the real world...

Therapeutic Embryonic Stem-Cell Research “Just Not Realistic”
by Caleb Colley, B.A., B.S.
http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/3504

Decoding Design In the Retina?
by Kyle Butt, M.A.
http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/3505

What Else “Living Fossils” Reveal
by Eric Lyons, M.Min.
http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/3506

[0] comments (946 views) |  [0] Trackbacks   [0] Pingbacks

A Dangerous Church...

A Dangerous Church
By Thomas E. Brewton

Christian churches should be noted for living and preaching the Gospel
everywhere, though confronted with every degree of hostility.

{ExtendedText}
Sunday’s sermon at Black Rock - Long Ridge Congregational Church (North
Stamford, Connecticut) was preached by Rev. Larry Fullerton.

The word dangerous has more than one meaning in contemporary culture.
It can refer, of course, to the threat of physical harm.  It can also
refer to someone with special skills, like an athlete who is always a
potential scorer.  Christian churches must become dangerous in both
senses.

Missionary work comes to mind in the first sense.  Black Rock - Long
Ridge Congregational Church supports many missionaries around the world,
for example in China and Muslim countries, where the threat of jail,
torture, and execution is very real.

As churches here in the United States how do we become dangerous in the
second sense?

Be Joyous and Believe:  The Apostle Paul in his letter to the church at
Thessalonica wrote:

“For we know, brothers loved by God, that he has chosen you, because
our gospel came to you not simply with words, but also with power, with
the Holy Spirit and with deep conviction. You know how we lived among
you for your sake. You became imitators of us and of the Lord; in spite
of severe suffering, you welcomed the message with the joy given by the
Holy Spirit.” (1 Thessalonians 1:4-6)

Proclaim the Gospel Everywhere: 

“And so you became a model to all the believers in Macedonia and
Achaia. The Lord’s message rang out from you not only in Macedonia and
AchaiaÑyour faith in God has become known everywhere.” (1 Thessalonians
1:7-8)

Be Generous With Your Time, Talent, and Money:

“And now, brothers, we want you to know about the grace that God has
given the Macedonian churches. Out of the most severe trial, their
overflowing joy and their extreme poverty welled up in rich generosity. For I
testify that they gave as much as they were able, and even beyond
their ability. Entirely on their own, they urgently pleaded with us for the
privilege of sharing in this service to the saints. And they did not
do as we expected, but they gave themselves first to the Lord and then
to us in keeping with God’s will. So we urged Titus, since he had
earlier made a beginning, to bring also to completion this act of grace on
your part. But just as you excel in everythingÑin faith, in speech, in
knowledge, in complete earnestness and in your love for usÑsee that you
also excel in this grace of giving.” (2 Corinthians 8:1-7)

Christian Love is the Foundation:

“A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so
you must love one another. By this all men will know that you are my
disciples, if you love one another.” John 13:34-35

Thomas E. Brewton is a staff writer for the New Media Alliance, Inc.
The New Media Alliance is a non-profit (501c3) national coalition of
writers, journalists and grass-roots media outlets.

His weblog is THE VIEW FROM 1776
http://www.thomasbrewton.com/

[0] comments (486 views) |  [0] Trackbacks   [0] Pingbacks

Ford reaffirms commitment to homosexual groups

Ford reaffirms commitment to homosexual groups

Ford says more “gay” support could be forthcoming

In an interview with The Advocate (Nov. 2007 issue), America’s largest homosexual magazine, Ford states more gay-specific ads are a distinct possibility.

In reaffirming its commitment to advancing homosexuality, Ford spokesman Jim Cain said, “We haven’t ruled out the possibility of doing more targeted (gay specific) ads…”

The comment came in a four-page article entitled, “Driving the Gay Market,” summarizing Ford’s past and current advertising practices in gay and lesbian publications.

Providing evidence of their continued commitment to the homosexual agenda, Ford placed a full-page ad in the November 2007 issue of OUT promoting its new Volvo C30 automobile. OUT is the nation’s second largest homosexual magazine.

Take action today at www.afa.net Also see www.boycottford.com

* A Message from the American Family Association

---------------------------------------------------------------

For the latest news about the homosexual agenda in schools, go to
http://www.truthatschool.org/news.htm

---------------------------------------------------------------

[0] comments (476 views) |  [0] Trackbacks   [0] Pingbacks

Hating Haters?

Is Hating ‘Haters’ Hateful?
http://www.defendthefamily.com/pfrc/archives.php?id=4429887

---------------------------------

Dumbledoring Down the Culture by Bob Knight
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=23005

[0] comments (475 views) |  [0] Trackbacks   [0] Pingbacks

Outlets...

Pro-abortionists biggest complaint—What about after?

Pro-abortionists(those that consider the abortion ‘option’ a must) have always claimed that the pro-lifers are only concerned with a baby’s life before it is born. Any time other than that, they believe pro-lifers could care less.

When one considers the mother/child/father programs that are available, it will be obvious how that argument is totally devoid of fact. Have they ever heard about Room at the Inn? How about Rachel’s Vineyard? Silent No More? Prayer Partners? Spiritual Adoption? Voter Registration?

Just taking the Room at the Inn, one can see an interesting trend developing. With a staff of only eight total people, two separate departments have developed. One is a residential location for all those mothers who decide to have their babies without any family support. The other is an Outreach Aftercare program encompassing professional counseling, life-skills in parenting, budgeting, nutrition, and employment basics.

But on the way to helping others help others live, strange things happened with this program. The first year(2004) saw 53 people helped/saved. The second year(2005) witnessed 153 people. But in 2006, there were over 450 people aided with the program. It is expected that they will help save >1600 lives in 2007. Now for those that care to extrapolate on trends, that looks to be >4500 lives saved/helped in 2008, and >13,500 in 2009.

One must ask several questions upon seeing this trend. Why is it growing at the astounding rate of at least 3x the previous amount every year? Keeping this trend in mind, how many are becoming pregnant, but have been using some other means of disposing of the unwanted child? With this kind of trend, how many lives would be saved after 10 years? After 25? Of those that were saved, what % would have considered themselves only ‘blobs of tissue’? Of those that were saved, how many would now consider themselves pro-life at this point?

Of course, these questions open up whole sets of other questions. Of those saved, who will wind up being another Washington, Reagan, Mother Theresa, or John Paul II? Who would have been smart enough to solve oncoming problems of an evolving world? Which one of them would have solved the dilemmas of ‘fusion’ energy, or even time travel, or any other oncoming problem?

Why limit yourself to a single organization out of Charlotte(NC)? We know that in the US alone, 1.3 million deaths are reported by abortion per year. And that’s not even counting the lives lost by the ‘pill’, the ‘morning-after’ pill, “IVF”, and RU-486.

The interesting item in all of the above is that a simple question to anybody still alive is, “Would you have preferred an abortion?” The resounding answer is, “Of course not”. In fact, few ever admit that they are glad that their mom had the legal option to kill them.

The bottom line is that ‘pro-lifers’ are always concerned about life—at any stage. Whether that be the proper care of a fertilized embryo, a five month old who would have difficulty living without help from their mom’s body, or a 5 year old who would have difficulty living without direct help from their mom and/or dad.

Even though huge amounts can be written about any of the other programs offered, that information can be obtained by sending the author an e-mail and the punch of a button.

It’s more than surreptitious that “live” spelled backwards is “evil”. 

Kevin Roeten can be reached at roetenks@charter.net or kevin@kevinroeten.us

[0] comments (441 views) |  [0] Trackbacks   [0] Pingbacks

Global warming...

Ozone Depletion Dependent on Global Warming?

The Montreal Protocol that protects the ozone turns twenty this year. Many claim that it was successful. But why would we celebrate a piece of legislation that robbed thousands of jobs? And worst of all, there may be reason to believe that ozone depleting substances(ODS) are not a cause for worry. Add to that, ozone depletion seems interconnected with Global Warming, from which anything ‘manmade’ has been debunked a while ago.

The National Center for Policy Analysis(NCPA) has recently issued a booklet with facts on Global Warming. It reiterates that there is little or no relationship between CO2 emissions and climate change. Humans contribute 3.4% of CO2—nature contributes 96.6%. There was an explosion of life forms during the Cambrian Period when CO2 was 18x that of today; and during the Jurassic Period(dinosaurs), CO2 levels were 9x higher. Even polar bears increased from ~5000(1950) to 25,000 today. The NCPA primer gives detailed resources for all this information. Because manmade GW is non-existent, are we sure of the dangers of ozone depletion?

Ben Lieberman(Heritage Foundation) states that the parallels with climate change are striking. The EPA also admits that predictions of ozone levels remain difficult. Some stratospheric cooling is also predicted from increases in greenhouse gases like CO2. But the earth is supposedly not cooling since 1975.

Interestingly, the World Meteorological Organization Global Ozone Research and Monitoring Project(#44), notes that a UNEP 1994 Assessment overestimated ozone loss for the 1994-1997 period. National Academy assessments(1st two years of Reagan administration) had also indicated that the first estimates of the magnitude of ozone depletion had been overly large.

Catalytic destruction of ozone by chlorine and bromine has always been assumed to be the major culprits. As a result, concern prompted the ban of chlorofluorocarbons(freons) as well as related halogens such as carbon tetrachloride[dry cleaning] and trichoroethane[degreaser]. Without getting overly technical, the ‘photo dissociation’ of these chemicals has produced halogen atoms, which in turn react and deplete ozone to produce oxygen.

But “Science Daily”(University of Leeds, University of East Anglia, & British Antarctic Survey) reports that large quantities of iodine oxide(halogen) have been found in Antarctica during those periods of light(August-May). This corresponds to the Antarctic’s yearly ozone thinning. But this chemical has not been found in the Arctic, which does not usually generate significant ozone thinning. The source of these halogens is natural. Sea-salt provides the bromine, and almost certainly iodine is obtained from the bright orange algae that coat the underside of the sea ice around Antarctica. Very recent satellite observations by one of the above team(Dr. Alfonso Saiz-Lopez), have confirmed that iodine oxides are widespread throughout coastal Antarctica.

Bottom line: scientists have found out that the ozone ‘hole’ over Antarctica has shrunk 30% versus last year’s record size. Ozone depths have indeed been shrinking at a slower pace since the 1980’s.  A 1988 World Meteorological Report has said that the linear depletion trend observed during the 1980’s has not continued, but rather total ozone has been almost constant. But it seems that the timeline of elimination of ‘ODS’ and ozone depletion don’t line up.

Even the WHO admits UVB radiation has never gone up.  The US National Cancer Institute statistics show that the much hyped acceleration of skin cancer rates has not materialized. That the incidence of malignant melanoma has actually been leveling off during the time of the ‘alleged’ ozone crisis. That even in Antarctica, no eco-system or species was shown to be seriously harmed by ozone depletion. Even in Al Gore’s book, The Earth in the Balance, the claim that because of the ozone ‘hole’, hunters would report blind rabbits, and fisherman would catch blind salmon, never came to be. 

But Anne Douglass(NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center) says that “The goal now is to ensure that CFC’s and other emissions continue to fall below the levels that produce an ozone hole. This won’t happen until about 2070.” But even NASA admits that the differences between loss and recovery of ozone at the poles are complex. Lately, the modern focus in ozone research has shifted to include the effects of climate change. But now, they realize that they are linked in subtle, but profoundly important ways.

Actually, CFC’s likely caused a drop in total ozone. But the earth seemed to compensate readily. It sounds like the hype over the ozone ‘hole’ was very similar to manmade global warming. Because ozone wasn’t even measured before 1980, and CO2 and temperature spikes don’t correlate whatsoever, can we say we’re sure about anything? Do we even want to know how much we’ve spent on problems that very likely never existed?

**************************************************************
Kevin Roeten can be reached at roetenks@charter.net or kevin@kevinroeten.us

-------------------------------------

So, How Many Nobel Peace Prizes Has Hillary Won?

Satire By John W. Lillpop

Former Vice President Al Gore’s efforts to save the planet finally paid dividends when he was able to triangulate a phony non-issue into a Nobel Peace Prize, a mockery of science that Gore shares with a UN panel.

With this spectacular achievement, Gore has gained the love and adoration of billions of people across the globe who yearn for a strong leader with the spiritual and moral credentials to lead the world out of the environmental quagmire created and perpetuated by G.W. Bush.

Above all else, Al Gore has taken the high road in doing something positive to change America’s tattered image as a collection of 300 million over consuming, overweight spoiled brats who view the rest of the world as America’s garbage disposal, ashtray, and septic tank.

Thanks to Al Gore, the world is starting to realize that there is indeed a good and gracious side to Americans.

Because of Al Gore, the world realizes that we care about more than money, sex, football, and 80- inch plasma televisions.

Al Gore has single-handedly reinvigorated the notion that Americans are among the most noble and trustworthy citizens on earth.

Next to inventing the Internet, and losing the 2000 election to a non-English speaking cow poke from Texas, winning the Nobel Peace Prize is the most remarkable event in the life of American hero Al Gore.

During the time that Al Gore has been dazzling the world with his spiritual and moral superiority, Hillary Clinton continues her relentless drive toward being the most corrupt politician ever to run for elective office.

Hillary’s associations with the likes of Norman Hsu, Sandy Berger, and Slick Wille only serve to reinforce her image as the woman whom people instantly like, but come to despise once they get to know her better.

If there were a female Darth Vader in American politics, it would surely be Hillary Clinton.

From a partisan political perspective, Al Gore’s latest triumph will inevitably catapult him into the front of the pack of Democrats running in the 2008 presidential election sweepstakes.

Indeed, strategists working on Gore’s behalf in Nashville, Tennessee, speaking on condition of anonymity, have disclosed Gore’s major campaign theme.

Namely, “So, How Many Nobel Peace Prizes Has Hillary Won?”

You go, boy!

[0] comments (509 views) |  [0] Trackbacks   [0] Pingbacks

Dear Abby: You're Wrong on Homosexuality

Dear Abby: You’re Wrong on Homosexuality
http://www.earnedmedia.org/sbm1010.htm

------------------------

www.TheParentsGroup.com

-----------------------

The ‘Mother Teresa’ of Ex-Homosexual Ministry
http://www.crossministry.org/

[0] comments (474 views) |  [0] Trackbacks   [0] Pingbacks

Family Security Matters begins database of illegal alien crimes

Family Security Matters begins database of illegal alien crimes
http://www.theconservativevoice.com/articles/article.html?id=28476

----------------------------

Will Your School Calendar Be Hijacked by Homosexual Events?
http://www.missionamerica.com/agenda.php?articlenum=75

Also see: www.truthatschool.org

----------------------------

This week the House Democratic leadership abruptly stopped the conversation on the new version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA). However now is not the time for you to be silent. We encourage our grassroots to strategize and develop creative ways to have your voice heard on this issue.

If this legislation passes, it will mainstream homosexuality and transgenderism and provide “homosexual” activists a legal tool for punishing employers who do not approve of this lifestyle. In addition, small businesses, schools, non-profit groups, hospitals, clinics, counseling centers, even certain religious institutions would be required to hire homosexuals, bisexuals and “transgendered” persons. An employer’s faith, moral view, the sensitivity of their work or service or the makeup of their clientele is of no consequence. Private schools, daycare centers, scouting organizations and quasi-religious organizations will not be exempt.

If ENDA should pass, employers’ liberty to use their own good judgment regarding hiring practices will be a thing of the past. Please contact your Member of Congress today!

* A message from FRC Action @ www.frcaction.org

[0] comments (519 views) |  [0] Trackbacks   [0] Pingbacks

Death...

Q: How can death be a “battle” about history?

A: We live in a world of death. Animals die; people die. Death, suffering, bloodshed, violence, and disease pervade the world. How did all this happen? And why do we have a world so full of life and yet totally permeated by death?

If you take the book of Genesis as literal history, then death is an intrusion into this world. The Bible describes it as an “enemy.” The first man, Adam, rebelled against God. As a result, the once-perfect world suffered corruption. The Apostle Paul says the whole cosmos groans because of sin. But the Bible also reveals that, one day, death will be thrown into the lake of fire—there will be a new heavens and a new earth, restored to the way it was before sin.

But if you believe in billions of years for the age of the earth and universe, then you also must accept that the fossil layers, full of dead things, were formed over millions of years before man. Thus, this history, based on man’s beliefs, teaches that death, disease, violence, and bloodshed were around for millions of years before man was created—millions of years before the Fall.

What a stark contrast. The heart of the age-of-the-earth controversy is a “battle” between two histories of death. But think about it: only the Bible’s account concerning death gives us hope.

For more information, see Two histories of death at
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v24/i1/history.asp

* A message from AIG @ www.answersingenesis.org

[0] comments (484 views) |  [0] Trackbacks   [0] Pingbacks

Why Did These Democrats Lie About Saddam's WMD?

Why Did These Democrats Lie About Saddam’s WMD?

by John W. Lillpop

Democrats are still smarting from the election defeats handed them in 2000 amd 2004 by a man they consider stupid.

The obvious question: If W is so stupid, how was he able to defeat Democrats so handily in 2000 and 2004? What does that say about Democrat candiadates?

Democrats have never recovered from those electoral losses, they seem to have suffered permanent emotional scars. Their hatred of George W. Bush has caused Democrats to do everything in their power to assure that America does not prevail in the war on terror.

A favorite mantra on the retarded left is that “Bush lied” about WMD so as to lead America into war.

Quite apart from the fact that such a lie would make no logical sense, many Democrats have made public statements in the past proclaiming their belief that Saddam did indeed have WMD.

The Democrats quoted below inlude the following luminaries:
Ted Kennedy, John Rockefeller, Al Gore, Carl Levin, Patty Murray, Nancy Pelosi, Joe Liberman, Barbara Boxer, Robert Byrd, Wesley Clark, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton,William Cohen(Defense Secretary under Clinton), Tom Daschle, John Edwards, d*** Gephart, Sandy Berger, Madeline Albright, Tom Larkin, Harry Ford, Diane Feinstein.

That is hardly a directory of names from the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy!

The exact quotes of these stars follow.

Did they all lie?

“[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.”—From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

“This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies.”—From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others

“Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to permit monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections; Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive progress toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities”—From a joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002

“Saddam’s goal … is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed.”—Madeline Albright, 1998

“(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983”—National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998

“Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement.”—Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002

“The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability.”—Robert Byrd, October 2002

“There’s no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat… Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He’s had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001… He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn’t have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we.”—Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002

“The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow.”—Bill Clinton in 1998

“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security.”—Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

“I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out.”—Clinton’s Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003

“Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people.”—Tom Daschle in 1998

“Saddam Hussein’s regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal.”—John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

“The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction.”—John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

“I share the administration’s goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction.”—d*** Gephardt in September of 2002

“Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.”—Al Gore, 2002

“We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction.”—Bob Graham, December 2002

“Saddam Hussein is not the only deranged dictator who is willing to deprive his people in order to acquire weapons of mass destruction.”—Jim Jeffords, October 8, 2002

“We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.”—Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002

“There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein’s regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed.”—Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002

“I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.”—John F. Kerry, Oct 2002

“The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation.”—John Kerry, October 9, 2002

“(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. ...And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War.”—John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003

“We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them.”—Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002

“Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States.”—Joe Lieberman, August, 2002

“Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq’s denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq’s claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction.”—Patty Murray, October 9, 2002

“As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.”—Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998

“Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production.”—Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998

“There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources—something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass
destruction.”—John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

“Saddam’s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq’s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East.”—John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

“Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration’s policy towards Iraq, I don’t think there can be any question about Saddam’s conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts.”—Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002

What caused all of those Democrats to lie?

[0] comments (507 views) |  [0] Trackbacks   [0] Pingbacks

Transmayored...

Mayor Newsome Now Transmayored into Mayor FOLSOM

Tolerance Gone Berserk in the Streets of San Francisco
Tolerance Gone Wild… Nudity, public sex, and blasphemy against our Lord
documented at San Francisco street fair, with congratulations from Mayor Folsom,
and hands-off police.

www.americansfortruth.org

-----------------------------------

[0] comments (440 views) |  [0] Trackbacks   [0] Pingbacks

Cohabitation of man a beasts...

Historical Support for the Coexistence of Dinosaurs and Humans [Part II]
by Eric Lyons, M.Min.
http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/3476

Most Americans Still Reject Evolution
by Dave Miller, Ph.D.
http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/3477

[0] comments (442 views) |  [0] Trackbacks   [0] Pingbacks

Foundation of liberalism...

Darwinian Evolution-the Foundation of Liberal Socialism
http://www.thomasbrewton.com/

---------------------------

Book Review:
The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Bible

by

Rob Hood

The latest on the Politically Incorrect Guide To series is the Politically Incorrect Guide to the Bible by Robert J. Hutchinson. Like the rest of the series, I will presume that this will be a bestseller.

In the politically charged world that we live in these days, this book is long overdue. The book makes mention one of the most important facts that people need to hear today: “The Bible made modern science possible.” Other facts include recent archaeological discoveries that prove the accuracy of the Bible, Biblical laws helped pave the way for democracy, and so much more.

The Book does focus on pro-life stance from a Biblical standpoint, Old Testament laws and the Ten Commandments, the Biblical origins of modern science and how atheists have tried to take away science from Christianity. For those atheists and agnostics who say they do not support the Bible because the Bible does not condemn slavery, there is a chapter for that as well.

I personally recommend this book for any individual as well as Christian group. it would make a great discussion or study for Sunday School, Bible Study class, or for the church library. I recommend buying two. keep one for yourself and give one to your church for others to read.

The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Bible by Robert J. Hutchinson is available in most bookstores. It is a great read and an excellent gift idea for a friend, relative, or fellow church member. I hope you buy a copy today!

ABOUT ROB HOOD

Rob Hood grew up in rural Mississippi and was rooted in the doctrine of the Southern Baptist Convention and its teachings of Biblical right and wrong, accountability to a higher authority, and the birth, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. He was a participant in Bible Drill for nine years, a Southern Baptist Convention program devoted to educating children and youth with scriptures from the Bible for use in everyday life situations. He graduated from Holmes Community College in Grenada, Mississippi with an Associate of Applied Science (AAS) degree in Electronics Technology and is currently employed as an Electronics Technician with HAM radio equipment manufacturer. He is also a Federal Communications Commission licensed Technician Class HAM radio operator and lives in North Mississippi.

Mr. Hood is also the author of Issues That Matter: America’s Moral Battleground and a columnist for the news/commentary sites of the Move Off Network at www.moveoff.net and also runs his own site and his own blog. You can check out Rob Hood’s blog at http://robhood.us (click on blog). Check out his regular site at www.standfortruthonline.com .

-----------------------------

Getting Rid of American Holidays in Public Schools
Education Warner Todd Huston, Senior Writer
October 1, 2007 URL: http://www.newmediajournal.us/staff/huston/10012007.htm

At the end of September the school district in Oak Lawn, Illinois announced it was considering eliminating holiday celebrations like Christmas in its schools. Oak Lawn has seen increasing numbers of residents that identify with the Muslim faith who are naturally sending their children to the public schools there and school board members are afraid that Christian holidays are “offensive” to Muslim students.

This move follows a recent decision to eliminate pork products from the school menu.

Unsurprisingly, these cultural clashing decisions by the school board have caused acrimony among parents of the district. Stating the painfully obvious, Columbus Manor Principal Sandy Robertson said of the controversy, “It’s difficult when you change the school’s culture.”

Elizabeth Zahdan, a parent of Muslim faith who took her case to the school board wanting the school to be “more inclusive” during holiday activities, however, adamantly denied she wanted to eliminate any American styled holiday observances. “I only wanted them modified to represent everyone,” she told the Chicago Sun-Times. Zahdan disclaimed to reporters, “Now the kids are not being educated about other people.”

Unfortunately for Mrs. Zahdan, a “modified” holiday is no longer the same holiday. It becomes something else once altered. So, whatever her motives, she was effectively advocating for their elimination.

Superintendent Tom Smyth said that the reason they were eliminating or trying to “tone down” holiday celebrations was one of wasting allotted teaching time. There isn’t time enough in the day to “celebrate every holiday,” Smyth claimed. “We have to think about our purpose. Are we about teaching reading, writing and math or for parties or fund-raising during the day?”

Conservatives will, of course, be offended by the elimination of standard, Christian American holidays and having them “modified” to be “more inclusive.” Many are upset that these purported outsiders are forcing the local schools to make such changes for Muslims and rightfully so, to be sure.

But, this anger from conservatives is hard to square with their ideas of local control of the school systems. The usual conservative policy prescription for what ails public education in America is local—as opposed to Federal—control. In general, this is absolutely correct as who better to control what sort of school a community wants than the community itself, one not encumbered by meddling control from the Federal government or state officers?

This local control ideal, though, invites the very sort of situation that the Oak Lawn schools are dealing with currently. Half the kids in some schools there are of the Muslim faith at this time. So, if local control is de rigeur, then the schools will naturally begin to react to such factors as changing demographics.

This fact makes the claim of complete local control a tad embarrassing for conservatives who would be upset at a school district that might change policies to reflect the desires of the local population. After all, isn’t that the effects of the market place, the base model for most conservative thinking? With complete local control, the schools will take on the interests and desires of the local population. That is the very essence of “local control.”

But, is it good to allow these sorts of forces to affect schools without careful consideration? Should we eliminate all things Christian in an American school district if the parents in that district are majority Muslim? In this climate of a wishy-washiness on American first principles infesting our country today, here is one instance where all control should not be at the smallest, local level.

School curricula must stay a state controlled issue. Though the Federal government should be entirely out of the picture, from funding to designing the curriculum, returning all schooling decisions to the smallest, local entity will result in exactly the sort of problematic de-Americanizing of our schools that we are witnessing in Oak Lawn. Whether it be overly Mexicanized, Muslim-centric, or what have you, we will assure that American influences will be replaced by the culture du jour if the locals have as much control as some conservatives by rote advocate for.

The solution to a loss of American ideals in local schools is to continue to have the school curriculum controlled by the state governments. This control, and a homogeneous statewide curriculum will offset the effect of pressures by small communities that fill with immigrant populations who might be apt to instill on our American schools the cultures and ideas from whence they, the parents, came.

What to do with the ire of parents who want their Muslim faith (or Mexican heritage in other instances) regarded in policy decisions is definitely something we will see more need to contend with in the days to come. It is a sticky question, of course. Since we have become a culture that won’t back a homogeneous observance of being an American, how do we address this issue? How do we serve local communities that are made up mostly of immigrants?

As the Sun-Times reported, Oak Lawn parent Elizabeth Zahdan moaned that eliminating all holidays would stop children from “being educated about other people?”

This issue is emotionally charged, of course, but for all the wrong decisions Supt. Tom Smyth has made here, he is correct on one issue. When he said that the schools didn’t have the time to celebrate every holiday on Earth to be “inclusive” of them all, he was correct. His answer to the problem is not so smart, however. Getting rid of all holidays is both the coward’s way out and completely un-American, to boot.

But, here’s the thing. Our schools shouldn’t be about educating our children about “other people.” That they can learn in college or in life. Our schools should be teaching about OUR people. And our schools are failing miserably to do this effectively.

It is agreed that we shouldn’t be celebrating every holiday under the sun in our schools. The Supt. is completely correct that we haven’t the time in our busy school days to do so. In fact, we shouldn’t be celebrating ANY other holidays but American holidays. American holidays reflect our national culture. Christmas and Halloween as we celebrate them are American holidays. The Holidays and traditions of other cultures deserve to remain at home, not in the halls of our schools.

By NOT indulging their desires to obviate American influences replacing them with ideas antithetical to our American first principles, we would be doing a far better service to our children than to re-draw every district to a different standard to placate foreign influences. We became a great country in the first place because of our culture, not by bending and warping every ideal to suit immigrant’s wishes in every small community across this great land.

So, conservatives should realize that “local control” is not the panacea they imagine it to be in every last instance. Certainly we should look to have some aspects of our schools controlled by the local school boards, but too much local control could backfire on erstwhile conservatives. We will surely begin to find schools becoming less and less American if the locals are allowed too much direct influence.

Do we want our schools taught in Spanish as a first language? Do we want the Koran to replace textbooks in others? Do we want our children taught that America is an evil empire?

I would hope not.

To avoid that, however, we need to teach Americanism. We should be allowing kids to celebrate holidays. There is no harm in that. But they MUST be America’s holidays.

Anything else and we are no longer America and are teaching our children that there is nothing out there especially American to teach them.

***

Warner Todd Huston is a senior writer for The New Media Journal. He also serves as an NMJ Radio Headline News Roundtable Editor, a free lance writer, graphic designer and works in Desktop Publishing. Like every man when young, Mr. Huston was sure that Conservatives were inhumane, ignorant of history and greedy...then he grew up.

[0] comments (511 views) |  [0] Trackbacks   [0] Pingbacks