The Cross Does Not Offend the Constitution


SCOTUS undoubtedly chapped the hide of Leftist Transformists everywhere with its 7-2 to keep the Bladensburg Peace Cross standing on taxpayer supported public land. Read Justin Smith’s thoughts.

JRH 6/23/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

************************

The Cross Does Not Offend the Constitution

A Landmark Victory for Religious Freedom 

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent 6/22/2019 11:22 PM

 

The Constitution as written, not the personal views of judges, should guide how the American people express their religious faith in the public square.” ~ Emilie Kao, Director of the DeVos Center for Religion and Civil Society

 

A fine blow was struck for religious freedom, when the United States Supreme Court handed down a 7 to 2 landmark victory in the case of the American Legion v. the American Humanist Organization, on June 20th 2019, as the majority opinion determined that the Peace Cross on public land in Bladensburg, Maryland, just outside of D.C., does not violate the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The forty foot tall Peace Cross commemorating forty-nine of Prince George’s County men who died fighting in WWI can now remain on public land, property of the State of Maryland.

 

The American Humanist Organization originally filed suit in 2012, and modified the suit in 2014; they forged ahead to force the removal of the Peace Cross, suing the Park and Planning Commission and the American Legion, that originally paid for its erection, in part. The AHO alleged that the presence of the memorial on public land amounted to a government establishment of religion.

 

In the beautiful shape of the Cross, the Bladensburg World War I Veterans Memorial was erected between 1919 and 1925, by Gold Star Mothers and a local American Legion post. The Cross design was provided by the Gold Star Mothers in 1919 to recall the cross-shaped grave markers standing over the thousands of American graves on the Western Front of WWI, with one mother actually referring to this memorial as her son’s “grave stone”.

 

This surely had to be at the front of the majority’s mind, in making their decision, since particularly troubled by opposition’s Taliban-style proposal of chopping off the arms of the Cross, Justice Samuel Alito offered the following in the decision: “Many memorials for Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. make reference to his faith. These monuments honor men and women who have played an important role in the history of our country, and where religious symbols are included in monuments, their presence acknowledges the centrality of faith to those whose lives are commemorated.”

 

John Seaburn is the name of one of the soldier’s whose name is memorialized on the plaque at the base of the Peace Cross, having bravely marched off to join the Army in an all African American unit. His great-niece, Alvergia Guyton is one of the few people left with a personal connection to the Cross, stating “It’s been there all my life; it’s history”, and on June 20th seven Justices in America’s Supreme Court agreed with her, leaving John Seaburn’s sacrifice and those sacrifices of Prince George’s Native Sons intact and unsullied.

 

This case did little to untangle the confusion created by past Establishment Clause decisions, since two dissenters, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Justice Sonia Sotomayor, saw it as a clear violation, and those seven who did not, Justices John Roberts, Stephen Breyer, Elena Kagan, Clarence Thomas, Brett Kavanaugh, Neil Gorsuch and Alito all offered opinions that didn’t offer a fix to the underlying problem and the many different past interpretations regarding the intent of the Constitution. So, these sort of issues will continue to manifest themselves, and if anything, this case reveals the importance of Justices who view the Constitution through the prism of Original Intent.

 

And even though “separation of Church and State” is a fallacy and a gross misinterpretation of a passage written to the Danbury Baptist Church by Thomas Jefferson, the AHO vowed to fight on to “bolster the First Amendment” and to “(redouble their) works to strengthen the wall of separation between church and state, brick by brick.”

 

In her dissent, Justice Ginsberg stated: “Soldiers of all faiths ‘are united by their love of country, but they are not united by the cross … ‘ By maintaining the Peace Cross on a public highway, the Commission elevates Christianity over other faiths, and religion over nonreligion.”

 

America was founded as a Christian nation, and that’s just a historical fact and a matter of record, but it was founded to also be tolerant of all other religious beliefs. The Founding Fathers’ vision was a country that facilitated all Americans’ free expression of faith even if in the public square, and all across the span of our nation’s history, Americans have used religious symbols to commemorate a variety of meaningful events, whether one speaks of holidays, the Courts and sworn oaths or prayer in State legislatures.

 

[Blog Editor: Many Leftists, Secular Humanists, Separation of Church-State Ideologues and probably other Anti-Christian groups would strongly disagree with Justin’s belief, “America was founded as a Christian nation”. To justify their misguided Anti-Christian attitude you will read the Left-version of cherry picking that actually twist facts. The Left will accuse Christians of cherry picking as well, but the difference Leftist cherry picking often are quoting out of context or using a historical person who represented an absolute minority opinion as in the rare atheist or French-influenced Deist (AND there is quite a difference between a French Deist and an American Christian Deist). Here are some posts demonstrating America’s Christian heritage which trust is not exhaustive:

 

 

 

 

 

President Trump’s appointment to the Court, Justice Neil Gorsuch rightfully suggested that the Court shouldn’t have heard the case, because the plaintiffs could show no concrete injury other than they were “offended” by seeing it as they pass it. Gorsuch wrote: “This ‘offended observer’ theory of standing has no basis in law … What matters … to assessing a monument, symbol, or practice isn’t its age but its compliance with ageless principles. The Constitution’s meaning is fixed, not some good-for-this-day-only coupon, and a practice consistent with our nation’s traditions is permissible whether undertaken today or 94 years ago.”

 

Justice Samuel Alito, writing the Majority Opinion for the Court, noted: “(The Peace Cross) has become a prominent community landmark, and its removal or radical alteration at this date would be seen by many not as a neutral act but as the manifestation of ‘a hostility toward religion that has no place in our Establishment Clause traditions …  The Religion Clauses of the Constitution aim to foster a society in which people of all beliefs can live together harmoniously, and the presence of the Bladensburg Cross on the land where it has stood for so many years is fully consistent with that aim. The Cross is undoubtedly a Christian symbol, but that fact should not blind us to everything else that the Bladensburg Cross has come to represent … For all these reasons, the Cross does not offend the Constitution.”

 

Kelly Shackelford, president of  First Liberty law firm and a defender of religious freedom, who defended the case, exclaimed: “This is a landmark victory for religious freedom. The days of illegitimately weaponizing the Establishment Clause and attacking religious symbols in public are over.”

 

Forever memorialized, these men were regular, ordinary Americans, doctors, farmers and laborers, educators, some in their prime and one in his fifties — already wounded — who probably shouldn’t have been on the front lines. They all had one thing in common. They never came home and they were much loved and sorely missed by those who waited for their return. And one-hundred years after WWI, Americans are still fighting for the concrete ideas these fine American patriots died to give us, the foundation of the First Amendment and its manifested inherent Freedom.

 

Many descendants of these fine men have lived with the Peace Cross all their lives, as it has stood gracing the skyline one mile from D.C. for nearly a century, and they are shocked to their very core that any American would challenge its right to exist, regardless of its placement on public land. Their memories include the story of the mothers who slowly pulled the American Flag from the base of the Cross ninety-four years ago to reveal the names of forty-nine soldiers, American heroes, who made the final sacrifice of their lives in World War I. It’s survived all this time, through WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Desert Storm and 9/11 and Enduring Freedom, and now, Thanks to God and the Supreme Court, it has survived its most dire threat and a terrible battle with radical, extreme atheists intent and determined to destroy this much respected and greatly loved memorial simply because it was in the shape of the Cross.

 

By Justin O. Smith

________________________________

Edited by John R. Houk

Source links and text enclosed by brackets are by the /editor.

 

Justin O. Smith

 

Supreme Court Ruled 7-2 The WWI ‘Peace Cross’ Stays


The Supreme Court put a nick in the Church-State Separation idiocy with a 7-2 decision allowing a Peace Cross WWI Memorial to stay on County land at County expense in Maryland. GOD BLESS AMERICA!

 

JRH 6/20/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

**********************

JUST IN: Why The Supreme Court Ruled 7-2 The WWI ‘Peace Cross’ Stays

 

June 20, 2019

100PercentFedUp.com

 

The Supreme Court just ruled that the Bladensburg Peace Cross, a cross-shaped WWI memorial in Bladensburg, Maryland, does not violate the Constitution’s establishment clause.

 

It will remain standing and in the care of the government.

 

The vote was 7-2 for the Peace Cross to stay with Justices Sotomayor and Ginsburg as the lone dissenters:

 

SCOTUS Decision (7-2) Peace Cross Stays 6-20-19 screen capture

 

The courts ruling says that the cross represents ‘sacrifice’  and that’s why he can stay put. The 40-foot Peace Cross is a 94-year-old memorial to honor 49 men who fought and died in WWI.

 

Pete Williams described the decision in-depth:

 

A Humanist organization brought the case against the cross and won in a lower court. This reverses the lower court’s decision.

________________________

Copyright © 2019. 100PercentFedUp.com. All Rights Reserved.

 

ABOUT 100PercentFedUp.com

 

We are two moms inspired by the life of Andrew Breitbart. We’re exposing the lies of the left & MSM propagandists.

 

Our lives took an unexpected turn on the day that conservative activist Andrew Breitbart died. Together, we came to the realization that we could no longer sit on the sidelines and watch the country we loved being destroyed by an apathetic citizenry. Our children don’t deserve to grow up in a world where they will be slaves to the debt we have recklessly saddled them with. Our goal is to expose the lies and hypocrisy of the progressives in academia, the entertainment industry, and MSM through the use of social media.

 

Here is a sampling of  READ THE REST

 

Head of NASA Praises Prayer and Christian Influence in Government: Left Has Orbital Meltdown


I live in Oklahoma. As such this post from Geri Ungurean on her blog Absolute Truth from the Word of God about former Oklahoma Representative Jim Bridenstine (my District roughly representing Tulsa) tapped to be Administrator of NASA by President Trump got my attention.

 

One Nation Under God by Jon McNaughton

 

Evidently Bridenstine is not shy about his Christian faith and it’s driving Leftists and Separation of Church/State activists nuts. Ungurean begins with SCOTUS concurring atheistic doctrine can simulate religion then goes into the fallacy of Separation of Church and State. Then Ungurean examines how Bridenstine Church/State Separation activists crazy.

 

JRH 4/27/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

********************

Head of NASA Praises Prayer and Christian Influence in Government: Left Has Orbital Meltdown

 

By Geri Ungurean

April 27, 2019

Absolute Truth from the Word of God

 

Jim Bridenstine

 

Did you know that The Supreme Court has said a religion need not be based on a belief in the existence of a supreme being? In the 1961 case of Torcaso v. Watkins, the court described “secular humanism” as a religion.

 

And in 2005, a Federal court deemed “Atheism” a religion.

Read about that decision here:

 

From wnd.com  — written in 2005

 

Court Rules Atheism a Religion

 

Decides 1st Amendment protects prison inmate’s right to start study group

 

A federal court of appeals ruled yesterday Wisconsin prison officials violated an inmate’s rights because they did not treat atheism as a religion.

 

“Atheism is [the inmate’s] religion, and the group that he wanted to start was religious in nature even though it expressly rejects a belief in a supreme being,” the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals said.

 

The court decided the inmate’s First Amendment rights were violated because the prison refused to allow him to create a study group for atheists.

 

Brian Fahling, senior trial attorney for the American Family Association Center for Law & Policy, called the court’s ruling “a sort of Alice in Wonderland jurisprudence.”

 

“Up is down, and atheism, the antithesis of religion, is religion,” said Fahling.

 

The Supreme Court has said a religion need not be based on a belief in the existence of a supreme being. In the 1961 case of Torcaso v. Watkins, the court described “secular humanism” as a religion. source

 

But if a person has the audacity to mention “God” or “Prayer to Him” in public; in this case in front of a Christian ministry by the HEAD of NASA– the reaction of the atheists is anger and of course citing the “Wall of Separation of Church and State.  So, the employees of NASA are attempting to take away a person’s freedom of speech because it will make them look bad – you know, guilt by association.

 

UNREAL

 

Let’s get something straight before I post about the Left’s response to the head of NASA (who happens to be a Christian).

 

You will not find “Separation of Church and State” anywhere in our Constitution.  The Left will tell you it’s there, but that’s a lie. This lie has been repeated so many times that the average person believes it.

 

So, where did the saying originate?

 

Satan is a liar and the father of them.  He is also the author of confusion.  He took our First Amendment and twisted it, just as he does with God’s Holy Word.

 

Here is the First Amendment of our Constitution:

 

“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.”

 

Do you  see in the First Amendment the verbiage “Separation of Church and State?”

 

Neither do I.

 

We don’t see it because it is NOT there.  The First Amendment was given its place of prominence because our Founding Fathers wanted to insure that the government would never establish a “religion” that would be forced upon the American people; and that we would always have freedom of speech.

 

Then why do we hear this clause so much?

 

In 1802, a group of Baptist ministers from Danbury, CT wrote to Thomas Jefferson. They were concerned about the possibility that the State would impose a denomination and their freedom to worship as Baptists might be in jeopardy.

 

Here is Thomas Jefferson’s response to these CT pastors:

 

Jefferson’s Letter to the Danbury Baptists

 

The Final Letter as sent:

 

To messers. Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut.

 

Gentlemen

 

“The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.

 

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

 

I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem.”  (Emphasis mine)

 

Th Jefferson
Jan. 1. 1802.

 

In the past 100 years, the phrase “Wall of Separation between Church and State” (taken from Jefferson’s letter) has been misconstrued  to mean that anything to do with Religion must be separate from State or Federal Government.

 

First of all, as I said before – the phrase “Separation of Church and State” is found no where in the Constitution.  God-hating individuals have repeatedly used this statement (which was to PROTECT the Christians) so many times, that the average person on the street will tell you that this is part of America’s Constitution.

 

And don’t forget that this man (Jim Bridenstine) was addressing a Christian Ministry – NOT an audience filled with NASA employees!

 

Brethren, you should print this article out so that you can speak truth to a person who is parroting the lie that this clause is found in our Constitution!

 

From frc.org

 

NASA Chief Finds Space for Faith

 

April 18, 2019

 

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand the First Amendment. Or maybe, after the spat over a speech by NASA’s Jim Bridenstine, it does. Thanks to the double standards of secularism, public officials can’t even talk about faith without making headlines. It’s no wonder, then, that when the head of America’s space program gave remarks at a Christian ministry, even he had trouble finding signs of intelligence in the criticism that followed.

 

Capitol Ministries [Blog Editor’s Link], the organization that Jim has supported for years, is hardly controversial. Nine of the president’s 15 cabinet officials are sponsors of the ministry — whose aim is simple: influencing government with biblical teachings. During his talk, Bridenstine even talked about the importance of that goal and what it means in the context of these times. “I love what Ralph said earlier: We’re not trying to Christianize the U.S. government. We believe in an institutional separation, but we also believe in influence. And that’s a big distinction and an important distinction, and that’s why I love this ministry.”

 

Jim couldn’t have been more clear: No one in the Trump administration is trying to create a theocracy. They just want the same freedom to bring their personal views to bear on public policy that liberals have. Still, secularists like Business Insider’s Dave Mosher, seem intent on dragging Bridenstine through the mud for daring to talk about actual NASA history — like Buzz Aldrin’s communion on the moon and the Apollo 8 astronauts’ Bible reading in orbit.

 

In a 2,000-word rant about the faith of Trump’s team, Mosher insists that “Some ethics and legal experts outside NASA have expressed concern over Bridenstine’s speech. They believe it ran afoul of the establishment clause of the First Amendment, which outlines a separation of church and state, and might have also violated ethics rules for federal executives.” Quoting people like Virginia Canter of Citizens for Responsible Ethics, Mosher tries to paint Bridenstine as a typical Establishment Clause abuser. “One’s personal beliefs must be respected, but when appearing in an official capacity, you have to adhere to certain ethical standards,” Canter explained. “One is not to give the impression that you are officially endorsing any products or service or enterprise.”

 

Funny, where was Mosher when Barack Obama was headlining political fundraisers for Planned Parenthood? Or worse, invoking God’s blessing on the abortion giant? Everyone from Hillary Clinton to Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) have not only endorsed the group’s “service” — but funneled hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars to it. No one seemed to care when they appeared in their official capacities to preach the gospel of abortion. But put a Christian on the stage from the Trump administration — encouraging something as innocent as prayer — and they’re a walking ethics violation! This is NASA, for crying out loud. What are they worried about? Jim sending astronauts to evangelize the galaxy?

 

If secularists are upset about Bridenstine’s speech, then they should have been shaking the White House gates over the last administration’s agenda for the space agency. How quickly we forget those shocking comments in 2010 when President Obama told NASA administrator Charles Bolden that his new mission should be “to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations…” If you’re looking for a textbook abuse of public office, I’d say start with the Obama administration. After that, giving a few remarks at a charity function seems like small potatoes.

 

But hypocrisy is the name of the Democratic game. Like Secretary Mike Pompeo and countless other Trump officials before him, Bridenstine is just the latest target of an intolerant Left whose only goal is purging faith from public life and history. If activists can’t get Christians to stay quiet, then they’ll try to drive them out of government altogether. That will be tough to do in this administration, thanks to the fearless leadership of Trump. If his team has learned anything, it’s how to stand up to bullies. That shouldn’t be hard for a man Jim Bridenstine. He was already light years ahead of the opposition. source

 

I say WELL DONE to the head of NASA!  He is not ashamed of our Lord Jesus before men, and neither will Jesus be ashamed of him before His Father!

 

But whoever denies Me before men, him I will also deny before My Father who is in heaven” (Matthew 10:33).

 

How Can I Be Saved?

Shalom b’Yeshua

MARANATHA!

__________________

A MESSAGE TO MY [Geri Ungurean] READERS

 

Brethren,

 

First of all, I would like to thank all of you for subscribing to “Absolute Truth From the Word of God.”

 

Many of you have been so generous by sending gifts to my P.O. Box. It’s always so surprising and warms my heart when I see gifts from my readers.

 

Here is the address for the P.O. Box:

 

Geri Ungurean
PO BOX 1031
Savage, MD 20763

 

But I did something recently that I did not feel comfortable about. I added a “Donate” button which I just took down.  My husband and I had a scare (and it’s not over) We received a letter from the VA stating that the government is looking at the money paid out to disabled Veterans and they may be cutting back the amount. Tim  was in the Vietnam war and volunteered for Desert Storm.

 

Anyway, I told hubby that I should try to find a full time job.  He was against that because of my health issues and also he said that it would cut back the writing ministry. And who is going to hire a woman who is almost 68? LOL!

 

So, friends urged me to place a donate button on the site.  I haven’t felt right since I did that. It was like saying to God that I didn’t trust Him that He would take care of us.  It’s like a heavy weight has been lifted off since I took down that Donate button!

 

Your prayers are much needed and so appreciated for this ministry, and I thank you so very much for adding us to your prayer list!

 

I love you all so much!

 

I can’t wait to meet you in heaven as we worship our Precious Jesus together!

 

What a Glorious Day that will be!

 

In Yeshua,
Geri
MARANATHA!

 

[NCCR Blog Editor: I do not sure Geri Ungurean’s reticence about using a donation button. Even so I encourage you to send your monetary support to Geri for her steadfast faith in standing with Jesus the Christ, the Savior of all who believe in the risen Lord.]

 

Here’s Hoping Capital Crime Case Ends Roe v. Wade


John R. Houk

© October 20, 2018

 

Jessie Phillips murdered Erica Droze Phillips & unborn baby in 2009

 

The Personhood argument against baby-killing abortion has arisen in Alabama within the merits of a capital crime of a husband murdering his pregnant wife:

 

In the case, [Jesse] Phillips was charged with the murders of his wife and unborn child, and sentenced to be executed. The state Supreme Court affirmed the sentence, rejecting claims that Phillips could not be sentenced for the unborn child’s death because the child was not a “person.” (WND article below)

 

This is a State Supreme Court ruling and not a Federal Court ruling. I will be surprised if the Alabama State Supreme Court does not make an appearance in Federal Court. Think of the irony as a bunch of Leftist baby-killing supporters rage that a convicted murderer was not only convicted of murdering his wife but also convicted of killing his unborn child.

 

I can hardly wait to see how the Left/Democrats spin an anti-Personhood argument when a person removes TWO lives from among the living. Why did Jessie Phillips kill his wife Erica Phillips?

 

… A jury in June 2012 found him guilty and put him on death row for the slaying, which took place at Lakeside Car Wash on Alabama 69 in Guntersville.

 

Court documents indicate that Phillips became angry because his wife had not changed the wet diaper of their young daughter. He subsequently shot Erica Phillips in the back of the head, leaving her body lying in one of the car wash bays; the 23-year-old died early the next morning at Huntsville Hospital.

 

Both of the couple’s children were present when the shooting occurred, as were two of Erica Phillips’ brothers. Jessie Phillips fled the scene without the children.

 

He later turned himself in for the murder and, in interviews with police, admitted knowing his wife was eight weeks pregnant at the time he shot her.  (Alabama man sentenced to death for 2nd time in pregnant wife’s murder; By Crystal Bonvillian; AL.com; 2/12/16)

 

There is absolutely zero doubt that Jessie Phillips is a heinous murderer. The Left is stuck with the conundrum of defending a wife-killer to perpetuate the heinous ideology that a woman has more rights over her body than an unborn life has a right to live.

 

The success of Personhood essentially boils down to this question: When does a life in a woman’s womb become a person?

 

The divide then becomes religious faith versus secularism. A secularist-minded person will look at biological criteria while a person of religious faith – particularly Christian faith – examines the criteria that life proceeds from God Almighty.

 

As to faith here is some valid thinking from the “Founding Charter for Personhood Alliance”:

 

WHEREAS, the Bible affirms the personhood, sanctity, dignity and value of every human being from the moment of our individual creation, as evidenced by the doctrine of Imago Dei and through the marital union of a man and woman (Gen 1:26-28), our being known by God even before being formed in the womb (Jer 1:5), the incarnation of Christ (Luke 1-2), and the sacrifice of Christ to atone for the sins of humanity and restore fellowship between God and man (Rom. 5:12-21);

 

The significant Biblical Scriptures in the above Personhood Charter are in order of usage are:

 

Genesis 1:26-28 (NKJV)

 

26 Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over [a]all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” 27 So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. 28 Then God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that [b]moves on the earth.”

 

Jeremiah 1:4-5 (NKJV)

 

Then the word of the Lord came to me, saying:

 

“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you;
Before you were born I sanctified[a] you;
[b]ordained you a prophet to the nations.”

 

[It stands to reason if God formed the Prophet Jeremiah in his mother’s womb, He formed YOU in your mother’s womb and He formed the entire human race in their mother’s womb.]

 

Luke Chapter one and two are the birth of Jesus Christ story. I am not going to quote the entirety of those two chapters. But to signify the importance of God in the birth process, here are some select quotes:

 

Luke 1: 26-33, 35; 2: 10-12, 15-16 (NKJV)

 

1 26 Now in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent by God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth, 27 to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David. The virgin’s name was Mary. 28 And having come in, the angel said to her, “Rejoice, highly favored one, the Lord is with you; [a]blessed are you among women!”

29 But [b]when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying, and considered what manner of greeting this was. 30 Then the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. 31 And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bring forth a Son, and shall call His name Jesus. 32 He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. 33 And He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of His kingdom there will be no end.”

 

35 And the angel answered and said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Highest will overshadow you; therefore, also, that Holy One who is to be born will be called the Son of God.

 

2 10 Then the angel said to them, “Do not be afraid, for behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy which will be to all people. 11 For there is born to you this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord. 12 And this will be the sign to you: You will find a Babe wrapped in swaddling cloths, lying in a [a]manger.”

 

15 So it was, when the angels had gone away from them into heaven, that the shepherds said to one another, “Let us now go to Bethlehem and see this thing that has come to pass, which the Lord has made known to us.” 16 And they came with haste and found Mary and Joseph, and the Babe lying in a manger.

 

Romans 5: 12-21 (NKJV)

 

12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned— 13 (For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come. 15 But the free gift is not like the [a]offense. For if by the one man’s offense many died, much more the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abounded to many. 16 And the gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned. For the judgment which came from one offense resulted in condemnation, but the free gift which came from many [b]offenses resulted in justification. 17 For if by the one man’s [c]offense death reigned through the one, much more those who receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.)

18 Therefore, as through [d]one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one[e] Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life. 19 For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous.

20 Moreover the law entered that the offense might abound. But where sin abounded, grace abounded much more, 21 so that as sin reigned in death, even so grace might reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

 

I gotta tell ya … For me all arguments using biology to determine life before birth are irrelevant in favor of the Redemptive view of God for humankind through Jesus Christ the Savior.

 

Jessie Phillips took two lives and is being held accountable according to the laws of the State of Alabama. BUT those lives removed from the living – Erica Droze Phillips and her unborn child – were and are certified by God Almighty.

 

JRH 10/20/18

In this current state of media censorship & defunding, consider chipping in a few bucks for enjoying (or even despising yet read) this Blog.

Please Support NCCR

********************

STATE SUPREME COURT: ROE V. WADE ‘PATENTLY ILLOGICAL’

Shocking decision declares unborn baby is ‘a person’

 

By Bob Unruh

October 19, 2018

WND

 

Alabama State Justice Tom Parker

 

The Alabama Supreme Court has ruled that an unborn baby is a “person” under the law, and, consequently, the death of that person can be punished with execution.

 

Further, in a special concurrence, Justice Tom Parker called on the U.S. Supreme Court to revisit Roe v. Wade, the 1973 ruling that created a “right” to abortion.

 

“I write specially to expound upon the principles presented in the main opinion and to note the continued legal anomaly and logical fallacy that is Roe v. Wade,” he said. “I urge the United States Supreme Court to overrule this increasingly isolated exception to the rights of unborn children.”

 

Parker affirmed the Alabama court’s rationale that “unborn children are persons entitled to the full and equal protection of the law.”

 

He asserted Roe v. Wade is “without historical or constitutional support, carved out an exception to the rights of unborn children and prohibited states from recognizing an unborn child’s inalienable right to life when that right conflicts with a woman’s ‘right’ to abortion.”

 

“This judicially created exception of Roe is an aberration to the natural law … and common law of the states,” Parker said.

 

He noted the Alabama court’s opinion stated the “obvious truth that unborn children are people and thus entitled to the full protection of the law” in its decision to reject Jessie Phillips’ arguments “that the unborn child he murdered, Baby Doe, was not a ‘person’ under Alabama law.”

 

In the case, Phillips was charged with the murders of his wife and unborn child, and sentenced to be executed. The state Supreme Court affirmed the sentence, rejecting claims that Phillips could not be sentenced for the unborn child’s death because the child was not a “person.”

 

The fault in the Roe decision was cited by Justice Harry Blackmun, who wrote the majority opinion.

 

He said the justices didn’t have the scientific evidence to determine if an unborn baby is a person, but “personhood” is the foundation of the case.

 

Blackmun wrote: “(If the) suggestion of personhood [of the preborn] is established, the [abortion rights] case, of course, collapses, for the fetus’ right to life is then guaranteed specifically by the [14th] Amendment.”

 

The Alabama ruling is not the only one to point out to the U.S. Supreme Court that Roe was wrongly decided.

 

In August, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals struck down an Alabama law banning the gruesome, second-trimester abortion procedure in which limbs are removed from a baby’s body in the womb.

 

At the time, Chief Judge Ed Carnes lamented in his opinion that he was bound by U.S. Supreme Court precedent to rule against the state, writing that “dismemberment” is the best description of the procedure, which clinically is known as dilation and extraction.

 

“In our judicial system, there is only one Supreme Court, and we are not it,” he wrote, calling the high court’s history of abortion rulings an “aberration” of constitutional law.

 

And Judge Joel Dubina wrote separately to express his agreement with Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia in Gonzales v. Carhart in which Thomas wrote, “I write separately to reiterate my view that the Court’s abortion jurisprudence,” including in Planned Parenthood v. Casey and Roe v. Wade, “has no basis in the Constitution.”

 

“The problem I have, as noted in the Chief Judge’s opinion, is that I am not on the Supreme Court, and as a federal appellate judge, I am bound by my oath to follow all of the Supreme Court’s precedents, whether I agree with them or not,” Dubina wrote.

 

The opinion had no use for the politically correct language of “choice” and “women’s rights.”

 

“This case involves a method of abortion that is clinically referred to as Dilation and Evacuation (D & E). Or dismemberment abortion, as the state less clinically calls it. That name is more accurate because the method involves tearing apart and extracting piece-by-piece from the uterus what was until then a living unborn child,” he wrote.

 

And a year ago, eight members of the Alabama Supreme Court revived a wrongful death claim against a physician even though the life that was lost was that of a “pre-viable” unborn child.

 

That ruling set the state in direct conflict with the Roe v. Wade decision.

 

The Alabama judges at the time criticized the Roe decision’s “incoherent standard” of viability.

 

The newest opinion notes that Alabama law states an unborn child is a person under the state’s intentional murder statute.

 

According to Liberty Counsel, “Justice Parker wrote separately to emphasize how broadly and consistently the law and judicial decisions in Alabama and around the country protect the rights of unborn children. This, Justice Parker said, contrasts with ‘the continued legal anomaly and logical fallacy that is Roe v. Wade.’”

 

In his opinion, Parker called on the Supreme Court to act: “It is my hope and prayer that the United States Supreme Court will take note of the crescendoing chorus of the laws of the states in which unborn children are given full legal protection and allow the states to recognize and defend the inalienable right to life possessed by every unborn child, even when that right must trump the ‘right’ of a woman to obtain an abortion.”

 

He said that by ensuring broad legal protections for unborn children, including under Alabama’s capital murder statutes, “we affirm once again that unborn children are persons with value and dignity equal to that of all persons.”

 

“There is a growing chorus of voices urging the Supreme Court to overrule its abortion decisions,” said Liberty Counsel founder Mat Staver. “The Supreme Court has created a constitutional aberration and caused incalculable harm by its abortion decisions. In 1992, Justice Kennedy voted with the majority to overrule Roe v. Wade, and then flipped his vote 30 days before the opinion was released to uphold Roe. It is time to correct course and overrule this horrible chapter in American and Supreme Court history.”

 

He continued: “We applaud Justice Tom Parker in calling on the Supreme Court to overturn the Roe v. Wade decision and once again protect precious children, women, and families. Abortion is simply a euphemism created by activists to soften what it really is: the murder of innocent unborn children.

 

“We must stop this human genocide. We must demand that the Supreme Court undo the horrendous ruling and make the womb a safe place again in America. As we hear about the horrible descriptions of the dismemberment of Jamal Ahmad Khashoggi, every breathing person naturally shutters. Yet, every day in America, helpless, preborn children are dismembered while they are still alive. We too must shutter at this horrible act and stop it.”

 

Parker is currently an associate justice of the Alabama Supreme Court and is running for the position of chief justice. Parker won the primary election on June 5, 2018.

 

In his new concurrence, Parker said a “person is a person, regardless of age, physical development, or location.”

 

“Baby Doe had just as much a right to life as did [mother] Erica Phillips. … Phillips was sentenced to death for the murder of two persons; Erica and Baby Doe were equally persons.”

 

He added: “In spite of voluminous state laws recognizing that the lives of unborn children are increasingly entitled to full legal protection, the isolated Roe exception stubbornly endures. … Some liberal justices on the United States Supreme Court adamantly defend the isolated Roe exception. I have written extensively explaining why the Roe exception lacks legal foundation and is patently illogical.”

 

The ruling, he said, “stands as an indictment against the United States Supreme Court.”

 

The only way it can continue, he said, is if the U.S. Supreme Court justices “insist, against all scientific evidence and reason, that unborn children are not human.”

________________________

Here’s Hoping Capital Crime Case Ends Roe v. Wade

John R. Houk

© October 20, 2018

______________________

STATE SUPREME COURT: ROE V. WADE ‘PATENTLY ILLOGICAL’

 

© Copyright 1997-2018. All Rights Reserved. WND.com.

Dr. Ford Passionate Assertions Don’t Match What Can be Proved


John R. Houk

© September 28, 2018

Christine Blasey Ford, left, and Brett Kavanaugh during testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday, Sept. 27, 2018 on Capitol Hill. (Left: Melina Mara/Pool/The Washington Post; right: Gabriella Demczuk/The New York Times via AP, Pool)

If you watched the Dems inquisition of Brett Kavanaugh yesterday you should have noticed the Dems trying to get Kavanaugh to call for an FBI investigation to prove his innocence. Senator Grassley had to remind the Dems – over and over and over again – that the FBI does not draw conclusions in background investigations. The FBI merely finds facts and allows the government agency to decide if there are any red flags to prevent trust.

 

Kavanaugh was actually investigated by the FBI SIX TIMES with ZERO red flags EACH TIME. Obviously the Dem interview of Kavanaugh was merely to entice Kavanaugh to slip up. To the Dem frustration, Kavanaugh NEVER FELL FOR DEM BAITING!

 

One of the things that bothered me was the Dem aim to vilify Kavanaugh because of his High School portrayal of a rascally social life. Surprise – Surprise. Kavanaugh and buddies participated in juvenile antics that included – GASP – beer drinking.

 

Today, I am a committed Conservative Christian upholding the moral values of the Bible. HOWEVER, if my High School Yearbooks revealed the amount of keggers I participated in – especially as a Senior – and revealed it to my Church and expected the Church leadership to treat me accordingly in the present, I would be ostracized or given the left-foot of fellowship.

 

Vilifying the Kavanaugh of today – who has had a stellar law career for decades (unlike say porn lawyer Avenatti) – based on the antics of a popular teenage boy-Kavanaugh, was simply idiotic!

 

But what is good for the goose is good for the gander. Real Clear Investigations has dug up some facts of teenage girl-Christine Blasey Ford based on her mysteriously internet-scrubbed High School Yearbook. And shock of all shocks! The teenage Christine Blasey ALSO participated in adolescent antics on an equal level (if not even higher hijinks) to Kavanaugh’s teen days. AND TODAY, I get the impression the adult Dr. Christine Blasey Ford has also developed a stellar and respected career in her field.

 

It bugs the tar out of my that the Dems outrageously tried to equate Kavanaugh’s teen past to his accomplished adult present while absolutely ignoring the same scenario for Dr. Ford. And it really bugs me that the GOP side of yesterday’s hearing let Dr. Ford’s Yearbook antics go totally unexamined as a comparison.

 

[Click to enlarge] Scribe Yearbook from Natural News

 

After watching Dr. Ford’s treated with kid gloves testimony, it was my opinion she came across as quite believable. For a moment my opinion that was a liar changed to she was mistaken. You can’t call Kavanaugh a liar because he has witnesses that he was never at such a party as described by Ford. Ford’s best friend has sworn Ford’s account never took place which was given under oath with the penalty of perjury if lied.

 

Dr. Ford has NO sworn backing for her account of being sexually assaulted. So, if it happened, she is mistaken about whom she accuses as perpetrator. BUT if you examine her High School antics, I find it possible she was coached into making a fabrication merely to prevent an Originalist Justice to serve on the Supreme Court. AND if that’s the case, Dr. Ford is a WICKED EVIL partisan Democrat.

 

Interestingly the blog CULT OF THE 1ST AMENDMENT – a source of cached Yearbook photos – was removed from Blogger. The Free Republic has a cross post of the removed blog less the photos.

 

 

 

 

 

JRH 9/28/18

In this current state of media censorship & defunding, consider chipping in a few bucks for enjoying (or even despising yet read) this Blog.

Please Support NCCR

**********************

Suppressed Blasey Ford Yearbooks Reveal Fast Times at Holton-Arms

 

By Paul Sperry

September 27, 2018

Real Clear Investigations

 

Democrats plan at Thursday’s Senate Judiciary Committee hearing to use the high school yearbooks of embattled Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, which they say imply he and his prep school pals regularly got drunk and boasted of sexual conquests, to discredit what they call his “choir boy defense” against sex-assault charges leveled by Christine Blasey Ford.

 

But Ford, whose story suffers from significant gaps in her memory, wasn’t exactly a choir girl. In fact, congressional sources say her own yearbooks, among other things, present a potential issue for her and her character, and Republicans are prepared to cite them in questioning her story through the female sex-crimes expert they’ve hired.

 

A committee staffer told RealClearInvestigations, “We have her yearbooks,” which had been mysteriously scrubbed from the Web prior to Ford coming out with her allegations. “She will not make a good witness.”

 

The source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, noted that the annual class books feature a photo of an underage Ford attending at least one party, alongside a caption boasting of girls passing out from binge drinking. Her yearbooks also openly reference sexually promiscuous behavior by the girls, including targeting boys at Kavanaugh’s alma mater, Georgetown Prep, an all-boys school in the affluent Maryland suburbs of Washington, D.C. Ford attended neighboring Holton-Arms School, an all-girls academy.

 

While congressional sources say Ford’s yearbooks could be an exhibit at the hearing, longtime Capitol Hill watchers caution that going after her reputation could backfire on Republicans.

 

“That’s a minefield, especially given the #MeToo movement,” one said.

 

A spokesman for Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley’s office declined to comment.

 

Other evidence indicates Ford, a popular cheerleader at the time, was immersed in an alcohol-fueled party culture and no stranger to “keg parties” in the D.C. area — or the “bar scene” along the Maryland and Delaware coast. In fact, Ford was known as a “party girl” on the Delaware shore during summer breaks, another source with direct knowledge of the congressional investigation said.

 

One report, moreover, recounts how Ford once got caught in “a romantic triangle” at Dewey Beach that ended with the two men getting into a fistfight over her.

 

At Holton-Arms, the source added, she was known by classmates, and even some parents, by a sexually derogatory nickname playing off her maiden name Blasey, suggesting she was promiscuous.

 

“She was not the wholesome Catholic girl they’re trying to portray her as,” the source said, making her claims of victimization at the hands of Kavanaugh “harder to believe.”

 

Ford and her attorney did not respond to requests for comment. But they have cast a much different narrative, suggesting Kavanaugh and other boys from Georgetown Prep aggressively targeted Ford and other reluctant girls from her school while plying them with alcohol. Specifically, Ford alleges Kavanaugh and another older boy took advantage of her at a house party somewhere in the Chevy Chase or Bethesda area of Maryland in the early 1980s.

 

She says she has suffered post-traumatic stress disorder from the alleged attack, which she says involved an inebriated Kavanaugh forcefully groping her on a bed over her clothes while clapping his hand over her mouth to keep her from screaming for help. She added that she has had to seek therapy and other medical treatment to deal with “panic attacks” and “anxiety” from the incident, which she did not report to authorities.

 

Ford cannot remember key details from that night, including the location of the house or the date of the party, while claiming to have consumed just “one beer” there. She says she told no one about the “assault” at the time, not even her close girlfriend, who she says was with her at the party, or her mother.

 

Ford claims the reason she didn’t tell her parents about almost being “raped” is that she didn’t want to get “in trouble” for drinking at a party.

 

“I did not want to tell my parents that I, at age 15, was in a house without any parents present, drinking beer with boys,” she said.

 

But classmates said the former cheerleader, who was known as “Chrissy,” was part of the underage drinking tradition that was no secret among Maryland prep schools in the early 1980s, when the drinking age was 18.

 

Her own school yearbooks (in which parents took out paid ads) celebrated “boys [and] beer” and pictured beer bottles and beer cans and scenes of boys and girls drinking at parties. One published a photo of Ford and other girls at a Halloween party alongside a caption boasting of “pass[ing] out” after playing “Quarters” and other binge-drinking games. Her father, Ralph Blasey, was president of the local country club.

 

Neither her parents nor her two siblings have come out to voice support for Ford, and they did not sign a family letter of support for her and her claims circulated by her husband.

 

The Holton-Arms yearbooks in question, which cover her sophomore, junior and senior years, are titled “Scribe ’82,” “Scribe ’83” and “Scribe ’84.”

 

Among other things, the annual books objectified men and even talked about hiring male strippers, including one in a “gold G-string,” for sweet 16 parties. They also featured the young Holton coeds dressed as Playboy bunnies and posing seductively atop desks, school-uniform skirts hiked up.

 

One section, “While the Parents Were Out,” talked about partying with boys at area house parties where kids got so drunk they “ruined” their parents’ “heirloom Persian rugs” with vomit.

“The tenth grade taught us how to party,” the girls bragged in another section. And, “Loss of consciousness is often an integral part of the party scene.”

 

A caption on another page talked about girls having “their choice of men” at the neighboring boys schools, including Georgetown Prep: “No longer confining ourselves to the walls of Landon and Prep, we plunged into the waters of St. John and Gonzaga with much success.”

 

Jay Martin, who went to school in the area at the time, asserted that Holton-Arms girls back in the 1980s were hardly innocent “victims” of Georgetown Prep boys.

 

“I am her age,” he said of Ford. “I went to high school next to Prep and knew lots of Holton-Arms girls. This is pure false memory syndrome.”

 

Added Martin: “One of my best women friends had Kavanaugh ask her out [and] she said he was ‘one of the nice ones.’ His mom was a judge. I mean, seriously?”

______________________

Dr. Ford Passionate Assertions Don’t Match What Can be Proved

John R. Houk

© September 28, 2018

______________________

Suppressed Blasey Ford Yearbooks Reveal Fast Times at Holton-Arms

 

© 2016 RealClearInvestigations.com. All Rights Reserved.

 

This and all other original articles created by RealClearInvestigations may be republished for free with attribution. (These terms do not apply to outside articles linked on the site.)

 

We provide our stories for free but they are expensive to produce. Help us continue to publish distinctive journalism by making a contribution today to RealClearInvestigations.

 

What is the Actual Dem Resistance to Kavanaugh?


Phone, FAX or Email your Senator to CONFIRM!

 

John R. Houk

© September 26, 2018

 

Breaking News as I was constructing this post

 

Julie Swetnick

 

A “Julie Swetnick” is now accusing Brett Kavanaugh not of sexual assault but of being one of many High School contemporaries of Kavanaugh of being a member of gang rape gangs.

 

AGAIN no corroboration or witnesses just Switnick’s word who is being represented by lawyer sleaze Michael Avenatti. The same Avenatti losing legal battles representing Stormy Daniels the porn actress who broke her nondisclosure agreement which she pocketed Trump cash. The same Avenatti who has his own legal and financial problems.

 

Even CNN (should be acronym for Communist New Network) brings up Avenatti’s criminal past in a story to potential financial involving $$$ MILLIONS:

He’s a convicted felon whose rap sheet is 15 pages long and spans four decades, according to court records. He served time in prison in the early 90s and was arrested on domestic violence charges as recently as February. (He pleaded not guilty and the case is awaiting trial). (Exclusive: How a ‘nobody’ ex-con pushed Avenatti law firm into bankruptcy; By Maeve RestonScott GloverSara Sidner and Traci Tamura; CNN; 6/1/18 Updated 8:12 PM ET)

And now as the Dems & Leftist MSM hops on the crucify Kavanaugh Train, Swetnick’s propensity for mental illness is being brought up:

In the wake of the 3rd Kavanaugh accuser Julie Swetnick’s identity becoming public through her lawyer, Michael Avenatti, The Kuhner Report received a call from a man who identified himself as “Thomas in Boston,”  whose family knew the Swetnicks “Well” in Maryland, and discussed the known “Issues of Substance abuse,” and “Mental Issues from Julie.”   He detailed a phone call from his sister this morning, who still lives in Maryland, where she said “Can you imagine a more delusional whack job is the one that came forward against Kavanaugh?”

“Thomas” also went on to describe the[y] are where they grew up in Montgomery Village, “Quite a distance from Bethesda” and that the “Social circles” would not have interacted.  He refutes that during High School “No way that she would have encountered these same social circles, certainly not during High School.”

He did say the information he received was “Second hand,” as it came from family members, but, he also offered details of the Swetnicks and his own family that lend credence to his story.

You can hear “Thomas in Boston” below: [i.e. on WRKO-AM 680 – The Voice of Boston page toward bottom] (Family Friend” of Julie Swetnick Details Her “Issues”; posted by Kuhner Report; WRKO-AM 680; 9/26/18)

 

What we have going on here is lie after lie by Dems trying to prevent Kavanaugh’s Confirmation.

 

+++****+++++****

Steven Ahle writing at DavidHarrisJr.com, lists 10 Republican Senators who have not committed to vote for Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s  confirmation to SCOTUS.

 

The Republican Party is supposed to stand for Conservative principles of governing. AND YET these GOP Senators will not go on the record to confirm Kavanaugh. Kavanaugh represents an Originalist view of the U.S. Constitution. This is as opposed to the official stand of the Dem Party that places its political principles on the so-called Living Conservative.

 

A brief description of Living Constitution:

 

In United States constitutional interpretation, the Living Constitution is the claim that the Constitution has a dynamic meaning or that it has the properties of an animate being in the sense that it changes. The controversial idea is associated with views that contemporaneous society should be taken into account when interpreting key constitutional phrases. While the arguments for the Living Constitution vary, they can generally be broken into two categories. First, the pragmatist view contends that interpreting the Constitution in accordance with its original meaning or intent is sometimes unacceptable as a policy matter, and thus that an evolving interpretation is necessary. The second, relating to intent, contends that the constitutional framers specifically wrote the Constitution in broad and flexible terms to create such a dynamic, “living” document. Opponents of the idea often argue that the Constitution should be changed through the amendment process, and that allowing judges to determine an ever-changing meaning of the constitution undermines democracy. The primary alternative to the Living Constitution is most commonly described as originalism. [Bold text Editor’s]

 

A brief description of the Originalist Constitution or Originalism:

 

In the context of United States constitutional interpretation, originalism is a principle of interpretation that tries to discover the original meaning or intent of the constitution. It is based on the principle that the judiciary is not supposed to create, amend or repeal laws but only to uphold them. The term originated in the 1980s but the concept is a formalist theory of law and a corollary of textualism. Today, originalism is popular among some political conservatives in the U.S., and is most prominently associated with Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Robert Bork. However, some liberals, such as Justice Hugo Black and Akhil Amar, have also subscribed to the theory. Originalism is an umbrella term for two major theories, principally: ⁕The original intent theory, which holds that interpretation of a written constitution is consistent with what was meant by those who drafted and ratified it. ⁕The original meaning theory, which is closely related to textualism, is the view that interpretation of a written constitution or law should be based on what reasonable persons living at the time of its adoption would have declared the ordinary meaning of the text to be. It is with this view that most originalists, such as Justice Scalia, are associated. [Bold Text Editor’s]

 

Both descriptions are from Definitions.net. It may be my imagination but it seems Definitions.net interpretation of Originalism though accurate in my opinion, is slightly dismissive. That annoys me. And so an affirmative analysis of Originalism comes Conservapedia:

 

Originalism is a method of constitutional interpretation that focuses on how a provision of a constitution would have been understood at the time of its ratification.[1]

 

The most common form is so-called “original meaning” originalism. This form that focuses on how ordinary people at the time would have understood the language of the constitutional provision. A largely-discarded form of orginalism [sic] is so-called “original intent” originalism, which focuses on what the authors of the constitution might have meant.

 

The philosophical basis of originalism is that a constitution only has force because it was approved by the people when it was ratified. Thus, the understanding of the constitution by the people who ratified it is the only valid interpretation.

 

Originalists reject the “evolving standards of decency” approach to constitutional interpretation that allows judges to effectively amend the constitution based on their own views of what the constitution “should” say. Instead, originalism is anchored in one certain interpretation. READ THE REST for even more details

 

Hmm… The concept of “evolving standards of decency” rather than a concept of “We The People” decide the rule of law by the vote is the fear that a Kavanaugh confirmation will ignore. Since Dems and Leftists in generals cannot stand that THE PEOPLE can comprehend what is good for them, Dems and Leftists would rather decide what is good for PEOPLE and what is good for society in general.

 

AND THAT IS WHY Dems in the Senate will do ANYTHING – lie, fabricate and/or rewrite laws via judicial activism – to prevent an Originalist to become a Justice on the Supreme Court of the United States.

 

OBVIOUSLY fabricating accusations of rape on Judge Brett Kavanaugh is the Dem process of doing ANYTHING to transform Constitutional Interpretation away from Originalism to Living Constitution is the purpose of the incredulous character assassination happening now.

 

Kavanaugh has already gone through SIX FBI investigations in his Federal journey of working for WE THE PEOPLE. In the confirmation process Kavanaugh experienced for the Federal Judiciary and Appellate Judiciary met hardly any Dem resistance. THEN he is nominated for SCOTUS and suddenly and mysteriously a couple of ladies with a sudden memory resurgence think it might have been teen Kavanaugh in High School and his Freshman year in college involved in their sexual assault that neither women reported to the police OVER 35 FREAK’IN YEARS AGO!

 

Only an idiot or an infected Leftist ideologue could believe such accusations. Are you an idiot are a mind-diseased Leftist Ideologue?

 

Think about your state of mind when you realize that there are actually TEN Republican Senators who haven’t made up their own minds on confirming Kavanaugh for SCOTUS.

 

Below Steven Ahle lists those ten Senators including their official phone numbers. MY GOD! If you are a constituent of one of these Senators call their office to demand Kavanaugh’s confirmation!

 

  1. Susan Collins:

 

Collins Contact:

 

ph: (202) 224-2523

fax: (202) 224-2693

Constituency Contact Form: https://www.collins.senate.gov/contact

 

  1. Senator Bill Cassidy:

 

Cassidy Contact:

 

Ph. 202-224-5824

Constituency Contact Form: https://www.cassidy.senate.gov/contact

 

  1. Senator Bob Corker:

 

Corker Contact:

Main: 202-224-3344
Fax: 202-228-0566

Constituency Contact Form: https://www.corker.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/emailme

 

  1. Senator Jeff Flake:

 

Flake Contact:

P: 202-224-4521
F: 202-228-0515

Constituency Contact Form: https://www.flake.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contact-jeff

 

  1. Wyoming Senator Michael Enzi:

 

Enzi Contact:

Phone: (202) 224-3424
Fax: (202) 228-0359
Toll-Free: (888) 250-1879

Constituency Contact Form: https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/e-mail-senator-enzi

 

  1. Senator John Kennedy:

 

Kennedy Contact:

 

Phone: (202) 224-4623

Constituency Contact Form: https://www.kennedy.senate.gov/public/email-me

 

  1. Senator James Lankford:

 

Lankford Contact:

 

Phone: (202) 224-5754

Constituency Contact Form: https://www.lankford.senate.gov/contact/email

 

  1. Senator Jerry Moran:

 

Moran Contact:

 

Phone: (202) 224-6521
Fax: (202) 228-6966

Constituency Contact Form: https://www.moran.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/e-mail-jerry

 

  1. Senator Lisa Murkowski:

 

Murkowski Contact:

 

Phone: (202)-224-6665
Fax: (202)-224-5301

Constituency Contact Form: https://www.murkowski.senate.gov/contact/email

 

  1. Senator Ben Sasse:

 

Sasse Contact:

 

Phone: 202-224-4224

Constituency Contact Form: https://www.sasse.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/email-ben

 

Here is an example email from what I sent to my Senator in Oklahoma according to the Steven Ahle list:

 

Senator Lankford,

It has come to my attention that you as a Conservative Republican have not committed to confirm Judge Kavanaugh to SCOTUS (https://davidharrisjr.com/politics/ten-senators-who-havent-committed-to-kavanaugh-yet/). I find this quite shocking as a Conservative! The only basis I can think of for any hesitation are the alleged sexual assault claims from ladies with very vague memories from over 35 years ago. AND IF Kavanaugh was a frisky teenage boy in High School and as a Freshman at Yale, can you not remember you were once a teenage boy. Even the most stellarly behaved teenage boy at very least has raging hormones that as more responsibility arises in life, more focus on mature life issues grow.

Surely you recognize that the sudden memory recovery of ladies that never reported a heinous crime of sexual assault when the alleged incident occurred are untrustworthy in their accusations. I have been doing some reading on sexual assault on women. In spite of MSM and/or Democratic Party assertions otherwise, sexual assault leave an indelible memory of revulsion and personal violation. Are you seeing this from Judge Kavanaugh’s accusers?

Dear God in Heaven Senator Lankford as a Conservative from Oklahoma, you should feel compelled to honor your constituents and confirm Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.

Sincerely,

John R. Houk

Feel free to amend and place your Senator and name to an email or FAX.

 

JRH 9/26/18

In this current state of media censorship & defunding, consider chipping in a few bucks for enjoying (or even despising yet read) this Blog.

Please Support NCCR

**********************

Ten Senators Who Haven’t Committed To Kavanaugh Yet

 

By STEVEN AHLE

SEPTEMBER 25, 2018

DavidHarrisJr.com

 

There is one thing you have to admire about Democratic Senators. They stick together and move forward, public opinion be damned. I really wish Republican Senators would do the same. If they mess up the Kavanaugh nomination, it will cost them on November sixth. They try to please the Democrat voters who will never vote for them regardless, so why do they even try? Currently, 10 out of 51 Republican Senators are not committed to Kavanaugh. They are:

 

  • Maine Senator Susan Collins -office number 202-224-2523

 

  • Louisiana Senator Bill Cassidy – office number 202-224-5824

 

  • Tennessee Senator Bob Corker office number 202-224-3344

 

  • Arizona Senator Jeff Flake – office number 202-224-4521

 

  • Wyoming Senator Michael Enzi – office number 202-224-3424

 

  • Louisiana Senator John Kennedy – office number 202-224-4623

 

  • Oklahoma Senator James Lankford – office number 202-224-5754

 

  • Kansas Senator Jerry Moran – office number 202-224-6521

 

  • Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski – office number 202-224-6665

 

  • Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse office number 202-224-4224

 

Look at all the RINOs. Jeff Flake has already said that he may vote against Kavanaugh because of the bogus accusations against him. But the truth is, Flake hates Trump more than he likes his constituents.

 

From The Gateway Pundit

 

Creepy porn lawyer Michael Avenatti is set to roll out Kavanaugh’s 3rd alleged accuser in the next 48 hours–Michael Avenatti took his grotesque attacks to the next level and informed the Senate he is accusing Kavanaugh and witness Mark Judge of getting women intoxicated at parties with drugs and alcohol so they could be gang raped by a “train” of men.

 

Call these Republican Senators and tell them enough is enough!

 

Mitch McConnell blasted Democrats earlier Monday from the Senate floor.

 

McConnell said the resistance has become a smear campaign aided and abetted by members of the U.S. Senate.

 

 

 

To stay up to date with David’s No Nonsense News, make sure to subscribe to his news letter on his website at www.davidharrisjr.com and follow him on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and YouTube @DavidJHarrisJr

 

He has also just announced that his book “Why I Couldn’t Stay Silent” is available for pre-order! Click the tab “Book” on the Home Page on his website. Over 600 books have already been ordered! He has increased the signed pre-orders to the first 700 books! Pre-order yours today and it will be signed by David!

________________________

What is the Actual Dem Resistance to Kavanaugh?

Phone, FAX or Email your Senator to CONFIRM!

 

John R. Houk

© September 26, 2018

_____________________

Ten Senators Who Haven’t Committed To Kavanaugh Yet

 

Copyright © David Harris Jr. All Rights Reserved.

 

ABOUT DAVID

David James Harris Jr & Wife Jennifer

 

David James Harris Jr is a passionate pursuer of life, love and hope and seeks to use his platform as Founder/CEO of Uncorked Health. Wellness, Inc. to help as many individuals as possible. David has been an entrepreneur for over 20 years launching his first business at just 20 years old. It became a multi-million dollar company within two years. He’s also tasted of life’s setbacks and chooses to seek for growth opportunities in every downfall. David has overcame many of life’s obstacles, both personally and professionally.

 

David is crazy in love with his high school sweetheart, Jennifer… The girl of his dreams and often in his dreams. They are about to celebrate 23 years of marriage this year. They have two amazingly talented and beautiful daughters Corbin, 20 and Skyler, 18 who’s passion for life and love for others are contagious. They each chose to start off on the road to adulthood by attending Bethel School of Supernatural Ministry in Redding, Ca, seeking to lay down a spiritual foundation before tackling all that life has to offer.

 

He is openly a lover of God, having had an encounter that he describes like unto that of Saul in the bible. His perspective on life, himself, and his reason for existence was eternally altered from these encounters, which led to him referring to God as… “Daddy”. He seeks to be a light in a dark world, operate a business that helps people achieve their goals in mind and body, while bringing messages of hope and love that enhance the spirit. Join him on a journey through life, filled with hope and enduring love…

 

Choose Pro-Life for Justice Kennedy’s Replacement


Justin Smith makes an excellent case for President Trump to nominate a Pro-Life and Constitutional Originalist to SCOTUS. Justin specifically posits the nomination to be Appellate Justice Amy Coney Barrett.

 

JRH 7/9/18

Please Support NCCR

********************

Choose Pro-Life for Justice Kennedy’s Replacement

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent 7/8/2018 8:41 PM

 

Under our God-given rights, Our Founders saw the law as a tool to preserve liberty and freedom for all, through the Western and Judeo-Christian principles and virtues that made the U.S. Constitution and our bicameral system possible. They did not see liberty under the law as anybody’s right to do anything, regardless of its reprehensible nature, and they certainly never intended to place America on a path where evil is called “good”, as the nation witnessed with the Supreme Court’s ruling on Roe v Wade. The Court was never supposed to be the final arbiter of law, becoming a tyrannical entity that seemingly answers to no one and places itself above all.

 

In this sense and in conjunction with Justice Anthony Kennedy’s impending retirement, President Trump is wrong not to question potential Supreme Court nominees regarding their position on Roe v Wade and whether or not they would overturn it, if given the opportunity. Any reluctance to do so is from a political concern and ignores the fact that Roe v Wade was given the force of de facto law by a Supreme Court that enforced its will and did not judge the case on any actual constitution basis, since the so-called “right” to abortion did not exist in the Constitution and they manufactured it out of thin air.

 

President Trump suggested that it somehow wouldn’t be “appropriate” to question his nominees on this. So, is murdering over 60 million unborn children since 1973 appropriate?

 

Senator Susan Collins (R-Maine), an overt progressive, stated that she could not support any candidate who might be willing to overturn the despicable Roe v Wade Supreme Court ruling. She suggested that many years of “precedents” must somehow be viewed as “set law” as she parroted Democrat talking points and the likes of progressive Democrat activist Justices, such as Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.

 

What about the hundreds of years of precedents that upheld the sanctity of life and protected life well prior to Roe V Wade?

 

Any person who views overturning the activist decision of Roe v Wade as a “big mistake is essentially willing to usurp an unborn child’s right to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”. They are either horribly ignorant or terribly callous in turning a blind-eye to the murder of a human person, committed in each abortion; but in either case, they are taking the position that protecting innocent life is not a moral good.

 

If Supreme Court precedents are set law, why isn’t Plessy v Ferguson and Lum v Rice still the law of the land? If these cases had not been overturned, America would still have segregation under the “law”. These were overturned by a later Court, because the Supreme Court is fallible.

 

However, ever since Marbury v Madison (1803) and the Court’s assumption that it was the primary interpreter of the Constitution, America has seen the Supreme Court define its own power, and increasingly and regularly, America has seen the Supreme Court usurp power and act as if it is dominant over Congress and the Office of the President, which is contrary to the Founders’ Original Intent. Marbury has been cited by the Court to invalidate laws in over 200 cases, even though Marbury v Madison does not contain any actual assertion that the Court has exclusive authority to bind other parts of government.

 

Thomas Paine, one of our Founders, once noted, “All power exercised over a nation … must be either delegated, or assumed … All delegated power is trust, and all assumed power is usurpation.”

 

The rights Thomas Jefferson lists in the Declaration of Independence are certainly open to interpretation, but according to our Founders, their metaphysical basis, found in nature itself, is not. However, activist Justices have now long impressed their notions of what they believe the Constitution should say, upon all America. As a result, America was handed rulings that removed prayer and the Ten Commandments from schools, pornography on demand, abortion and homosexual “marriage”.

 

Some call retiring Justice Kennedy a “moderate” because he voted along conservative lines fifty-seven percent of the time, but how anyone reaches this conclusion is disturbing, especially once one looks at some major cases. Kennedy voted too often to advance the deviant and perverted homosexual agenda in America, although this segment of society represents only a mere 3 to 4 percent of the population. Kennedy knocked down Texas’s sodomy laws, the upheld Roe v Wade twice and he voted in favor of homosexual “marriage”, aiding in making a mockery of traditional marriage and the only true meaning of marriage — the union between one man and one woman in Holy Matrimony before God. This is not a “conservative” or a “moderate”.

 

By the time this is released, Pres. Trump will have made his pick for the Supreme Court. Let us all pray that he chooses Amy Coney Barrett, the 46 year old Justice of the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals,  who is a pro-life Catholic mother of seven and a strong Constitutionalist. Ms. Barrett was also awarded the top student award from Notre Dame Law School in 1997.

 

President Trump cannot deny, that these illiberal anti-Constitution proponents of abortion stand firmly opposed to the conservative philosophy, which is the protector of America’s founding ideas, those ideas of life and liberty so many American patriots have died defending. As such, President Trump and Congress should unabashedly state that they will move to place a pro-life nominee on the Supreme Court, such as Amy Barrett, because modern Justices no longer seem capable of just determining the constitutionality of any particular law, in accordance with the Founders’ Original Intent; rather, they seek to wield the Supreme Court like a club to meet the demands of whatever political agenda at hand at any given moment, during a time that the anti-Constitution progressive Democrats have certainly made no secret that defending baby murder is an integral part of their fight to accept or reject any candidate for the Supreme Court.

 

As Christians, we are bound to speak for those who cannot speak for themselves and to reject the lies and the evil of an abortion industry that murders the image of God approximately 1.5 million times a year in America. No one should ever call such a heinous crime a “right”.

 

And in the meantime, America must put forth the necessary effort and work to reign in an out-of-control Supreme Court, as the admonishment and prophesy of Brutus, one of the great anti-Federalists guiding the Constitution’s ratification debate, has become our present-day reality: “The Supreme Court under this Constitution would be exalted above all other power in the government, and subject to no controul … There is no power above them, to controul any of their decisions. There is no authority that can remove them, and they cannot be controuled by the laws of the legislature. In short, they are independent of the people, of the legislature, and of every power under Heaven. Men placed in this situation will generally soon feel themselves independent of Heaven itself.” [Italic bold by Editor]

 

America must stop un-elected Supreme Court Justices from arbitrarily exercising power over the entire nation, our federal and state governments, in a manner that abrogates part of the Constitution itself, as it sets forth to define good and evil from the high court. And America must stop the reprehensible abortion industry and overturn Roe v Wade, and right the historic wrong that has perpetrated the worst mass murder in history, upon a nation that purportedly seeks to be blessed by God.

 

By Justin O. Smith

____________________

Edited by John R. Houk

All source links as well as text embraced by brackets are by the Editor.

 

© Justin O. Smith