John R. Houk
© July 13, 2012
Solid Snake often complains that pro-family groups are more talk than action. He believes they are more about sending out newsletters to keep the donating base going in order to keep the salaries going for their non-profit organizations. Instead a greater percentage of the donations should be used for actual activism rather than merely moralizing.
I believe Solid Snake is on to something. The moralizing is good; however if it is not followed up by action the moralizing is merely for the ever shrinking choir. The choir is shrinking because Left inspired activism is well funded and well organized for activism.
In America Christians have allowed America’s Left to effectually war on Christianity. More and more of the Mainstream Church Denominations in America are either losing membership or rendering the Word of God to the level of myth or both. Evangelical Christians and of that lot those Churches that lean to non-denominationalism are the only Christians that are constantly adding numbers to the Body of Christ.
Solid Snake’s expertise in the infiltration homosexual activist organizations and public events and exposing the depravity and too often illegal activities related to embezzling or corrupting America’s youth with something like promoting underage sex within a homosexual venue.
Here is a recent letter that Solid Snake sent to some Pro-Family groups as a call for more activism:
Unite: God’s Truth and Family Values
By Solid Snake
Originally sent: June 29, 2012
Dear Pro Family Group:
Thank-you for standing up for God’s Truth and Family Values, and against lawlessness, indecency such as public nudity including homosexual acts and other things that are difficult to put into words-that the Homosexual lobby is trying to force us to accept and affirm…
You are aware of homosexual groups and their goals to destroy the nuclear family and our long held American family values. They will silence anyone who questions or challenges them, or who dares to talk about reparative therapy or the freedom to change.
I have been watching up close up and personal this battle for quite some time. I have infiltrated some of the most horrific events they put on to bring the reality of what they are doing to your attention. Yet some pro family groups lack the intestinal fortitude to challenge the Homosexuals out in the open head-on.
What is there to fear??
Perhaps some encouragement is what’s needed.
Writing newsletters and press releases can only go so far. Eventually, the enemy has to be faced on the field of battle, which few have the stomach for, because most are shying away from it. Pretending it doesn’t exist is not going to eliminate the threat.
For those who have fought the Homosexuals on their own ground I commend you. The homosexual activists may have main stream media and Hollywood at their beck and call. But you have an ally more powerful than anything or anyone the Homosexual lobby has in their suitcase of treachery, fraud, violence, lust & greed. That ally is our Lord Jesus Christ. (Emphasis Mine)
The only way to combat this evil is to work together as a single unit to expose the inexcusable acts by Homosexual activist groups and what they are doing to children. I humbly ask you to put your differences aside with your co laborers and work together as a single unit in unit cohesion to overcome this evil.
Pool your resources to combat what the enemy is planning before it is too late. Hollow and unstable [is] the foundation of Homosexual’s lobby and their groups’ are capable of severe damage as they are defeated in every arena. [SlantRight Editor: I had a difficult time understanding the original paragraph so I took the liberty to edit this paragraph. I pray I did not alter Solid Snake’s original intent.]
An attack on one pro family organization or person who opposes the homosexual lobby should be considered an attack on all (clergy included). All the Hate email, snail mail written by homosexual “activists”, bloggers should be posted publicly verbatim so people can see how vile and evil they really are to anyone who questions or opposes their lifestyle. I sincerely thank you for your work and I will continue to support and assist your cause however I can.
Cc: NYFRF, FRC, Mass Resistance, AFA, Mission America, NOM, AFTH (sic)
The last organization a copy was sent to is actually AFTAH. The “Cc” forgot a letter. In conversations I have had with Solid Snake the organizations he rates as best is Mass Resistance, AFTAH and Mission America. The Pro-Family organizations that Solid Snake believes are not pulling their weight in activism are AFA and FRC. I am certain Solid Snake has other Pro-Family organizations on the plus and minus side however these are the ones he has mentioned to me.
I check up on Mass Resistance and AFTAH via my RSS program. I am on the email lists of AFA and FRC. I don’t know much about Mission America.
I know Mass Resistance is in the heat of battle in confronting the homosexual agenda to warp the morals of America. Currently Mass Resistance is in a battle to expose the homosexual activist Adam Flanders who is a convicted Man/Boy sex offender in having sex with a minor boy. Flanders has enlisted the money of homosexual groups to utilize a Leftist activist Judge in Maine to harass Mass Resistance founder Brian Camenker. Exposing Flanders was just a part of taking the fight to the homosexual agenda. Mass Resistance is exposing what is going on at homosexual youth camps. You can guess that more goes on than to just provide a place of validation for corrupted boys and girls that have been brainwashed that choosing a homosexual lifestyle is normal and good for society.
AFTAH is all about exposing the perversity of homosexuality that the MSM does not inform heterosexual America and that homosexual activism is hell-bent in preventing such knowledge from reaching Americans while homosexual activism brainwashes people to accept godless morality over Biblical Morality. AFTAH is the acronym for Americans for Truth about Homosexuality.
The AFA is the acronym for American Family Association. Below is some AFA information from their website:
American Family Association (AFA) a non-profit 501(c3) organization was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was pastoring First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of America’s culture war. The original name of the ministry was National Federation for Decency but was changed to American Family Association (AFA) in 1988.
Today, AFA is one of the largest and most effective pro-family organizations in the country with over two million online supporters and approximately 180,000 paid subscribers to the AFA Journal, the ministry’s monthly magazine. In addition, AFA owns and operates nearly 200 radio stations across the country under the American Family Radio (AFR) banner.
Other divisions of AFA include OneNewsNow.com, an online news provider that is syndicated around the world. AFA maintains activist web sites such as OneMillionMoms.com and OneMillionDads.com that rally Christian activists to contact companies asking them to drop their advertising from objectionable TV shows. AFA web sites average over 40 million hits and five million visitors each month.
AFA uses all these means to communicate an outspoken, resolute, Christian voice throughout America.
AFA is a long-time member of the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability. In 2008, the AFA received a second consecutive four-star rating from Charity Navigator (CN), an independent watchdog organization which monitors nonprofit groups. Click here to see article.
Highlights of AFA’s recent accomplishments include:
§ AFA issued its annual “Naughty or Nice” listing of retailers’ recognition of Christmas in its advertising. Over one million people viewed the list during Nov/Dec.
§ Alerted consumers to Sears’ distribution of hard-core pornography from its website. Sears eventually pulled the material.
§ Launched a boycott of The Home Depot after it refused to remain neutral in the culture war.
§ Stopped Comedy Central from airing “JC”, a cartoon mocking Jesus and Christianity.
§ Launched the iVote campaign, placing hundreds of billboards across the nation, encouraging citizens to vote their values in November.
§ Exposed homosexual “Day of Silence” and encourage parents to keep their children home from public school on that day.
§ AFA suspended the boycott of PepsiCo. After monitoring the company for several months, AFA is satisfied the company has withdrawn its major financial contributions to gay activist groups.
§ Over 11,705 official indecency complaints were filed with the FCC after FOX Network aired a bestiality scene on its American Dad program.
§ Erroll Southers, the President’s poorly chosen nominee to head up the Transportation Security Administration, withdrew his name from consideration. Tens of thousands of you sent letters to your senators in response to our action alert on his nomination.
The whole page of which “Who is AFA?” and “Has made an Impact” can be viewed HERE.
I have to disagree with Solid Snake that the AFA is ineffective in activism. I believe the AFA has made a huge impact in defense of Family Values. On the other hand if the AFA and other Pro-Family groups unite in a defined level to protect Family Values the impact would bury homosexual activism among the other issues that are on attack mode against Family Values. For example a coordinated front of Family Values activism on a grassroots level is something that would have to be reported by the Mainstream Media (MSM).
For example he has taken it upon himself to infiltrate homosexual events to take pictures and videos of the perversion that occurs in public. Yet he feels like a lone wolf because he and perhaps a few willing buddies enter these streets and avenues of Sodom and Gomorrah.
The Family Research Council (FRC) is not as activist oriented in its agenda as the AFA. Here is some information about FRC activities from their website:
Since 1983, Family Research Council (FRC) has advanced faith, family and freedom in public policy and public opinion. FRC’s team of seasoned experts promotes these core values through policy research, public education on Capitol Hill and in the media, and grassroots mobilization. We review legislation, meet with policymakers, publish books and pamphlets, build coalitions, testify before Congress, and maintain a powerful presence in print and broadcast media. Through our outreach to pastors, we equip churches to transform the culture.
Strategically located in Washington, D.C., FRC is the leading voice for the family in our nation’s halls of power. FRC is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization.
Family Research Council (FRC) champions marriage and family as the foundation of civilization, the seedbed of virtue, and the wellspring of society. FRC shapes public debate and formulates public policy that values human life and upholds the institutions of marriage and the family. Believing that God is the author of life, liberty, and the family, FRC promotes the Judeo-Christian worldview as the basis for a just, free, and stable society.
You can read more about the FRC history HERE.
FRC’s activism is in educating a network of people that are influential in Washington, DC politics. The FRC’s idea of grassroots activism is keeping a network of potential donors informed. To give FRC a little credit, informing their network of potential donors is in all probability influencing potential voters who will in turn be writing their Senator and Congressman on a Federal and State level. Hopefully this influence also translates into the proper votes on a County and City level.
A true impact would be to organize a spontaneous looking protest against homosexual debauchery in the thousands at all the major cities that allow perverted homosexual events to take place across the USA. NOW that would be some impact.
The impact would be the MSM would have a difficult time reporting a confrontation as between poor victimized homosexuals and some bigoted Christians. If the MSM would dare to show Christians walking peacefully with signs and Scriptural chants of protest compared to the barely clad males participating in something like homosexual sadomasochism, then the public would have a hard time believing a MSM spin that Christian protesters were utilizing violent intimidation. I am certain any violence that would ensue would be from homosexuals engaging in violent intimidation and coarse language that would match the perversion already being engaged into.
This kind of grassroots activism is something Pro-Family groups FAIL to engage in. One must ask – WHY?
Solid Snake might answer the question that the Pro-Family groups’ fear their funding may be attacked in some way when homosexual activism strikes back with the usual baited diatribes that Christians are engaging in homophobic bigotry. After all homosexuals have the Right as Lesbian, Gay, Bi-sexual and Transgender individuals to choose this alternate lifestyle because even the American Medical Association as well as the Psychology and Psychiatrist equivalents were intimidated into changing homosexuality from a mental health problem to societal normalcy.
Homosexuals are actually a very small minority in America. According to the MSM The Atlantic less than 5% of Americans are homosexuals. Of course the opposite is true then: MORE THAN 95% OF AMERICANS ARE THE REAL NORMAL. This statistic does not make homosexuals a small minority, rather it makes homosexuals NOT NORMAL.
Now think of the impact on American culture if the huge proportion of the Christian population that is a part of 95% of normal Americans, united on a grassroots level, to counter the money-power of the way less than 5% of homosexual activism – would Biblical morality be reaffirmed?
SlantRight Editor: Solid Snake sent the 990s of the AFA and FRC to drive home the point that those two Pro-Family organization are more interested in money than inspiring local grassroots activism across America. I have to be honest that bean counting is not one of my strong points in producing an appropriate analysis. So this is what I am going to do. I am going to post some screen shots of sections of the 990s and those of you with a head for math send me the analysis of what the AFA and the FRC can do better on a grassroots involvement on the local level.
John R. Houk
© May 21, 2012
I am on the WND email list. And really, I enjoy being on the WND mailing list. One of the draw backs though are I am bombarded with ads from the WND store. I actually read those ads with interest because I am tempted to buy stuff. Fear of the budget minded wife keeps me inline and away from buying on a weekly basis.
In saying all that WND sent an interesting ad with a theme I am very interested in. The theme is the effect of Secular Humanist/Marxist thinking invading America’s Public School system to mold young minds away from traditional Christian Moral thought.
The email ad is informative even if you don’t buy anything and because of this I am posting the email almost in its entirety. Here is quick summary list of the sale offer and the topics inherent in the title:
§ ‘Marxism led Madalyn Murray O’Hair to atheism’
§ INDOCTRINATION: PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND THE DECLINE OF CHRISTIANITY IN AMERICA
§ My War: The Testimony of Bradlee Dean (DVD)
§ Fish Out of Water (Paperback)
It is hardly surprising that many young Christians find their faith tested upon entering a university. Secular institutions today are rife with professors who are not only unbelievers, but who actively mock religion, all under the guise of “academic freedom.”
§ INDOCTRINATE U: OUR EDUCATION, THEIR POLITICS
Below is the email promo (Read at SlantRight 2.0) with the theme of assault on Christian Values in the American Public School System.
John R. Houk
© February 15, 2012
For years I have straddled a line when it comes to Islam. Muslim apologists are quick to point out that 90% of Muslims are “Moderate” peaceful Muslims and that 10% are Radical Muslims taking the Quran out of perspective to promote-inflict a Conservative view of Islam on Muslims and non-Muslims alike.
There are roughly 2 billion Muslims. That means that the 10% of Radical Muslims are roughly 20 million. The Left is always trying to obfuscate the reality of 20 million radical Muslims pointing out there are Right Wing Christians also. We all know that a huge majority of Right Wing Christians (especially in America) are peacefully oriented when it comes to social distress over blaspheming the faith of Christianity. Then there is the extremist Right Christians that will use portions of the Old Testament to justify violence which often is armed with bigotry. The Left has attempted to lump all the Christian Right together whether they are Christ following New Testament Believers or the pseudo-Christians that cherry pick Old Testament Scriptures that have zero application in Christianity in the 21st Century. Violence in the name of God in the Old Testament was time-period specific. This means when the mission assigned by God was accomplished, time was up and violence was not to continue or at least not until the next assignment.
Whereas in Islam, the violence that is in their holy writings (Quran, Hadith and Sira SA The Five Principles) advocate violence as part of the spreading and defending the supremacy of Islam in perpetuity. Violence is only advocated in the New Testament in the Last Days and even then Jesus Christ is a general defeating Satan’s forces on planet earth. Until that time Christians on an individual basis are to fulfill the Great Commission to go throughout the world to share the Good News of Salvation in the Risen Christ.
There is always something that has drawn me back and forth across the line that says on one side there are good Muslims out there that believe Islam is a peaceful solution to achieve whatever Islamic bliss is out there. Then there is the side of the line that convinces me Islam is evil. Muslims that call themselves Moderate or actually believe Islam is peace and their prophet is the perfect example for all humanity to emulate are all self-deluded and blind to their own writings. Muslim holy writings – by the way – that those we label as Radical Muslims are following to the very text they are devoted to.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali has written a compelling article that has pushed me back over the line that Islam is evil. Ali was a Muslim gal that escaped an arranged marriage in Somalia. She then ended up in Netherlands where she was a member of that nation’s Parliament (or whatever the Dutch version is called). Obviously Ali’s experience with Islam in Somalia soured her view on that faith. She left Islam and became critical of it especially as it pertains to women’s rights.
Ali is an atheist yet her article is a demonstration of how the West is ignoring the Muslim perpetration of Christian genocide in Islamic dominated nations. The West and especially Western Leftists are huge on condemning criticism of Islam as bigoted Islamophobia (as if that word is an epithet); however the harassment and systemic violence often leading to deaths plural is never front page news in Western Media in print, radio or television.
Get ready to be outraged OR at least you should be outraged and read Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s article entitled “The Global War on Christians in the Muslim World”.
Do Not War against Christianity in America
John R. Houk
© December 20, 2010
Leftists, atheists and non-Christians have wittingly or unwittingly made war on Christianity in America. This odd union of complainers has gone to great lengths to make sure Christian themes and the Christian symbols of Christmas are eradicated from the public and private arena of American culture. The crazy notions given for this attack on Christianity are a faulty interpretation of the disestablishment clause of the First Amendment (in which judicial fiat has tragically upheld) and the notion that what is offensive to non-Christians is an act of discrimination ergo Christian/Christmas symbolism must be sanitized.
The First Amendment states:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. (Obviously the bold print is added)
The First Amendment has become the cornerstone of Liberty and Civil Rights in America. In the early days of the American Republic the First Amendment was a measuring tool in which State Sovereignty would interpret and apply the Amendment’s meaning. When Constitutional government was ratified and established in 1789 there was a call for a clearer definition of the rights of citizens. Thus the first ten Amendments of the Constitution were formulated which are commonly called the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights (10 of 12 proposed Amendments) ratified on December 15, 1791.
Leftists and atheists in the 20th and now 21st century have the concept of a Jeffersonian letter written to Danbury Baptist Church in Connecticut in which the famous phrase has become a part of American political nomenclature:
“… a wall of separation between church and state”
Even if Jefferson intended the meaning to be that the government should totally stay out of the realm of religion (meaning incidentally Christianity) and that religion stay totally out of government, it was not a shared idea of the other Founding Fathers. Indeed both President Washington and John Adams believed that Christian morality should be the ethical backbone of the American government.
The country’s first two presidents, George Washington and John Adams, were firm believers in the importance of religion for republican government. As citizens of Virginia and Massachusetts, both were sympathetic to general religious taxes being paid by the citizens of their respective states to the churches of their choice. However both statesmen would have discouraged such a measure at the national level because of its divisiveness. They confined themselves to promoting religion rhetorically, offering frequent testimonials to its importance in building the moral character of American citizens, that, they believed, undergirded public order and successful popular government. (Religion and the Founding of the American Republic; VI Religion and the Federal Government, Part 1; THE RHETORICAL SUPPORT OF RELIGION: WASHINGTON AND ADAMS)
Frankly it is not clear that Jefferson meant that government and religion should have been separate in an absolute sense (SEE: Original Intent and the Free Exercise of Religion #3). After writing his letter to the Danbury Baptist Church, President Jefferson was a regular attendee of Christian worship that was presented every Sunday at the House of Representatives. This is an indication Jefferson was not interested in separating the mechanics of government from the influence of Christianity.
The pro-Religion Founders and the more secular minded Founders had one thing in common; viz., that the Federal government not Establish any particular Christian Denomination or beliefs as the Federal mandated Church that receives government support via mandatory taxation specifically for an Established Church. The Founding Fathers did not want Religion to be mandated or financially supported on a National level; however the State level was a different matter. Even if Federal money was not to go to a specific denomination in support of the Christian religion, the Founding Fathers very much intended to inculcate Christian principles and ethics into America’s rule of law and the new American culture.
Even after the U.S. Constitution became the rule of law for America many States still had established Churches. The Federal government did not turn the screws with threats of military action to comply a withdrawal from a State support of a Church. Rather over time State’s came to the conclusion that State established Churches infringes on religious freedom of other denominations. Not in sense of discrimination of forbidding religious practices, but in the sense one Church receives taxpayer support while other Churches are excluded financially. States that supported Christianity with State taxes came to an end after the Civil War and 14th Amendment required the States to uniformly treat American citizens in an equal manner. The intent was to even the political playing field for Afro-Americans recently liberated from the bondage of Southern State slavery. However the 14th Amendment was used as the final straw for individual State direct support of Christian Churches on a local level.
Now another situation Leftists, atheists and Secularists have accomplished in recent years is reinterpreting the word “religion” in the First Amendment. Let us revisit the religious clauses of the First Amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof …
The 20th and 21st century definition of “religion” might run something like this:
1. a. the state of a religious (a nun in her 20th year of religion)
b. (1) the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
2. a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
3. archaic: scrupulous conformity: conscientiousness
4. a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith (Merriam-Webster Online)
Take note the word “religion” today has a general connotation. That generality is fully embraced by the Left and Secularists. Religion can be referenced as the practices multiple religions as in plural. What do you think the Founding Fathers connoted for the meaning of the word “religion” when it appeared in the First Amendment? Here is a hint: “Give me that old time religion…”
To anyone not blinded by anti-Christian thinking, the word “religion” is the practice of Christianity. Many Leftists, atheists and Secularists love to point that a significant amount of the Founding Fathers were Deists and not Christians. The reality is the Deists of America differed greatly than the Deists of Europe. A better appellation for American Deists would be “Christian Deists”. The Christian Deists of America believed in Natural Law and Nature’s God/Creator. That God was the Christian monotheistic God of the Holy Bible. The Christian Deists of America placed reason above faith.
Christian Deists believed in God but did not believe the Creator was active in influencing the affairs of mankind. Thus Christian Deists denied the existence of Biblical miracles and relegated them to fables or to moral object lessons. Christian Deists were as huge on Christian Biblical Morality as any other orthodox practicing Christian (i.e. the beliefs of standard Christian sects or Denominations). Christians and Christian Deists believed that the absence of Biblical religion would destroy the social fabric of society leading to chaos and debauchery.
The point is the “religion” of the First Amendment is the Christian Religion. I am very pleased that the religious freedom clause has come down today to make the practices of every religion within the frame work of the very Constitution that institutes religious freedom to enable the equal right of all religions to practice.
I pray you noticed the context of religious freedom “within the frame work of the very Constitution that institutes religious freedom”. The caveat is if a religion’s theological tenets run counter to the Liberty and Civil Rights embodied in the U.S. Constitution, those tenets need to be restricted rather than accommodated. Constitutional religious freedom does not nullify the U.S. Constitution. If you read my posts you can guess where I am going with this line of thinking.
I have a specific religion in mind in which its codified tenets establish acts of violence, murder and genocide against those who refuse to follow that specific religion. That religion is Islam which should be described after the name of its founder and be called Mohammedanism. I do realize the term Mohammedanism has been abandoned by academics circa early 20th century notably because the term offends its adherents. Since political correctness is in common usage today, academics conform to adherents and use Islam as an appellation rather than Mohammedanism.
Islam’s founder Mohammed is the heart and soul of the religion he founded. Muslims consider Mohammed the perfect man much as Christians consider Jesus Christ the Son of God as both human and divine as well the only man born without sin since God’s first human creation Adam.
The Muslim’s perfect Mohammed started out fantastically in Mecca; however after winning only around a hundred or so believers in his message, Mohammed began to transform his tenor of tolerance. In essence the Meccan polytheists gave Mohammed the boot. Some of Mohammed’s followers found refuge in Egypt and a significant amount including Mohammed himself found refuge in the close by desert city of Medina (called Yathrib at the time). Mohammed was welcomed with open arms initially probably because thoughts on monotheism had already made its way to Medina via Jews and a few Christians. Mohammed’s earlier knowledge Judaism and Christianity can be seen in his biblical revisionist writings accepted as eternally valid by Muslims. Mohammed thought the Jewish-Arab tribes would embrace him as the newest (and last) of the line of prophets stretching back through the Jewish Patriarchs. Jews and most Christians (the already few in number saw enough closeness in Mohammed’s theology to accept his Prophethood and receive kind of tribal protection at the same time) rejected Mohammed’s claim to Prophethood.
After the Mecca expulsion and the refusal of belief among Jewish-Arabs Mohammed began to show signs of very un-divine jealousy and hatred. In my opinion a good man began to go insane. The danger of Mohammed’s insanity was multiplied by his continual charisma and emerging political-military genius to vanquish foes in subtle growing stages. Eventually Mohammed became the big dog in military might in Medina and the eventual confrontation between Mohammed’s Muslims and Jewish-Arabs came along. Unfortunately for the Jewish-Arabs they lost. The result of Mohammed’s victory was a small genocide of Jewish-Arabs, the sex-slavery of the good looking Jewish-Arab women followed with the eventual expulsion of all Jews from the Arabian Peninsula which included the few residing Christian-Arabs. In essence Mohammed was a bad dude to non-Muslims and was willing to use his Office as Prophet to gain exceptions to the rules he set for his fellow Muslims. An example is the acquiring of other Muslims’ wives to become his wife if they were Arab babes. Allah revealed it to Mohammed. Mohammed shared the revelation. And even if the revelation contradicted previous revelations it must be so since Allah ratified it for Mohammed. I guess this makes Mohammed the Hugh Hefner above the law of the 7th century.
Jesus Christ on the other hand preached “love your enemies.” The Lord was an example of peace in His earthly walk. The most violent thing he did was chase merchants with an improvised whip and tipping over merchandise in the Outer Courts of the Temple because the Temple was for prayer and not for self-aggrandizement with selling for personal gain. Instead of establishing an earthly Kingdom as Mohammed’s aim was, Jesus volunteered to be the spotless sacrifice to Redeem humankind from the darkness of Satan’s realm and Satan’s lease acquired from Adam. As part of that sacrifice Jesus was betrayed by His closest friends, turned over by the Temple authority to the Romans for a death penalty, Roman authority whipped Jesus with spiked cat-o-nine tails ripping the flesh to the Savior’s very bones, then Jesus was forced to carry the instrument of His own execution to Golgotha/Calvary with the last legs of the route the Cross of Christ being aided by Simon the Cyrenian, then the Lord experienced more torture having his hands and feet nailed to the Cross and plopped into the ground to die an agonizing death.
For Christians the Good News is that Jesus the Christ the Son of God and the son of Mary arose bodily after three days of entombment to a glorified body give the God-kind of Life to all that believe in the Redemptive Resurrection act of Christ Jesus.
Islam is absolutely incompatible with the U.S. Constitution. Sharia Law calls on Muslims to be intolerant and justifies punishment that is cruel and usual according to the U.S. Constitution. Many Muslim apologists will point out that the punishments prescribed for criminal violations are no longer followed by most Muslim nations. Incidentally the word “most” means there are some Muslim nations that still utilize punishment which under America’s Constitution would be cruel and unusual.
The 8th Amendment specifically lays it out that “cruel and unusual punishment” should not be used within the legal code to punish convicted individuals for their crimes.
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. (8th Amendment of U.S. Constitution)
Here are some excerpts from FindLaw.com annotating the “cruel and unusual punishment” phrase of the 8th Amendment:
“Difficulty would attend the effort to define with exactness the extent of the constitutional provision which provides that cruel and unusual punishments shall not be inflicted; but it is safe to affirm that punishments of torture [such as drawing and quartering, embowelling alive, beheading, public dissecting, and burning alive], and all others in the same line of unnecessary cruelty, are forbidden by that amendment to the Constitution.” (FindLaw.com)
… the Court explained that the cruel and unusual punishments clause “circumscribes the criminal process in three ways: First, it limits the kinds of punishment that can be imposed on those convicted of crimes; second, it proscribes punishment grossly disproportionate to the severity of the crime; and third, it imposes substantive limits on what can be made criminal and punished as such.” 182 These limitations, the Court thought, should not be extended outside the criminal process. (FindLaw.com)
Sharia Law is quite different and is encoded as Muslim holy law even if a majority of Muslim nations do not officially follow Sharia punishments.
… Sharia is a Muslim code of behavior – for the individual and for society. In many Muslim countries, its provisions on family issues – like divorce and inheritance – are incorporated into secular law. But its application in criminal law is less common…
In reality, most Muslim countries do not use traditional classical Islamic punishments. But they do not [openly announce that] because it’s a politically sensitive [topic]; they just avoid situations where the maximum punishment for stealing is chopping off the hand or the maximum punishment for adultery is capital punishment. …
But there are exceptions – such as Sudan, Afghanistan, and Saudi Arabia. These countries use the criminal provisions of Sharia that may lead to amputation for stealing or flogging for adultery. (Excerpts GlobalSecurity.com – Read the whole article)
I am not even going to take the time to write about the deficiency in Liberty and Civil Rights for non-Muslims, Muslim females and Muslim apostates. In my opinion you get the idea with the encoded Sharia punishments.
Certainly you get the point that Islam as a religion when followed to the fullest extent of what all Muslims consider to be absolute divine perfection is not compatible with the American Founding Father documents leading to the Constitution and definitely Islam is incompatible with Constitutional law. And yet, Muslim activists in America utilize the U.S. Constitution to practice their religion with impunity even if the practice is unconstitutional.
ACT for America has pointed out an incidence in which a Muslim gal is demanding the right to perform the Muslim Hajj to Mecca. No problem right? Actually the Muslim gal is a Public School teacher and the time she has chosen for the Muslim Hajj is in the middle of the school year. The school denied her request for obvious reasons. It is irresponsible for a Public School Teacher to take time off other than the holidays already set up by the School District.
Here is the thing: the Muslim gal is screaming that her religious freedom was infringed upon according to the First Amendment. And check this out! It is not the ACLU or (the Muslim Brotherhood/Hamas oriented) Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) that are filing on behalf of the Muslim gal. Eric Holder and the Justice Department are filing a complaint that the School District infringed upon Safoorah Khan’s religious freedom.
What is a Hajj you may ask. It is one of the Five Pillars of Islam to visit Mecca at least once in a lifetime. The ritual of the Hajj predates Islam; however Islamic tradition bastardizes the Biblical account of Abraham, Sarah, Hagar and Ishmael. The Quranic account Arabizes names; thus in the same order only in Arabic the names are Ibrahim, Sarah, Hajira and Is’mail (or Ismail).
The Biblical account is Sarah gave Hagar to Abraham to produce a son. The reason being Sarah had been barren but Abraham was promised a son to be his heir by God Almighty (not Allah). The outcome was that Ishmael was born to the Egyptian slave Hagar who was a servant of Sarah. Hagar took advantage of being the mother of Ishmael who at the time was the only son of Abraham. Hagar began to scorn her mistress Sarah. God Almighty had to get Abraham’s attention and tell him the promise of a son was between Abraham and his wife Sarah. Sarah eventually bore the child of promise Isaac. Then Hagar began to be puffed up as the mother of Abraham’s oldest son Ishmael. Ishmael the son of a slave began to be abusive to Isaac the child of promise. Sarah complains to Abraham and says this slave and her son cannot remain. Thus Sarah by Abraham’s permission gives Hagar and Ishmael the boot. God Almighty promises Abraham that Ishmael will be protected and become the father of 12 strong princes. Biblically this is the origin of the Arabs.
The Bastardized Quranic account (or tradition) is that Abraham and Hagar (Hajira) hook-up to bear the Abraham’s oldest son Ishmael (Ismail). In fact the test of faith between Abraham and Isaac is bastardized in the Quran to be Abraham and Ishmael. The Angel of God saves Ishmael rather than Isaac in confirming Abraham’s faith and obedience to God Almighty. The Quranic story further bastardizes the Abraham, Sarah, Hagar and Ishmael account by Abraham delivering Hagar from Sarah’s wrath by personally taking Hagar to the desert (Arabia). Then Hagar and Ishmael discover underground water which is turned into a well. Hagar and Ishmael prosper by selling water to merchants on a caravan route. Abraham returns to Hagar and is pleased that things are going well for her.
The Prophet Ibrahim was told by Allah to build a shrine dedicated to him. Ibrahim and Is’mail constructed a small stone structure – the Kaaba or Cube – which was to be the gathering place for all who wished to strengthen their faith in Allah.
As the years passed Is’mail was blessed with Prophethood and he gave the nomads of the desert the message of surrender to Allah.
After many centuries, Mecca became a thriving city thanks to its reliable water source, the well of Zam Zam.
Gradually, the people began to adopt polytheistic ideas, and worship spirits and many different gods. The shrine of the Prophet Ibrahim was used to store idols. (Info and quote from: BBC – Hajj: pilgrimage to Mecca)
The Hajj the fifth Pillar of Islam is the reason a Christianity vs. Islam legal jihad is brewing in Chicago.
Attorney General Eric Holder is stepping into a Chicago School District’s decision to not accommodate Muslim Safoorah Khan to defect from her school teacher job to perform the Islamic Hajj and expect to have a job when she returns. Khan complained to U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that she was being discriminated because of her religious beliefs. The EEOC probably saw a brouhaha in the making and sent the complaint to the Justice Department that then was filed with the Federal Court on behalf of Khan.
Can you see where this is going?
Public Schools have a break or vacation in December which falls within the Christian Holy Day of Christmas. Christmas has been diminished due to Leftists, atheists and Secularists. This triumvirate of hatred toward Christmas and Christianity has nearly succeeded in removing the thought of Christmas vacation and replacing it with the thought of Winter Break or Winter Vacation. Even after this dilution by the war on Christianity triumvirate it is evident that Safoorah Khan intends to demand equal time for a very slim minority of Muslims in America over the Christian cultural heritage that has been in America from its early Colonial beginnings. To drive this point home Islam ONLY makes up .06% of Americans. The number is extremely miniscule. Thank God for that miniscule amount because Islam tenets are anti-American and anti-Constitutional.
For the sake of the Muslim Apologists who legitimately believe they are moderate Muslims I have to say this. Currently the majority of Muslims in America are moderate which means they practice a form of Islam that betters the inner being of a person rather than follow the tenets of Islam to force conversions, delegitimize a person’s humanity or death. And before the defenders of Islam jump down my throat about the Quranic dictum that there is no compulsion in religion; I state that this a misleading tenet. If there are three choices of convert, dhimmitude or death then a person chooses rather than is compelled. In the Western mind this indeed is compulsion; however in the dualistic theology of Islam in which contradictory dictums can both be valid and Islam is offering the choice, then the person is not compelled.
In America there definitely is a war against Christianity. The war becomes very apparent during the Christmas season. The Obama Administration is a Left Wing Administration. Part of Obama’s Leftism is to be critical of Biblical Christians as a 2008 Presidential campaign phrase indicates about the implied ignorance of those who cling to their guns and bibles. And now the Obama Administration through Attorney General Eric Holder will further disembowel Christianity by making it an issue for Safoorah Khan to be the victim of religious rights infringement when in reality there was simple common sense used that was to benefit Chicago kids in school.
John R. Houk
© October 10, 2010
You know I am a huge fan of protecting America’s right to Free Speech even to the point of allowing ideology that I believe (and probably most Americans) is an ideology of corruption. Saying that here is a question that the Supreme Court has interpreted to affirm the answer: Is pornography a Free Speech issue or an affront to human decency issue that should be criminalized?
The Supreme Court has ruled pornography in the Free Speech realm is free expression covered under First Amendment Free Speech (Notably: Jacobellis v. Ohio & Stanley v. Georgia). Any nominal through devout Christian should have been angered for opening this can of worms that as late as the early 20th century would have the porn perpetrators and porn participants thrown in the slammer. I am guessing even a significant amount of moral relativists would have and should have not been pleased with the Supreme Court decision to transform many centuries worth of Western/Christian culture into legalized protected exploitation of women for the sake of the prurient interest of males (and in the present of females as well).
I think I might have an understanding to the reason SCOTUS legalized pornography to become legal precedent according to the First Amendment. If SCOTUS had ruled against pornography in the fast pace changing 20th century a worse can of worms may have opened. The horns of a dilemma may have been a choice of the lesser of two evils in which a ruling indeed was necessary for the times.
If SCOTUS ruled in favor of many centuries of Western/Christian culture in which pornography did not suit the common good then another question would arise in which the worms of the can might lead to forms of despotism and interpreting Culture rather than the Constitution. That question is: Who decides the Western or Christian measuring tool of what the common good is?
I am sure some may disagree that the proverbial can of worms of the common good is the lesser of two evils. And yet consider this: the SCOTUS ruling of applying Free Speech to pornography also strengthened the equality of Free Speech for the Left/Right political spectrum. The fringes of that scale such as Communist bloody transformative revolution on the Left to extremist Capitalism in which the consumer is the victim of caveat emptor or worse the victim of bloody despotism of Fascist Corporatism in which an oligarchy or an individual leader of the State utilizes corporations to finance the whims of the Right. This strengthening of Free Speech allows Leftist idiocy (yep I’m on the Right) to be framed in public as much as the good sense of the Right. More importantly a Christian such as I also do have the freedom to frame their thoughts in public without the worry of Leftist/Secular Humanist legal or illegal persecution.
As a side bar: The one unfortunate result of SCOTUS ruling that pornography is a Free Speech right is the degradation of America’s culture harming the common good by further allowing deficient social mores snagging darkly into acceptance. Thus the porn right has led Psychiatrists and Doctors to withdraw homosexuality as a deviancy. Ever since the porn has the right SCOTUS ruling, more fuel has been given to the Left to minimize America’s Christian influence in or society. More and more the aegis of Free Speech coupled with the SCOTUS misinterpretation the First Amendment phrase not allowing the U.S. Government to Establish a State Church (meaning the unconstitutional phrase: Separation of Church and State) has given America’s Left a weapon to attack Christianity. Note I am not saying religion. I am saying Christianity.
America’s Left will support the ungodly and oft times unconstitutional theopolitical ideology of a religion to practice their faith even if the goal of that religion is to eradicate the very Constitution that allows Religious Freedom. That religion which the Left hooks up with to undermine Christian morality is the supremacist concepts of Islam. End of Side bar.
A classic example of weakening America’s perception of Christian influence in our culture is the recent story of middle aged female trucker (If Yahoo archives this story, go to SlantRight.com to read it) going into an art display in Colorado and take a crowbar to a 12-panel lithograph which included but was not limited to the portrayal of a dress wearing Jesus Christ having an orgasm from a male performing oral sex. The artist was Mexican born Stanford Professor Enrique Chagoya. The vandal was Kathleen Folden.
The writer of the story did his part to minimize Christianity. In parentheses following the description of Folden’s defending Christianity are these words:
Somehow the prophet-and-pigs panel seems to have gone overlooked, but that’s Colorado for you.
The article is a valiant effort of a MSM writer toward neutral journalism; nonetheless the writer’s thoughts on why the offense to Islam was not bashed in the same act of vandalism is the underlying bombarding of America’s culture with the subliminal persuasion that Christianity is the archaic practice of those who own guns and Bibles.