedom. It may well be that — but it's also an issue of municipal zoning, and the Salmans' attempts to manipulate it.
Indeed, your perspective on this story shifts dramatically depending on whether you take a micro or macro view.
To the city, the question is simply whether the Salmans are holding services in a building that's permitted only for residential use. The services, they say, hold a genuine safety risk.
But for the Salmans, the questions are as big as the Constitution itself.
What exactly is a church? And what is a group of people who meet once a week to celebrate their faith? Should the government really be in the business of delineating?
After all, if it's okay to have friends over every week for game night, why isn't it okay to have them over to worship God?
For the past year and a half, the Salmans jumped through the hoops required by City Hall for construction of a 2,000-square-foot outbuilding in their backyard. It took engineers, architects, and roughly $80,000, but the city ultimately signed off on everything.
The problem is that the Salmans told the city they planned to use the building as a personal "game room." Instead, they're using it as a church.
They won't come right out and say that, of course. But when I visited the Salmans' home in the quiet North Glen Square neighborhood last Friday, a day after the unannounced police visit, the couple acknowledged that they are using the building for worship.
In fact, it was clear to me that worship is the building's only use. The interior looks like any number of the Valley's small, Bible-based churches, from the altar to the neat rows of blue-quilted chairs to the reproduction of da Vinci's The Last Supper on the wall.
"Look, I'm inviting my friends and my family to do the most important thing in my life — which is worship God," Suzanne Salman says. "What's the difference between that, and if I had them over for movie night? Is the city now going to come to the neighbors and say you can't have a movie night every week?"
To anyone not familiar with evangelical churches, that might sound stupid. Of course a group of people that meets regularly to worship is, by definition, a church.
But to anyone familiar with evangelical churches, and their myriad home-based groups, the argument is bit more complicated. After all, a "church" in the old-school Biblical sense isn't a building; it's people. Often, those people do their best worshipping outside a formal structure, in loosely organized home groups.
That is exactly the kind of meeting we can't allow the government to interfere with.
hen I was a kid, my parents held a Bible study in their home. Every Monday night for more than 20 years, our narrow suburban street was packed with cars on both sides. The worship itself was no quiet undertaking: My parents' brand of born-again Christianity leaned heavily toward the euphoric, with guitars and tambourines and shouts of exhortation to Jesus. I used to walk my younger brother in his stroller and marvel at how far we had to go to escape the sounds of fervent worship blasting from our living room.
My parents were lucky, I realize now, in that our neighbors were incredibly tolerant. We never got so much as a phone call asking them to turn down the music. In fact, when the parking situation got really awful, the spinster two doors down actually volunteered her driveway for the overflow.
But what if we'd had different neighbors? What if they hadn't put up with our noisy worship? I cringe to think that we could've been visited by cops armed with a search warrant, insisting that if we drew 75 people every week, we would qualify as a church under municipal ordinances. It seems absurd.
In reality, the Salmans' enterprise appears to have far less impact on their neighborhood than my folks' Bible studies used to. The Salmans' house is behind a gate, and Michael and Suzanne tell me they draw a dozen cars, maximum. They all park behind the gate.
Frankly, I think the trouble at the Salmans' is less about the impact of a dozen cars every week and more about the relationship between Michael Salman and his neighbors.
I wrote a cover story more than a year ago about the dispute between Salman and his neighbors. At the time, Salman publicly spoke of building a big church in his backyard; he was thinking 4,200 square feet.
Petrified about the impact that such a big project could have on property values, the neighbors did whatever they could to stop him, from lobbying City Hall to hiring a lawyer.
The neighbors dug up Michael Salman's criminal history — he did time for a drive-by shooting before finding Christ while in prison — and accused him of preaching at a neighborhood park with a megaphone, aiming the speakers toward their homes. He fired back by producing witnesses who attested that Councilman Claude Mattox had branded him a "religious zealot" at a neighborhood meeting. It was bad blood all around.
Things have only gotten worse.
In April, a pickup belonging to one of Salman's most vocal critics was set on fire. It's being investigated as arson — and, as Salman acknowledges, he's been accused by some neighbors as a "person of interest." (For the record, Salman says he had nothing to do with the blaze; the Phoenix Fire Department didn't return a call seeking comment.)
Last week, two neighbors asked for restraining orders in Maricopa County Superior Court, saying Salman has been harassing them. Salman plans to dispute those charges in court.
The neighborhood's ire clearly triggered the police visit last week. As Detective Holmes points out, the outbuilding is impossible to see from the road, but the Salmans say the neighbors have been videotaping people as they show up for Sunday services.
The neighbors surely aren't happy that, even after they effectively blocked construction of a real church, they still have a congregation in their midst. And even if their response to the weekly gatherings is an overreaction, they may well have municipal law on their side.
And that's because the Salmans have been trying to have it both ways.
Last year, when the Salmans realized that they couldn't meet the city's commercial requirements for a church building, they went ahead with constructing the game room. They tell me they were planning all along to use it for religious activity. But they weren't exactly straightforward about their intentions.
Interestingly, both city officials and Michael Salman referred me to the same set of e-mails to buttress their positions. In the e-mails, sent in April just before the city signed off on final construction, city officials pointedly explained that the building can't be used for church assembly.
"A church assembly use is not allowable under City Code unless the site is developed as a commercial project," a staffer wrote.
Salman responded, agreeing that the building "will not be used for a public place of worship. It is for private use. Yes, we are not planning to convert the 2,000-square-foot building into a public place of worship and do understand that if we want a public place of worship that we will have to adhere to the building codes and such."
Sounds clear-cut, right?
Not to Salman. He may have assured the city he wasn't building a public place of worship, but his emphasis was on public.
"This is for private, personal use," Salman says. "We're not going to put signs up there with worship service times. We don't advertise anywhere. We have gatherings at our house. That's not against the law."
That's a distinction the city isn't buying.
City spokesman David J. Ramirez says the issue isn't the nature of the assemblies. It's safety. There are no sprinklers in the outbuilding and no emergency exits, yet the room features 145 chairs. "It's a hazard to pack 145 people into a space like that," Ramirez says.
So last Thursday, no fewer than seven officers showed up at the Salman home, escorting a group of zoning officers with an administrative warrant. While the Salmans have yet to be cited for a crime, the cops did leave behind a "notice of code violation." It reiterates that the outbuilding may be used only for residential use.
Indeed, for all the protestations that they aren't hosting church services, the Salmans are, at best, walking an incredibly fine line. Unlike most small, home-based fellowships, they've got all the trappings of a church. A sign on their gate announces "Harvest Christian Community Church." Advertisements for the fellowship's Web site, www.hcfaz.org, pepper the family's two vans. And, of course, Salman goes by "Pastor."
The main difference between their group and any other start-up church is the Salmans' insistence that they chose to be "private."
Does that matter? Should it? Really, what can the city do? Bad enough that they sent a half-dozen officers last week to do the work of city bureaucrats. Shut down a religious service, and they will have triggered all sorts of constitutional issues.
The Salmans aren't stupid. They realize this. So despite the officers' arrival on Thursday, on Sunday, the Salmans invited some friends and family into their "game room."
They didn't play poker or pool or Pictionary. Instead, they worshipped God, exactly as they'd planned.
The police were nowhere in sight. Not this Sunday, anyway.
Next Sunday is anyone's guess.
More than four decades of decades of tradition were changed this year at the God and Country Family Festival in Nampa, Idaho.
Typically, a military flyover is a highlight of the event, but this year it did not happen.
To make a fly over happen you have to get permission from the Pentagon.
It hasn't been a problem in the past but this year it was --all because of the word "God."
"We found out the routes you were supposed to take so we filled out all the paperwork, we got approved from the FAA, and then just had to forward it on, and that goes to the Pentagon," said Patti Syme, board member.
A request for a military flyover is a tradition at the God and Country Family Festival, but that tradition was put on hold this year.
When the Pentagon responded in an e-mail to board member Patti Syme that her request had been denied.
"It says, we prohibit support for events which appear to endorse selectivity benefit or favor any special interest group, religious or ideological movement," said Syme.
"What was your response? asked NewsChannel 7.
"I called him immediately and just said, you know hey we've been doing this for 42 years, we've had flyovers, what is the problem? And he said, well we have looked up your Web site and everything on your Web site seemed to focus on Christianity, ministry booths. And he said, in fact, ma'am it sounds like it focuses on Christianity. And he said, in fact, it would be great to go to, in fact, if I personally, could come I would, but we can't endorse such an endeavor, so they couldn't do the flyover," said Syme.
"There are statements on the Web site, because it truly a God and Country Festival founded on the principles that our country was founded on and the military part of it, obviously is a huge part of the event," said Canyon County Commissioner David Ferdinand.
Ferdinand says every year a request was submitted it was granted and he believes this was simply a mistake.
"We've had A15, A10s, we have even had a B-1 bomber from the U.S. Air Force," said Ferdinand.
Ferdinand says the flyover is a salute to the service men and women, and is a cherished part of the night for the more than 10,000 that attend.
"This thing is a patriotic event and in our opinion, why it started and where it started, we need to continue that tradition," said Ferdinand.
The rejection hurt the group but they say they will try again to bring it back next year.
"We are going to pursue the flyover, that's what it is for to honor those active, those serving," said Syme.
NewsChannel 7 made calls to the Pentagon today to get their side of the story, and specifically asked for the officer who spoke with Patti Syme.
But this is a holiday and we're unable to get a response for now. A new addition to the God and Country Family Festival was the swearing in of members from four military branches -- 79 men and women represented the Marines, Navy, Air Force and Army.
American Muslims organized a nationwide prayer which is scheduled for Sept. 25, gathering tens of thousands of Muslims.
Monday, 14 September 2009 13:27
World Bulletin / News Desk
American Muslims organized a nationwide prayer which is scheduled for Sept. 25, gathering tens of thousands of Muslims.
Dar Al-Slam mosque in Elizabeth, Dar-ul-Islam, is spearheading a national prayer gathering next month in Washington, D.C., that organizers are billing as the first event of its kind outside the U.S. Capitol building.
50.000 worshippers are anticipated.
Hassen Abdellah, president of Dar-ul-Islam and a main organizer of the event, said that The event will not include political speeches or placards, just prayer.
Organizers have considered the Jummah Prayer on Capital Hill as a Day of Islamic Unity.
The organizers said on website that "the objective of this gathering is to invite the Muslim Communities and friends of Islam to express and illustrate the wonderful diversity of Islam. "
They said that thay intend to manifest "Islam's majestic spiritual principals" as revealed by Allah to Islmaic prophet Muhammad.
They intend to inspire a new generation of Muslim to work for the greater good of all people. We shall serve all people, regardless of race, religion or national origin, they also said.
Over 500 buses were reserved to transport attenders from local Masjids to Elizabeth mosque.
There will be also Qoran Recitation By Sheik Muhammad Jebril and Sheik Ahmed Dewidar
September 15th, 2009, 18:24
vector7
Re: The End of Christian America
Obama ignores the National Day of Prayer,but he will allow the Muslims to use the site of his Inauguration to chant Islamic Prayer through loudspeakers in Washington, DC?http://www.uniteordie.org/forum/imag...a-distress.gif
The objective of this gatheringis to invite the Muslim Communities and friends of Islam to express and illustrate the wonderfuldiversity of Islam. We intend to manifest Islam's majestic spiritual principals as revealed by Allah to our beloved prophet
Muhammad (PEACE BE UPON HIM) of Arabia. Likewise; we intend to inspire a new generation of Muslim to work for the greater good of allpeople. We shall serve all people, regardless of race, religion or national origin.
ON THIS DAY....
The Athan will be chanted on Capitol Hill, echoing off of the Lincoln Memorial, the Washington Monument and other great edifices that surround Capitol Hill
Thousands of Muslims from all races, creeds, colors and ethnicities will gather for the sole purpose of prayer
Bonds of friendship will be formed between those in attendance, both Muslims and Non-Muslims
Muslim youth will experience tours of the Library of Congress and the Supreme Court.
The peace, beauty and solidarity of Islam will shine through America's capitol.
http://www.wnd.com/images/misc/islamicnewyeardec7.jpg
Dec. 7, 2010 marks the Islamic New Year, but not Pearl Harbor Day on all calendars produced by Blue Mountain Arts of Boulder, Colo. (WND photo / Joe Kovacs)
"A date which will live in infamy."
That's how President Franklin Roosevelt immortalized Dec. 7, 1941, the day forces stunned the U.S. with a sudden attack on Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, prompting the U.S. to jump into the Second World War.
Just don't expect to find any mention of that on your calendar this year.
Nearly seven decades after the onslaught, many U.S. calendars produced by American companies are ignoring Pearl Harbor Day, and are displaying instead the Islamic New Year on Dec. 7.
Even calendars promoting the Holy Bible take note of the Muslim observance, while completely omitting the day on which more than 2,000 Americans lost their lives in the surprise attack.
"I have a Psalms calendar, which has a Bible verse on each month's picture, made by BrownTrout Publishers, Inc., and it also has Dec. 7 as the Islamic New Year. No mention of Pearl Harbor Day," said Donna Brandt of Marshalltown, Iowa. "I am incensed and will be giving the BrownTrout Publishers a piece of my mind! Thank you for calling my attention to this blasphemy."
Jim Jones of Waco, Texas, also bought a BrownTrout calendar, and says, "We are going to get rid of it. I think I am going back to the store where we bought it (Petsmart) and ask for my money back. I do not want to honor a bunch of fanatics who are trying to kill us infidels. My thinking is all Islamists, if they believe and follow the Quran, are fanatics, and I have no use for them."
All calendars produced by the world's largest caledar company, BrownTrout Publishers of San Francisco, make no mention of Pearl Harbor Day, but instead cite Dec. 7, 2010 as the Islamic New Year. (WND photo / Joe Kovacs)
WND obtained several calendars from a variety of publishers, including San Francisco-based BrownTrout, which bills itself as the largest calendar publisher in the world, producing about 1,000 separate varieties each year.
In its 2010 Bible calendar, which features a 1563 painting of the Tower of Babel on its cover, the Dec. 7 entry specifies "Islamic New Year," with Pearl Harbor Day completely absent.
Perusing the rest of its December page, the BrownTrout calendar notes Dec. 23 is the "Emperor's Birthday" in Japan, Dec. 26 is when Kwanzaa begins as well as St. Stephen's Day in Ireland, and Dec. 27 is a "Bank Holiday" in the United Kingdom. Popular observances such as Christmas Day and New Year's Eve are also included on Dec. 25 and 31, respectively.
"Pearl Harbor day is not a federal holiday," said Mrs. Wendover Brown, owner of BrownTrout, which excludes mention of Pearl Harbor from all its datekeepers. "It's a day of mourning which is not normally indicated as a holiday."
She admitted, "We've had many, many letters questioning our patriotism," and called it an "unfortunate overlap" that Islamic New Year, which is a floating, lunar-based observance, happens to fall on Dec. 7 of this year.
"I apologize to anyone who feels we were unpatriotic or dismissive of Pearl Harbor Day. We're not," she told WND. "We're a very patriotic company and we're very American. Tolerance is a good quality of the plurality of our country."
"We feel that the purpose of a calendar is to alert people when regular is closed," she continued. "We certainly don't have a political agenda to impose. We apologize if our products have not reflected the wonderful country we all enjoy. We will be reviewing holiday citations on our products for future editions. We will promise to be responsive to what our consumers tell us."
Brown, 56, says her own brother is a 27-veteran of the U.S. Marines, and is about to next month from his post at the Pensacola Naval Air Station in Florida.
She also points out that within 10 days of the 9/11 terrorist attacks on America, her company produced two special calendars to raise some $741,000 for the Uniformed Firefighters of Greater New York to help families of the heroes killed in the line of duty.
"We gave so much money to that they said they couldn't take any more because they were having trouble distributing it," she said.
BrownTrout, founded in 1986 by Wendover and her husband, Marc Brown, previously did include Pearl Harbor Day when it was just a dealing with American clients. She says as the firm expanded, its calendars became more international-oriented, and Pearl Harbor Day became a victim of the globalization.
Regarding which days are included and which are not, she says there's an eight-week process editors go through from Jan. 1 every year through the end of February, when they do a thorough polling of major buyers, bookstores, pet stores as well as public comments throughsuch as Twitter and Mrs. Brown says the 2011 calendar is already being printed and does not include Pearl Harbor Day on Dec. 7, so the next possible chance to include it would be for the 2012 edition. The company does provide refunds to those who request them.
Blue Mountain Arts has never noted Pearl Harbor Day in any of its calendars, but mentions Islamic New Year Dec. 7, 2010. (WND photo / Joe Kovacs)
Meanwhile, popular 2010 calendars published by Blue Mountain Arts of Boulder, Colo., including "A Sister's Love is Forever" and "Mom, I Love You So Much," all cite Dec. 7 as the Islamic New Year without any citation for Pearl Harbor Day.
Bob Gall, president of the company, was initially unsure when WND first asked why Pearl Harbor Day is not included, saying it was "really interesting why we don't. I question the same thing. It is a significant event in our lifetime. Good question. I don't know."
After investigating the matter, he discovered the company has never included Pearl Harbor Day in its publications, but added, "we probably will in the future," since many other days have been added over the years.
Other observances Blue Mountain Arts currently deems worthy of inclusion are:
March 1: National Women's History Month begins April 11: Holocaust Remembrance Day April 21: Administrative Professionals Day April 22: Earth Day, as well as Take Our Daughters and Sons to Work Day May 1: May Day May 4: National Teacher Day May 5: Cinco de Mayo Aug. 11: First Day of Muslim Ramadan Aug. 26: Women's Equality Day Sept. 21: U.N. International Day of Peace Nov. 16: The Muslim Eid-al-Adha Dec. 26: First Day of Kwanzaa, Boxing Day, St. Stephen's Day in Ireland
The company did not completely ignore the military, though, as Armed Forces Day is noted on May 15 in addition to federal holidays such as Memorial Day and Veterans Day.
Gall admits the company has made errors in the past, such as producing a calendar displaying Nov. 31, when such a date does not exist. He says a bride-to-be contacted the company complaining, "I scheduled the wedding for Nov. 31 based on your calendar."
"The fun of calendars became a reality where you just can't make a mistake," Gall said.
Susan Polis Schutz, co-founder of Blue Mountain Arts
Blue Mountain Arts was co-founded by anti-war activist Susan Polis Schutz, the director and executive producer of "Anyone and Everyone," a film about parents of homosexual children.
Concerning her film, she stated, "It is a lot easier for gay people to come out now than it was 15 years ago. However, there is still prejudice. In some cases the prejudice is flagrantly overt, in other cases through more subtle biases of the mind.
And there remain antiquated laws and unequal rights that inhumanely and negatively affect gay people all over the world."
According to Denver's Westword, Jared Polis in recent years has donated heavily to Democratic campaigns and left-leaning organizations, including giving $200,000 to MoveOn.org.
As WND first reported last week, Publix Supermarkets, a major chain in 5 Southeastern states, pulled its free, 2010 calendar from shelves after outraged customers flooded the company with complaints for citing the Islamic New Year at the expense of Pearl Harbor Day.
http://www.wnd.com/images/misc/pearl...ussshaw650.jpg
The forward magazine of USS Shaw explodes during the 2nd Japanese attack wave on Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, Dec. 7, 1941. To the left of the explosion, Shaw's stern is visible, at the end of floating drydock. At right is the bow of USS Nevada, with a tug alongside fighting fires.
A South Florida radio station, WFTL, brought the matter to light with its midday hosts, Joyce Kaufman and Jeff Katz, urging listeners to bombard Publix with their concerns.
Ironically, while Publix did not include Pearl Harbor Day, it did find space for National Boss Day and Administrative Assistant's Day.
The inclusion of those non-holidays contradicts a statement last Wednesday by Publix spokeswoman Kimberly Jaeger who explained, "Traditionally, our calendars have solely noted holidays. Due to the number of holidays in a calendar year, days of remembrance have not been noted."
By Friday, another statement isssued by the chain claimed those non-holidays were added "based on customer requests."
Publix also found room to list independence days for many foreign countries such as Antigua, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Bolivia, Central America, Cuba, Haiti, Mexico, Paraguay, Uruguay and Trinidad and Tobago.
In the wake of WND's national exposure of the matter, the supermarket has taken on a more apologetic telling its customers, "We would never knowingly disappoint you. We truly regret and apologize for having done that. Our intent was never to exclude important dates or to reduce the importance of any one day. Since our customer base is very diverse, we make every effort to do the right thing, for the most people."
Concerning the calendar flap, Kathleen Riley of Rochester, Mich., wrote WND to the bigger issue, in her opinion, is that immigrants must assimilate into American culture, not Americans into foreign cultures.
Little by little, inch by inch, the folks from the Middle East countries are promoting their values, ideals and culture on us, some by force, some by insistence, some by their clothing style, and some merely by perseverance. (I live in the Detroit area; first they took over Dearborn, then Hamtramck and now are flooding Southfield. The Dearborn schools stop for prayers six times a day, creating an uncomfortable situation for anyone non-Muslim. Consequently, people move out of the area and sell their homes to other Muslims. ... This is the impact of adding their holidays to our calendars. Excuse me, but the last time I looked (despite what Obama tells the world), the United States of America is a Christian country. This multi-culturalism hoax must go away.
According to WND readers, another calendar maker citing the Islamic New Year over Pearl Harbor Day is Myron Corp. of Maywood, N.J.
But not all publishers have omitted the World War II attack. The National Pen Co. of Shelbyville, Tenn., as well as the National Rifle Association are among those who take note of Pearl Harbor Day, while excluding the Islamic New Year for 2010.
According to the Naval History and Heritage Command, Americans losing their lives on Dec. 7, 1941, numbered 2,403, including 68 civilians, most of whom were killed by improperly fused anti-aircraft shells landing in Honolulu. There were 1,178 military and civilian wounded.
A high school hall-of-fame and Christian wrestling coach in Dearborn, Mich., claims he was muscled out of his long-tenured coaching job by the school's principal, a devout Muslim, because the administrator was furious over a student wrestler who had converted to Christianity from Islam.
Gerald Marszalek has coached wrestling for 35 years at Dearborn Public Schools, amassing more than 450 wins and, in addition to being added to the Michigan High School Athletic Association Hall of Fame, was named "Sportsman of the Year" by the All-American Athletic Association.
Despite Marszalek's success, however, Principal Imad Fadlallah of Dearborn's Fordson High School ordered the administration not to renew the coach's contract, allegedly in retaliation over the student's conversion and to continue a campaign of flushing Christianity out of the school.
"We are getting a glimpse of what happens when Muslims who refuse to accept American values and principles gain political power in an American community," said Richard Thompson, president and chief counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, which is representing Marszalek. "Failure to renew coach Marszalek's contract had nothing to do with wrestling and everything to do with religion."
Marszalek is suing both the principal and the school in the U.S. District Court of Eastern Michigan, seeking back pay, injunctive and declaratory relief, damages, and to be reinstated as coach of the wrestling team.
According to lawsuit documents, Principal Fadlallah's retribution against the Christian coaches serving Fordson High began in 2005, after Marszalek's volunteer assistant coach, Trey Hancock, led a non-school sanctioned and independent summer wrestling camp.
Hancock, who is also pastor of the Dearborn Assembly of God and parent to one of the wrestlers, reportedly shared his beliefs at the camp and baptized a Muslim Fordson student into the Christian faith.
That fall, Fadlallah fired Hancock and ordered the volunteer coach not to have further contact with the student wrestlers.
"Subsequently, in full view of students and faculty," the lawsuit states, "Fadlallah approached the young Fordson student who had chosen to be baptized a Christian at Hancock's summer wrestling camp, punched the student and advised the student he had 'disgraced his family' by converting to Christianity from Islam."
According to a statement from the Thomas More Law Center, Dearborn is one of the most densely populated Muslim communities in the United States. An estimated 30,000 of its 98,000 residents are Muslims, and roughly 80 percent of the student population of Fordson High School is Arabic, many of whom are also Muslims.
Furthermore, the lawsuit alleges, Fadlallah then banned Hancock from entering the school, ordered Marszalek to "keep Hancock out of the building" and even banned the Hancock family from helping out at school concession stands, even though Hancock's son was an All-State wrestler on Fordson's team.
On or about Thanksgiving Day 2007, Hancock came to the school to register his son for an activity, an offense against Fadlallah's orders, the lawsuit claims, which led to a vocal confrontation between the principal and Marszalek, who was allegedly accused of failing to enforce Hancock's banishment.
When the 2007-2008 wrestling season concluded, the lawsuit states, Fadlallah instructed the school's athletic director to be rid of Marszalek too, by refusing to even process the Christian's yearly renewal application for the coaching position, saying, "Gone. I want him gone. No appeal."
Another assistant coach, who had made no application for the head coaching position, was chosen by the school to take Marszalek's place.
According to the lawsuit, however, Marszalek's treatment by Fadlallah isn't isolated, but part of an intentional eradication of Christianity from the school.
"Fadlallah, since assuming duties as Fordsons' principal in 2005, has systematically weeded out Christian teachers, coaches and employees and has terminated, demoted or reassigned them because of their Christian beliefs," the lawsuit continues. "Fadlallah has publicly stated 'he sees Dearborn Fordson High School as a Muslim school, both in students and faculty, and is working to that end.'"
David Mustonen, a spokesman for Dearborn Public Schools, told the Detroit Free Press earlier today that the district had not yet seen the lawsuit and would therefore have to review it before making any comment.
For all his faults and not-so-true conservative bones, George W. Bush was indeed a man of some character and one who displayed the fruit of the Spirit. While one of our most humble leaders—he was not by any means perceived as weak by our enemies or disloyal by our allies.
He actually read the Bible, attended church, and knew (on the question of the sanctity of life) that life began at conception and abortion was murder. He prayed, attended church, and sought advice from other believers.
You could argue about some of his “liberal” decisions or his strategy in Iraq which produced far reaching results for an oppressed people.
His graciousness during the transition to the Obama administration was one of eagerness to help even to the point of serving the incoming president. He was for many Christians a good example of real “fruit” produced by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit: love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness and temperance.
Now before I am swamped by those who think I am trying to canonize Mr. Bush, let me say that I am simply pointing out many of the qualities I perceived of him during his eight years in the White House.
As far as I can remember, Mr. Bush never perceived the United States as not being a Christian nation. He didn’t view the Constitution as something archaic and to be shredded. He was an interesting leader in that he suffered the heap of criticism from the MSM—that relentless, overbearing, at times criminal display of contempt and hatred—with incredible grace and longsuffering. He wasn’t a great orator and often he ‘invented’ words that became known as ‘Bushisms’. But he never complained (at least publicly) about the harsh treatment, and never boasted of the fact that he had “won” the presidency. And I don’t recall him using a teleprompter when he visited any classroom in America!
He is an imperfect man who displayed Christian fruit while holding the world’s most demanding job. Say what you want about George W. Bush, but I have no doubt he is indeed a true Christian. Was he our last Christian president?
I only ask this in light of today’s definition of what a Christian really is based on research from George Barna and the Pew Research surveys.
Christians used to have a biblical worldview—but now a great number of those who identify themselves as ‘Christian’ have ambivalence about abortion, same sex marriage, sexual promiscuity, and sound doctrine. We live in a post-modern, post-Christian world in which the worldview is shaped more by the many colors of our culture than the black and white of God’s word.
Whoever leads this nation and professes their Christianity while not challenging those laws and morays which are an anathema to God cannot be truly born again. It’s easy, though, in America today, to have it both ways. You can sew the label of Christ on your garments but that doesn’t mean you are clothed in the grace of Jesus Christ and bearing the fruit of the Holy Spirit.
March 11th, 2010, 18:16
vector7
Re: The End of Christian America
Yep,
Just need the rest of the country to come to the same conclusions before we find ourselves in unrecoverable territory.
Many believe we are already past the point of no return...well, at least the America we used to know.
Detroit looks at turning vacant lots into farmland to save city: Now, a city of nearly 2 million in the 1950s has declined to less than half that number. On some blocks, only one or two occupied houses remain, surrounded by trash-strewn lots and vacant, burned-out homes. Scavengers have stripped anything of value from empty buildings.
In the squares of the city - In the shadow of the steeple Near the relief office - I see my people And some are grumblin' and some are wonderin' If this land's still made for you and me. I guess the ones asleep will finally wake up with everyone else when we all arrive at the Government relief office.