Church And State/ACLU issues

Goodbye good folks!,At Least For Time Being

2006-04-12T19:16:00.000-04:00

I am shocked beyond compared that I would receive so many visits and hits in the short time this blog has been up.I have checked my stats at site meter and many people have been reading for as much as 30 minutes and that is the type of thing I love to see.

But this type of blog require numerous of amounts of time to do research and I just don't have the time to keep this blog running.(Edited April 20,2006.If I should find the time,I will consider in trying to take this subject for another spin.)

I want to thank all of my readers for stopping by and those who have been reading but haven't commented I appreciate you all,and I appreciate all the comments that I have received even all the negative ones.

The ACLU may have won a few battles but they haven't won the war!!

May God Bless You!,And May God Bless The U.S.A.!!

Funeral protest bills are passed 'To slander a soldier's name is wrong'

2006-04-05T14:39:00.000-04:00

Funeral protest bills are passed 'To slander a soldier's name is wrong'
2/8/2006 Lexington Herald-Leader

FRANKFORT - Kentucky is joining a growing list of states limiting when and where people may protest at funerals -- all because of a small fundamentalist Kansas church whose members picket soldiers' burials and argue that Americans are dying for a country that harbors homosexuals.

The state House and Senate each passed bills yesterday to limit the church's protests to outside a 300-foot buffer zone around funerals and other memorial services. Neither bill had opposition.

The Senate had approved the measure last week, but reconsidered and passed it again yesterday. That version also would keep people from making their protests audible to bereaved family members attending funerals or other services.

During the 1990s, members of the Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka went around picketing the funerals of AIDS victims with protest signs that read, "God Hates Fags." Recently, they started showing up at the burials of soldiers and Marines killed in Afghanistan and Iraq, and politicians began paying more attention.

"It just stunned me. It was like a sucker punch to my stomach," said Regina Talley, who saw the protests at the funeral of Spec. Michael Ray Hayes of the Kentucky National Guard's 617th Military Police Co. The funeral was in Bowling Green.

Talley, a family-support group leader for that company, attended Hayes' funeral last summer. Her son, Sgt. Jon Ray, 31, is also a member of the 617th, she said.

"I was going, 'What is that and what are they doing?'"

The protesters say their message is not against the war. Church members -- largely the extended family of the Rev. Fred Phelps -- see the soldiers' deaths as a sign that God is punishing the nation for tolerating gays. They also went to West Virginia last month to protest at the funeral of coal miners.

They often carry signs that read such things as, "Thank God for IEDs," referring to improvised explosive devices used by insurgents.

"To slander a soldier's name is wrong and it's not covered under the Constitution," said Talley, of Nashville. "They have no respect for the family members at all."

Legislation is being considered in at least 14 states, and several of the bills are moving quickly, with backing from legislative leaders and governors.

Last week, Gov. Ernie Fletcher's spokeswoman Jodi Whitaker said Fletcher supported the proposal.

Kentucky lawmakers were trying to expedite the bill through the legislature and get it signed into law before an expected protest at a Fort Campbell memorial service on Wednesday. However, Rep. Mike Weaver, the bill's House sponsor, said it would not affect the memorial service because the post is a federal installation.

Weaver, D-Elizabethtown, said he is also pushing a resolution urging Congress to address the matter at federal locations.

The church group has announced it would protest at the funeral of Scott Messer, an Army soldier from Ashland killed in Iraq last week.

The bill would prohibit demonstrators from "making unreasonable noise" or making "any utterance, gesture or display designed to outrage" people attending funerals or memorials services. Violations would be misdemeanors.

In a telephone interview, Phelps said such laws are unconstitutional and the church was still planning its protest for Wednesday.

"The amazing thing going on here is that this nation is manifesting a willingness to trash, absolutely trash, the thing that makes it distinctive and glorious. And that's the First Amendment," Phelps said. "They would gladly repeal it to stop our message."

What is your viewpoints on church and state Issues?,I want my reader's views

2006-04-03T18:12:00.000-04:00

Have an opinion? Let your voice be heard on how you feel.

The “Bah, Humbug” Cases

2006-03-30T17:18:00.000-05:00

The “Bah, Humbug” Cases

The Mayor of Denver decided that a church in that city should be barred from entering a float in Denver’s annual Parade of Lights. What was the offense of this church which caused its exclusion? It intended to enter a float which was explicit in mentioning the reason for Christmas, that it marked the birthday of Jesus Christ. In accord with advance warnings from the ACLU, the Mayor decided that he should shut down such unacceptable behavior.

The Denver issue has not yet developed into a case in court, but it could. Likewise the decision of a school district in New Jersey to forbid all “holiday” songs from school performances, if those songs have any “religious” content. Parents in New Jersey have pointed out that the school system’s policy does not require such a blanket exclusion, and that songs with “religious” content are only to be excluded if they go beyond merely historical references.
For the rest of the story http://www.civilrightsunion.org/acluwatch/041216.asp#2

The "Pornography for Pupils" Case

2006-03-30T13:41:00.000-05:00

The "Pornography for Pupils" Case

In the December session of Congress, it passed the Children's Internet Protection Act, requiring that all school libraries which have federally-funded computer systems must include "blocking" software which will prevent access by students to certain Internet sites which have obscene content. The ACLU immediately announced that it would file suit against this Act because the federal government is seeking "to require censorship in every single town and hamlet in America."

Note this position statement by the ACLU: "More than 100 years of local control of libraries and the strong tradition of allowing adults to decide for themselves what they want to read is being casually set aside" by this legislation, said Chris Hansen, a senior staff attorney with the ACLU. An article on WorldNetDaily on December 21, 2000, brought this to my attention.

This statement is intended to appeal to conservatives, who are generally in favor of state and local autonomy from the federal government. It is also intended to appeal to conservatives who oppose "censorship," especially the federal government deciding what people in general can and should read and hear.

However, almost all parents would not want their children looking at pictures of men and women engaging in various sexual acts, on their computers at home. Nor would they want their children to be able to look at such pictures in school, where the parents cannot be present to supervise the activities of their children.

The ACLU objections concerning citizens' rights, censorship, and the overreaching of federal control (not normally a major item on the ACLU agenda) are all off-base. First, as the US Supreme Court has repeatedly found in cases involving student newspapers and meetings, children are not just small adults, with all the same rights and privileges as adults, and schools are not open forums, like a public discussion among adults.

Schools have a right to make reasonable restrictions in the activities of students -- even high school students, much less elementary school students. This law says absolutely nothing about the Internet viewing habits and choices of adults.

Secondly, the Act does not require that any federal bureaucrat somehow decide what students in Elephant Breath, Montana, may look at on their computer screens. "Blocking" programs are content-based. If certain content is present -- and for those not familiar with the darker regions of the Internet, some of this "content" is nearly unbelievably gross -- the program prevents the user from bringing up that website on his or her computer.

For the rest of the story http://www.civilrightsunion.org/acluwatch/census.htm#cip

The ACLU,and athiests claims James Madison as their own,but is that true?

2006-03-28T11:08:00.000-05:00

When Benjamin Franklin made his famous appeal for prayer for divine guidance,James Madison made the motion that it be enacted,and it was seconded by Roger Sherman
--Irving Brant,James Madison,Father of the Constitution,1787-1800 (New York:Bobbs-Merrill,1950)Vol.III,P.84

Now then,wouldn't these men know what was constitutional and what wasn't? If these men were alive today they would be furious at what the ACLU is doing.If they knew what the ACLU were doing,they may even turn over in their graves.

The ACLU knows that it is constutional for prayer to be in schools,they know it is constitutional for The Ten Commandments to be posted in goverment buildings,but they don't like it because they don't like anything that does with religion or Christianity.They want to fool people into believing a lie.

How old is grandma??,The ACLU can even learn from this,but then again,they are beyond learning

2006-03-27T14:40:00.000-05:00

The following is an good e-mail that I have received,The ACLU may even learn from this,but then again,I seriously doubt that!!,Afterall,The BLIND CAN"T LEAD THE BLIND!!

Subject: How old is Grandma

Stay with this -- the answer is at the end. It will blow you away.

One evening a grandson was talking to his grandmother about current events.
The grandson asked his grandmother what she thought about the shootings at schools, the computer age, and just things in general.

The Grandma replied, "Well, let me think a minute, I was born before:

 television

 penicillin

 polio shots

 frozen foods

 Xerox

 contact lenses

 Frisbees and

 the pill

There was no:

 radar

 credit cards

 laser beams or

 ball-point pens

Man had not invented:

 pantyhose

 air conditioners

 dishwashers

 clothes dryers

 and the clothes were hung out to dry in the fresh air and

 man hadn't yet walked on the moon

Your Grandfather and I got married first, . . . and then lived together.

Every family had a father and a mother.

Until I was 25, I called every man older than me, "Sir".

And after I turned 25, I still called policemen and every man with a title, "Sir."

We were before gay-rights, computer- dating, dual careers, daycare centers, and group therapy.

Our lives were governed by the Ten Commandments, good judgment, and common sense.

We were taught to know the difference between right and wrong and to stand up and take responsibility for our actions.

Serving your country was a privilege; living in this country was a bigger privilege.

We thought fast food was what people ate during Lent.

Having a meaningful relationship meant getting along with your cousins.

Draft dodgers were people who closed their front doors when the evening breeze started.

Time-sharing meant time the family spent together in the evenings and weekends-not purchasing condominiums.

We never heard of FM radios, tape decks, CDs, electric typewriters, yogurt, or guys wearing earrings.

We listened to the Big Bands, Jack Benny, and the President's speeches on our radios.

And I don't ever remember any kid blowing his brains out listening to Tommy Dorsey.

If you saw anything with 'Made in Japan ' on it, it was junk.

The term 'making out' referred to how you did on your school exam.

Pizza Hut, McDonald's, and instant coffee were unheard of.

We had 5 &10-cent stores where you could actually buy things for 5 and 10 cents.

Ice-cream cones, phone calls, rides on a streetcar, and a Pepsi were all a nickel.

And if you didn't want to splurge, you could spend your nickel on enough stamps to mail 1 letter and 2 postcards.

You could buy a new Chevy Coupe for $600, . . . but who could afford one?
Too bad, because gas was 11 cents a gallon.

In my day:

 "grass" was mowed,

 "coke" was a cold drink,

 "pot" was something your mother cooked in and

 "rock music" was your grandmother's lullaby.

 "Aids" were helpers in the Principal's office,

 " chip" meant a piece of wood,

 "hardware" was found in a hardware store and

 "software" wasn't even a word.

And we were the last generation to actually believe that a lady needed a husband to have a baby. No wonder people call us "old and confused" and say there is a generation gap... and how old do you think I am?

I bet you have this old lady in mind...you are in for a shock!

This Woman would be only 58

The "Scrambled Eggs & Prayer" Case

2006-03-27T13:01:00.000-05:00

The "Scrambled Eggs & Prayer" Case

According to an article in the Atlanta Constitution on 4 January, 2002, the Georgia ACLU filed suit against Mayor Patsy Joe Hilliard and the City of East Point seeking an injunction against the "East Point Mayor’s Annual Prayer Breakfast." The ACLU claimed that the "breakfast is an extreme example of a city government choosing one religion over all others and making non-Protestant members of the community feel like outsiders in their own city."
The court acted promptly. While this update was being prepared, the news came that the court had dismissed this case, finding that the Mayor, like any other citizen, had a perfect right to engage in a "prayer breakfast" or any other religious activity under the First Amendment. The ruling only specified that the breakfast "not be conducted as an official activity of East Point."
For The Rest of the story click here,http://www.civilrightsunion.org/acluwatch/smuggler.htm#eggs

Freedom of Speech??,Where Does The Line End?,Part 2

2006-03-24T13:22:00.000-05:00

I am still sickened to know that they are sick groups such as NAMBLA,and even more sickened to know they are sick groups such as the ACLU that will go so far to defend such sick people.

I don't care if a boy consents to having sex with a man or not.A boy is exactly that,a boy.We even have a law in place that is supposed to protect young kids rather or not the sex was consensual or not.It is called child molestation,or Rape.A child has no right to consent to sex because HELLO!!,he or she is only a child and he or she is not old enough to make a decision such as that.If a man has sex with a child,then they are a child molester and they should never see the light of day.And child molestation by the way is against the law.

The ACLU will defend people like this,and they will defend such people that has such publications as NAMBLA saying that they have a right to Free Speech.Hello!!,any type of publication that even hints to child molestation,and having sex with a child is in my book child pornography,and the way I see it,it should be against the law!!,and the way I see it,it is against the law!!,but the ACLU does not see it that way.

If an adult has sex with an underage person rather or not it was consensual,it is called rape or child molestation.

How many parents would be outraged if a man or woman was to have sex with your child? If you are a decent parent you would be very outraged to learn that a man or woman was having sex with your 9 year old son or daughter.

If you were to do a search on NAMBLA Bulletin,you would see the following.

"I read The NAMBLA Bulletin fairly regularly and I think it is one of the most intelligent discussions of sexuality I've ever found. ... Before you start judging what NAMBLA is about, expose yourself to it and see what it is really about, the issues they are really talking about; and deal with what's really there rather than this demonized notion of guys running about trying to screw little boys. I would have been so much happier as an adolescent if NAMBLA had been around when I was 9, 10, 11, 12, 13."

~ Samuel Delany, science fiction writer.
Queer Desires Forum, New York City, June 25, 1994.

And if you were to click on a sample of what is in their publications,you would find a poem entilted "Pollen Boy".I don't know about you,but that poem was very sickening.And a woman was the one who wrote it!

I believe it is about time that Parents start waking up and we citizens should do something to try and stop sick people such as NAMBLA.

Congradulations Kentucky!!,Once Again!!

2006-03-22T11:28:00.000-05:00

Ten Commandments Bill Approved In Kentucky
March 17, 2006, 09:13 AM EST
(FRANKFORT, Ky.) -- The Ten Commandments could be posted in schools and government buildings and a large monument with the biblical directives would be placed outside the Capitol under legislation awaiting the signature of Gov. Ernie Fletcher, an ordained Baptist minister.
"The governor looks forward to signing this bill," said Brett Hall, spokesman for the Republican governor who is currently in the hospital where he is being treated for a blood clot. "I'm sure he will be very happy to hear this news."

The measure passed without debate in the House on Friday in a 90-5 vote, and drew immediate criticism from the American Civil Liberty Union of Kentucky.
House Speaker Jody Richards, D-Bowling Green, said he believes the measure is constitutional because the commandments would be part of displays with other historical documents.
"It's a bill that the people of Kentucky largely support," Richards said.
http://www.wave3.com/Global/story.asp?S=4614765

My Comments:The legislators here in Kentucky are at least doing something right,I applaud them for this.Of course the ACLU have almost messed their pants because they don't like it one bit.Our legislators realize the majority of the people are in favor of The Ten Commandments and they are working for the people and not against the people.And come on look at the vote,90-5.I think it is about time that the ACLU would go and fly a kite!!

Congradulations Kentucky!!

2006-03-21T14:14:00.000-05:00

Anti-abortion license plates bearing the message "Choose Life" will be available in Kentucky within a few months, a state official said yesterday.
A federal court ruling issued in a Tennessee case says such tags are legal, even though they promote only one side of the debate.

My Comments:
This probably will end up with a fight,because the ACLU is against life.But I say,"The ACLU needs to just go and suck a lemon!!".

Past Featured blogs,Web-sites,And Books

2006-03-20T16:29:00.000-05:00

From time to time I will bump my Featured Blogs,Web-sites.And Books up.Just click below and you will have some good reading rather it be a blog,a Web-site,or a book.

http://joninky123.blogspot.com/2006/03/past-featured-blogsfeatured-web.html

Abortion? Notify parents

2006-03-18T10:20:00.000-05:00

Abortion? Notify parents
The Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States ruled unanimously, underscoring the fact that parents play a crucial role in the health and well-being of minor children, especially when an abortion is in question.

With the backing of its members across the U.S., the ACLJ filed amicus briefs with the Supreme Court of the United States in a New Hampshire parental notification case, and the high court agreed overruling the First Circuit Appeals Court decision which had struck down a state parent-notification law.

I believe every parent should be notified if their child is considering abortion.The ACLU probably won't like this though,but I say TOUGH!!

Freedom of Speech??,Where does the line end.

2006-03-16T17:38:00.000-05:00

I guess this is about time I do a little fussing.Isn't it quite strange when people is against sick people like the ACLU and NAMBLA,we are called haters? Well I guess the ACLU and people like NAMBLA are haters too then,right? Afterall,the ACLU says they are for free speech for all.Are they kidding,joking,or lying? Cause give me a break!!

If the ACLU was for free speech for all,why do they try and fight schools because a student may say a prayer during his graduation speech or may bow his head at lunch on his break to offer God a prayer for his food silently? Why do they try and take the Ten Commandments off from our school and other government buildings? Afterall,aren't they supposed to be for free speech for all?

The ACLU is all for free speech if you are a child molester,a member with the ACLU,a member with NAMBLA,if you are for abortion,pornography,child pornography.

I don't know about you,but it makes me sick!! that the ACLU will defend a child molester or will defend NAMBLA and their publications even though they know what type of publications the NAMBLA has.

Freedom of Speech,Where does the line end??

TO BE CONTINUED....

Freedom for all even if it's against the law?

2006-03-14T11:03:00.000-05:00

The ACLU will defend NAMBLA even if it is against the law for a sick dog (ADULT MALE or ADULT FEMALE) to have sex with a boy or girl.That is NOT Freedom of speech.If it is against the law,then that is not Freedom of speech.If you break the law you MUST pay,but the ACLU doesn't see it that way.

Why did the ACLU defend NAMBLA?
In representing NAMBLA, the ACLU does not advocate sexual relationships between adults and children. What we do advocate is robust freedom of speech. This lawsuit strikes at the heart of freedom of speech. The defense of freedom of speech is most critical when the message is one most people find repulsive. For more information, please read the ACLU's press release.

The above can be found on the ACLU"S Web-site.

http://www.aclu.org/info/18852res20040107.html#3_4

They say they don't advocate sexual relationships between adults and children.They have warped the meaning of Freedom of speech.I guess they don't see anything wrong with NAMBLA having a survival Manual on how a man can survive in a Man-Boy Relationship either.

On of NAMBLA'S Publications is titled The Survival Manual:The Man's Guide to Staying Alive in Man-Boy Sexual Relationships.According to Larry Frisoli,"It's chapters explain how to build relationships with children.How to gain the confidence of children's parents.Where to go to have sex with children so as not to get caught".Bill O'Reilly of Fox News added that NAMBLA Web site "actually posted techniques designed to lure boys into having sex with men and also supplied information on what an adult should do if caught".

And the ACLU believes that it is okay for NAMBLA to have such an manual.Well if your child is ever molested,you should sue the ACLU for they are at fault just as much as NAMBLA and the child molester,for they are allowing NAMBLA to argue they have the right to publiclize such filthy information.If a child of the ACLU'S is ever molested because of publications by NAMBLA, I just have to wander,"Would they still be for NAMBLA

I thought I would do an update in regards to an earlier post and post remarks that was left.The following is an earlier post.
Friday, January 27, 2006
ACLU defends NAMBLA and other sick people,they MUST believe Pedophilia is good and religion bad

Pedophilia good, religion, bad
Jewish World Review Sept. 15, 2000 / 14 Elul, 5760
Debbie Schlussel
http://www.jewishworldreview.com --

AND YOU thought it was impossible for the ACLU to sink any lower.

The self-anointed defender of the First Amendment is defending NAMBLA, the North American Man/Boy Love Association, a pedophilia advocacy group, in a lawsuit over its role in the 1997 sexual molestation and murder of 10-year-old Matthew Curley.

Curley was lured from his suburban Boston neighborhood by Charles Jaynes and Salvatore Sicari. When he resisted their sexual advances, they smothered him to death. Then, they raped his dead body and stuffed it into a concrete-filled container, which they dumped into a river

To read more click here
http://www.geocities.com/stopthesodomites/pedophiliagoodreligionbad.html

2:31 PM | Permalink
4 comments
How come none of you ACLU haters ever reports the cases when the ACLU DEFENDS Christianity. Here take a look: http://www.stcynic.com/blog/archives/2005/01/more_examples_o.php

Of course, it doesn't fit your anti-civil liberty agenda of hate.

Posted by Daedalus | 9:56 PM

I am unsure why you call us ACLU haters for.My Bible teaches me that we are supposed to love everyone,and yes that includes the ACLU.Love the sinner,hate the sin.

You mention that the ACLU represents Christianity at times,that is far in between and is very seldom.

They represent a few Christians,and the reason probaly is because they want to think that they are doing a good thing.Just because they do a few good things doesn't get them off the hook for all the bad things that they do.

FOR THE RECORD:I AM NO HATER.

Posted by Jon | 12:46 PM

Dae is right..this is hate. The ACLU defends one thing; the constitution. I do not like it any more than they do that they have to defend sickos like NAMBLA, but you can not pick and choose who has the right to free speech. It is a slippery slope. One must decide if we want free speech. If we do then we have to protect ALL. It is sad and I hope we see a day where there is no NAMBLA but we must remember WHY we fought our British oppressors and that the constitution is worth defending..even if it means having to defend the right to say things we wish people would not say.

Posted by Anonymous | 12:39 AM

I can't understand why people who stand up and tell the truth about the ACLU we are called haters.That just doesn't make any sense at all.Freedom for all? Where is the freedom for Christians? Why does the ACLU hate Christians for? They will defend scumbags but when a student prays voluntary or reads his bible voluntary or even the posting of The The Commadments are outlawed the ACLU hollers church and state.Afterall they have a right to Freedom of Speech don't they? But how can a person say that NAMBLA has a right to freedom of speech,when they have sex with boys? My friends that is NOT freedom of speech,and that is NOT expression of freedom of speech but that is child molestation and that is sick and child molestation is against the law,but yet the ACLU will defend scumbags like them.

Posted by Jon

Are We A Christian Nation?,What some of our Founding Fathers and others have to say

2006-03-09T14:41:00.000-05:00

Let's take a look and see.

My God! How little do my countrymen know what precious blessings they are in possession of,and which no other people on earth enjoy!--Thomas Jefferson

We have staked the future of all our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government;upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves,to control ourselves,to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments.--James Madison

And to the same Divine,Author of every good and perfect gift we are indebted for all those privileges and advantages,religious as well as civil,which areso richly enjoyed in this favored land.--James Madison

The reason that Christianity is the best friend of Government is because Christianity is the only religion that changes the heart.--Thomas Jefferson

So great is my veneration of the Bible,that the earlier my children begin to read it the more confident will be my hope that they will prove useful citizens of their country and respectable members of society.--John Quincy Adams

Taking submissions for featured blogs,Or Web-Sites

2006-03-07T16:33:00.000-05:00

Do you have a blog you would like to see featured on this site.Then leave me a comment with your URL and I just might feature your blog over on the right side.I prefer Christian blogs,but if you have an interesting blog that does NOT contain profanity,or anything that is vulgar or offensive,I will take a look at your site.Don't forget to include your URL.

Congradulations to South Dakota

2006-03-07T12:46:00.000-05:00

According to slice of laodicea,the Governor of South Dakota has signed the bill that would ban most abortions,click here to read more http://www.sliceoflaodicea.com/archives/2006/03/crosstalk_alert_6.php

This is great news!,but what still has me wandering is the definition of "abortions that may endanger a woman's life".In what circumstances would define a woman being in danger? If a woman is raped,would she be able to get an abortion? If I am not mistaken,wasn't that how Roe vs.Wade got started because a woman said she was raped and she wasn't? My opinion is this,"If a woman was raped,it's not the baby's fault".And let me add this as well,"A woman says it's her body and she can get an abortion if she wants to" "Well that is where she is wrong,she can't do what she wants to because my bible tells me we are NOT our own we are bought with a price so a woman can't do what she wants to".she might get away with it now but she will have to stand before God one day.And I will add this and I will be done,what is the difference in a mother killing her unborn child and a mother killing her 10 year old child? There is no difference,both is MURDER!!,the only difference is the age of the child.

But this will not go away without a fight,you can count your bottom dollar that the ACLU will get involved.Why?,because the ACLU puts a price tag on life,they put a cheap price tag on life,they want to destroy life before life gets started.They also want to end life when a person is terminally ill.If it was up to the ACLU,they would try and help kill ALL of our senior citizens,they may say the following,they are too many old people,let's eliminate all of them.That is only a thought.Here is another thought,Isn't life supposed to be equal and aren't everybody supposed to have equal rights? Okay then,what rights do the unborn have? They have rights as well,and I believe it is high time that we respect the rights of the unborn.It's pretty bad that the ACLU is for abortion and say a woman has a right to get an abortion.what about the rights of the unborn?It's time to wake up AMERICA,and smell the black coffee and say enough is enough!!

THE LAW IS THE LAW

2006-03-04T13:19:00.000-05:00

This is one of the better e-mails I have received in a long time! I hope this makes its way around the USA several times over!!!!!

So Be It!

THE LAW IS THE LAW

So if the US government determines that it is against the law for the words
under God to be on our money,
then, so be it.

And if that same government decides that the Ten Commandments are not to be used in or
on a government installation,
then, so be it.

And since they already have prohibited any prayer in the schools,
on which they deem their authority,
then so be it.

I say, so be it, because I would like to be a law abiding US citizen.

I say, so be it, because I would like to think that smarter people than I are in positions to make good decisions.

I would like to think that those people have the American Publics' best interests at heart.

BUT, YOU KNOW WHAT ELSE I'D LIKE?

Since we can't pray to God, can't Trust in God and cannot Post His Commandments in Government buildings,

I don't believe the Government and it's employees should participate in the Easter and Christmas celebrations which honor the God that our government is eliminating from many facets of American life.

I'd like my mail delivered on Christmas, Good Friday, Thanksgiving &Easter.
After all, it's just another day.

I'd like the US Supreme Court to be in session on Christmas, Good Friday, Thanksgiving &Easter as well as Sundays. After all, it's just another day.

I'd like the Senate and the House of Representatives to not have to worry about getting home for the &"Christmas Break;" After all it's just another day.

I'm thinking that a lot of my taxpayer dollars could be saved, if all government offices &services would work on Christmas, Good Friday &Easter.

It shouldn't cost any overtime since those would be just like any other day of the week to a government that is trying to be politically correct.

In fact....

I think that our government should work on Sundays (initially set aside for worshipping God...) because, after all, our government says that it should be just another day....

What do you all think????

If this idea gets to enough people, maybe our elected officials will stop giving in to the minority opinions and begin, once again, to represent the 'majority' of ALL of the American people.

SO BE IT...........

Please Dear Lord,

Give us the help needed to keep you in our country!

'Amen' and 'Amen'

Touche!

These are definitely things I never thought about but from now on, I will be sure to questions those, in government, who support these changes.

At the top, it says I hope this makes its way around the USA several times over!!!!!

Let's see that it does. Keep it in your mailbox and resend it whenever someone new comes along.

One Nation Under God

2006-03-04T12:36:00.000-05:00

One Nation Under God.What is a nation? It is a group of people who share a similiar purpose or goal,in joining together as a group.For example,the nation of Israel was to be a group of people sat apart to be God's people.The nation of America is a people who have had the distinction of showing the world what it means to be a free people,who have attempted to govern themselves based on the laws of God.

It is hoped by God's assistance,some of the continents in the ocean will be discovered...for the glory of God--Christopher Columbus

Religion,morality,and knowledge,being necessary for good government and the happiness of mankind,schools and the means of Education shall forever be encouraged.--The Northwest Ordinance 1787

Rules in order to post your comments.

2006-03-04T12:32:00.000-05:00

I welcome comments rather they be negative or positive,but I will NOT accept anything that may be offensive rather it comes from Pro-Choice or Pro-Life.No racist comments,no hate speech,no profanity or anything that is vulgar in other words.I believe this is self-explanatory and does not need any further instructions.

Past Featured blogs,Featured Web-site,And Featured Books.

2006-03-04T10:06:00.000-05:00

Featured blogs--In His Steps--Outdoor Pictures,(This is one of the best photo blogs I have ever seen)--My Corner of the world--Things We Said--Rose Desroches

Featured Web sites--Slice of Laodicea--Kristie's Law--Amazing Facts,(If you are looking for good Christian books,then they may have what you are looking for)--Liberty Counsel

Featured Books--Distant Echoes,By Colleen Coble
Halfway to Forever--,By Karen Kingsbury(Make sure you have a kleenex box nearby,because you may need it.--The Richest Cave Man--The Oath,By Frank Peretti--Life Support,By Robert Whitlow

ACLU salutes Abortion Providers

2006-03-02T14:57:00.000-05:00

If you do any types of searches about the ACLU on National Day of Appreciation for Abortion Providers,you will find a comment like this one."We must change the climate overall from one where abortion providers are vilified and assaulted to one where they are honored and upheld as the heroes they are"--ACLU press release--"ACLU :National Day of Appreciation for Abortion Providers,"March 10,2002.
http://www.aclu.org/reproductiverights/abortion/12517prs20030310.html

I oppose people of bombing abortion clinics or those who may kill people who works in abortion clinics.But here is the ACLU applauding the abortion providers who are killing innocent unborn babies.MURDER is MURDER!! The ACLU is very sick in the head.They are sending the message that life comes cheap.They are sending out the message that also life is cheap by also being for euthanasia.Just look at the Terri Shiavo case.How humane is it to starve a person to death?

In all our wars combined over 651,000 courageous Americans have died.But over forty-six million Americans,over seventy-one times as many,have died from court approved surgical abortion.That's fourteen million more Americans than the entire population of Canada.--Alan Sears,speaking at the 2005 National Day of Prayer,in Washington,D.C.,May 5,2005.

If the ACLU is so good

2006-02-28T17:07:00.000-05:00

If the ACLU is so good,then why are they for ALL criminals for? They are for child molesters,they are for NAMBLA (North American Man Boy Love Association),they are for abortion,they are for pornography,they are even for child pornography,and the list goes on and on and on and on.

They want it mandortory that students be taught about homosexuality and yet they try and force Christianty out of the schools.They don't want children to hear anything about God,but yet they force them to have these homosexuality classes?

Now come on now,who is censoring who?

Yet More About The ACLU

2006-02-15T17:49:00.000-05:00

Michele Parish-Pixler,the former Utah executive director of the ACLU,has said,"I can't see that there's any rational justification for prohibiting it (polygamy).As long as it is between consenting adults,it ought to be permitted".--"ACLU wants to legalize Polygamy",Christians and Society Today,June 1990,4.

Nadine Strossen,ACLU president,when asked about polygamous relationships during a talk at Yale Law School in 2005,said,"We have defended the right for individuals to engage in polygamy.We defend the freedom of choice for mature,consenting individuals".--Citizens for Equal protection,Inc.,et al.,vs.Attorney General Jon C.Bruning,et al.4:03cv3155,May 12,2005.

Professor George W.Dent Jr.,writing in the Journal of Law and Politics,said once same-sex "marriage" is legalized,other forms of marriage,such as,polygamy,endogamy (the marriage of blood relatives),polamory,bestiality,and even child marriage will soon be las well.The ACLU is for anything goes.--George W.Dent Jr.,"The Defense of Traditional Marriage",Journal of Law and Politics,vol.15,no.4 (Fall 1999):628-37.

More about the ACLU

2006-02-14T12:57:00.000-05:00

Jacobellis vs.Ohio (1964):The ACLU participated in this case in which the Supreme Court overturned the conviction of a theater manager for violating a state obscenity law by showing a film.According to the Supreme Court,the film was not obscene,so it was protected by the First Amendment.Fortunately,the ACLU has not gotten nearly all it has asked for the Supreme Court to do.As early as 1982,in New York vs.Ferber,the ACLU asked the justices to decree that child pornography was protected by the Constitution,The Court rejected the argument.--Jacobellis vs.Ohio,378 U.S.184 (1964).
New York vs.Ferber,458 U.S.747(1982).

The ACLU is kinda like spagetti,they just love to stretch the Constitution and its First Amendment so far out of shape.Our Courts used to not violate the laws of God,they were too fearful back then,now they not only mock His name,they do so openly.

The ACLU is not for U but are for them ownselves.People becomes a member of the ACLU cause the ACLU will allow them to do whatever they please no matter how immoral it may be.The ACLU are censoring speech rather than protecting it.

A look at the founder of the ACLU--Roger Baldwin

2006-02-10T13:19:00.000-05:00

I am for socialism,disarmament,and ultimately for abolishing the state itself as an instrument of violence and compulsion.I seek social ownership of property,the abolition of the propertied class,and sole control by those who produce wealth.Communism is the goal.--ACLU founder Roger Baldwin
Peggy Lamson,Roger Baldwin:Founder of the American Civil Liberties Union:A portrait9Boston:Houghton-Mifflin,1976,p.192

Baldwin developed the strategy--still used today--to occasionally defend a conservative to illustrate it was non partism.And,as in the early days,the ACLU has a few associates who not only espouse a broad support of free speech,but will actually take steps,in a few times and places,do defend speech they personally disagree with.Yet the ACLU'S infrequent,even rare,defense of conservatives or orthodox and traditional persons of faith is often just a tactic to advance its agenda for left-wing causes.As Baldwin noted in 1934,"If I aid the reacttionaries to get free speech now and then,If I go outside the class struggle to fight against censorship,it is only because those liberties help to create a more hospitable atmosphere for working class liberties.--Donohue,Twilight of Liberty,xi,citing Roger Baldwin,"Freedom in the U.S.A. and the U.S.S.R.".,Soviet Russia Today (September 1934):11.

William Donohue commented,"In other words,the occasional defense of right--wing extremist opens up the courts,thereby making it easier for the ACLU to defend its ideological kinfolk on the left.--Donohue,Twilight of Liberty,xii.

ACLU Exposed Part 2

2006-02-07T16:03:00.000-05:00

One thing I agree with Adolf Hitler on is this,"He has stated that if a person tells a lie often enough,people will begin to believe it."

I am glad that there are even more people seeing the damage that the ACLU can be.

Let's take a look at what will happen if the ACLU will have their goals and dreams come true.

1.All legal prohibitions on the distributions of obscene material--including child pornography--are unconstitutional.
"1992 Policy Guide of the ACLU",policy 4d,p.7,and policy 4g,p.9.

2.Pornographic outlets can locate wherever they please--whether next to churches or day--care centers or near residential neighborhoods.
Ibid.,policy 4e,p.8.

3.Tax-funded libraries should not restrict access of children to pornography on the internet.(MY NOTES: Let me give you an example,what if your child was innocently doing some research on a school project and they typed www.whitehouse.com,instead of .gov and something pornographic came on? Here is an innocent child who was exposed to something they didn't intend of looking at.(I read somewhere,and I am sorry that I can't remember where,but it said that www.whitehouse.com used to be something of a pornographic nature.Would you want your small child view pornographic material by accident?)
"ACLU Defends Library against Parent Seeking Internet Censorship,"ACLU of Northern California Press release,January/February 2000;
http://www.aclunc.org/aclunews/news12000/library.html,and "ACLU Defends California Library against Parent Seeking to compel Internet Censorship",ACLU press release,June 10,1998.

4.Parents should have no legal recourse when it comes to shielding their children from exposure to hard--core pornography.
"1992 Policy Guide of the ACLU",Policy 2a,p.3.

5.The military cannot enforce even the most basic codes of conduct--such as disclipline for disrespectful behaviour toward a superior officer.
Ibid.,Policy 39a,P.82.

I guess these are lies as well?

The ACLU,the rest of Part 1

2006-02-06T18:23:00.000-05:00

In Lafayette,Indiana,the ACLU defended an alleged pedophile covicted three times of molesting children!This was an active pedophile.After he had been released from jail the third time,the sex offender openly talked in a group therapy session about going to a local park to fantasize about havin SEX with the young children innocently playing there.

(MY NOTES: Why in the HELL,did the court allow this man 3 chances for?????,yes when a man is released,he is considered a free man,but being convicted 3 times,he should have never been released!!!)

The mayor of Lafayette,out of legitimate concern for the city's children,had the city attorney seek a restraining order to stop the convicted molester from "cruising" parks for life.And don't you know,the ACLU found a sympathetic court to agree that the actions of the mayor and the city attorney discriminated against the alleged pedophile.In a 2-1 decision (MY NOTES:At least 1 of them had a brain and common sense!!),the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the city could not bar the offender from the public park,regardless of the potential endangerments to the children there.The ACLU attorney who opposed the city said,"These cases are symptomatic of what sort of discrimination follows people around."

Paul Walfield,an attorney in California,expressed his dismay over the ACLU's actions."Imagine that,convicted pedophiles who cruise city parks in search of children are discriminated against because decent people who want to protect their children get a restraining order to stop one in particular who literally admitted to his vile intentions....The ACLU decided that a pedophiles right to pursue his dreams was more important than the harm child molesters could cause kindergartners.

Walfield continues,"If we don't look out for our kids now,their fates will be left up to the likes of the ACLU.No one wants that.After all,how do you explain the court's ruling to the parents of the pedophile's next victim,let alone to the parents of little children who had been molested by him,that the monster is now free to 'cruise' playgrounds once again?

Paul Walfield,"Caring Less for our Children",Accuracy in Media,July 10,2003;
http://www.aim.org/publications/guest_columns/walfield/2003/jul10.html

(MY NOTES: Some people have stated that it was the parent's responsibility to watch their children at city parks.By that same reasoning if you have children or grandchildren then,and if a burglar broke into your home while you were asleep,your children or grandchildren were asleep,and they sexually molested your children or grandchildren,then by their same reasoning,you would be at fault for NOT paying more attention to them,even if you were asleep and wasn't aware that the burgular broke in and sexually molested them.)

The ACLU exposed part 1

2006-02-03T15:17:00.000-05:00

I am very ashamed at some people who says that they are a proud card member of the ACLU.

Point of view:FACT,The ACLU will help defend a child molester befor they think about a poor little innocent child.

FACT:In Indiana,a convicted child molester not once,not twice,but three times convicted of child molestation.

Indiana's mayor tried to put a stop to him.He was in the process of getting a restraining order against him in which he wouldn't be able to cruise city parks for life.

After the third time this convict was released he told in a group therapy session that his fantasy was to cruise parks and look at innocent children playing there and how he would like to molest them.(I have paraphrased this just a little,but if need be,I will quote this later and give you my source.)

Here was a very sick monster,but don't you know,here comes the ACLU.The ACLU had actually found a sympathetic court that ruled in this monster's favor.The court had ruled even though a child may be at risk,they had to rule in this monster's favor because he was discriminated against and they couldn't bar him from visiting a park,even though this monster was convicted 3 times!!,and even though these innocent children was to be a potential victim!!

I had to paraphrase alot of this cause I can't recall the exact wording,but the FACT of the matter is,I can't believe that the ACLU would defend such a low down monster.They thought more of his rights than an innocent child's life.A child if he lives after the monster molests them,they will have scars about this for life!!,this just proves how low some of our courts can really be!!

Here was an honorable mayor who was trying to do what was right and have this monster banned from parks because he thought of the well being of the child,and the ACLU had to put their nose where it didn't belong!!

In this particular case,it made me want to VOMIT!!

Now I just have to wander after reading this how many ACLU card carrying members can now say that they are a proud member of the ACLU!!?? If they are still proud,they need to get their heads examined,because they are same as supporting child molesters if they support the ACLU.

If Christians Want To Learn About God,Why Can't They Go To A Christian School,Or Go To Church?

2006-01-31T15:02:00.000-05:00

Well,the last time I checked Christians still pays school tax.And if schools can teach evolution which is only a theory,they should also teach creationism.It's the kids who goes to school and not the parents,it should be left up to the kids to decide between the two in which to believe.

Also if kids wants to learn about evolution,why can't they just go to the library and check out a book on evolution,libraries are full of books on evolution.If you are going to teach evolution,then they should also teach about God.

When evolution was first brought into the classroom,the evolutionists just wanted their foot in the doors of our schools,at that time they didn't care if schools taught about religion.I can only assume that that reason was that they had believed many people would believe in evolution.But now,since many people believes in God,they want to do away with any teachings of any type of religious teachings.They want everyone to believe in evolution,so of course they now want to do away with any and all religious history.

I would rather believe in God's Word than some book that would have you to believe you came from sort of an animal.If it is true,if we came from animals,then why not start acting like animals instead of human beings??

ACLU defends NAMBLA and other sick people,they MUST believe Pedophilia is good and religion bad

2006-01-27T14:31:00.000-05:00

Pedophilia good, religion, bad
Jewish World Review Sept. 15, 2000 / 14 Elul, 5760
Debbie Schlussel
http://www.jewishworldreview.com --

AND YOU thought it was impossible for the ACLU to sink any lower.

The self-anointed defender of the First Amendment is defending NAMBLA, the North American Man/Boy Love Association, a pedophilia advocacy group, in a lawsuit over its role in the 1997 sexual molestation and murder of 10-year-old Matthew Curley.

Curley was lured from his suburban Boston neighborhood by Charles Jaynes and Salvatore Sicari. When he resisted their sexual advances, they smothered him to death. Then, they raped his dead body and stuffed it into a concrete-filled container, which they dumped into a river

To read more click here
http://www.geocities.com/stopthesodomites/pedophiliagoodreligionbad.html

Religious Liberty

2006-01-25T16:03:00.000-05:00

I believe the following link may be interesting for my viewers.It is entitled Religious Liberty,By Perry L.Glanzer.
http://www.family.org/cforum/fosi/government/freedoms/a0031383.cfm

It let's people know what rights Christians have.Mr.Glanzer does a tremendously good job in explaining what Religious Liberty really is supposed to mean.The ACLU has attacked Christian's Rights to their Religious Liberty for many years now and they will continue to do so as long as we let them.

While it may be true that they may represent Christians at times,but it is very rare.If they were indeed for Christians,they would't try and take all of our religious liberty's away.The Bible tells us that they are many wolves in sheep's clothing.Just because every now and then someone may do something good,it doesn't mean they can get by with doing many more bad things.

It makes me angry that a child can't pray in school or can't read their Bible's because it may offend people.Well it offends me when people has rights to do things that are very sickening but yet something good as prayer or reading their Bible's at school is not allowed?

Just 1 point I would like to address is simply this,something that is so sickening but yet the ACLU will go out on a limb to defend them.When the ACLU defends NAMBLA (North American Boy Love Association) then something is wrong.I don't know about you,but I find it completely gross that a man would want to even have sex with a small child.I read somewhere back that NAMBLA' motto is "Sex befor 8 or it's too late.That is so sickening that it almost makes me want to puke!!

But yet kids are not allowed to pray or read their Bible's without the ACLU trying to take that right away.Something is wrong!!

The ACLU seems to favor protecting the rights of terrorists

2006-01-25T12:00:00.000-05:00

The ACLU seems to favor protecting the rights of terrorists who want to kill law abiding citizens."The truth is obvious.Terrorists and all others who do not respect the American way of life must be stopped in order to protect the life styles of law abiding American Citizens",said Don Swarthout,President of Christians Reviving America's values.

"The ACLU wants to protect the rights of criminals and terrorists.Why doesn't the ACLU want to protect the rights of law abiding citizens," Swartout asked?

We Are A Nation Under God's Laws

2006-01-23T10:01:00.000-05:00

The Declaration says that we are a nation under God's laws.Therefore,all other laws of our country should be consistent with the law of God or they violate our national charter.

--Michael Farris," The Real Meaning of the Declaration of Independence,"

Concerned Women for America News,Vol 8 (July,1986),pp.3,16.

Many people evidently have never even read the Declaration of Independence.

Well here is a link so that you can read it.
Declaration of Independence
LAST EDITED,JAN 24,2006

United States Department of Education Guidelines on Religious Expression in Public Schools

2006-01-12T11:57:00.000-05:00

United States Department of Education Guidelines on Religious Expression in Public Schools

Student prayer and religious discussion: The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment does not prohibit purely private religious speech by students. Students therefore have the same right to engage in individual or group prayer and religious discussion during the school day as they do to engage in other comparable activity. For example, students may read their Bibles or other scriptures, say grace before meals, and pray before tests to the same extent they may engage in comparable nondisruptive activities. Local school authorities possess substantial discretion to impose rules of order and other pedagogical restrictions on student activities, but they may not structure or administer such rules to discriminate against religious activity or speech.

Generally, students may pray in a nondisruptive manner when not engaged in school activities or instruction, and subject to the rules that normally pertain in the applicable setting. Specifically, students in informal settings, such as cafeterias and hallways, may pray and discuss their religious views with each other, subject to the same rules of order as apply to other student activities and speech. Students may also speak to, and attempt to persuade, their peers about religious topics just as they do with regard to political topics. School officials, however, should intercede to stop student speech that constitutes harassment aimed at a student or a group of students.

Students may also participate in before or after school events with religious content, such as "see you at the flag pole" gatherings, on the same terms as they may participate in other noncurriculum activities on school premises. School officials may neither discourage nor encourage participation in such an event.
To read more click here

What Ever Happened To "Freedom For All"?

2006-01-12T11:12:00.000-05:00

A group of high school students in Lubbocx,Texas, was denied access to a school classroom before or after school because conducting a Bible study would supposedly violate the first amendment.The school provided such a room for groups to study politics,social activism,athlectics,or almost everything else--but for religious purposes? "Absolutely not!" said school officials.

The outrage of U.S. congressmen caused them to pass "the equal access bill" in 1985 to rectify this problem.But even after it became federal law,making it legal for Christian students to have "equal access" to such rooms before and after school,many hostile school authorities still refuse to cooperate.Some obsessively secular school superintendents have chosen to cancel all such special meetings so that Christian students are not given the opportunity to use school facilities.In many cases,students or their parents have had to file lawsuits to get a classroom assigned for their use.According to one student," It is easier at our school for Marxists to get a room to hold meetings in than for Christians."

Are We A Christian Nation? And What Does Church And State Really Mean?

2006-01-11T18:42:00.000-05:00

I would like to first point out the author of the First Amendment and what he has to say,but let me say this first,The only one thing that I can agree with Adolf Hitler on is simply this,"If you tell a person a lie often enough,then pretty soon they will start believing those lies because they have heard them for so long".The ACLU has been telling the American people those lies for years and years and people have been buying their lies ever since.Now let's look at the author of the First Amendment has to say.

James Madison was the author of the First Amendment.He entered the Congress directly from the Constitutional Convention.Madison's first task as a Congressman was to chair the committee charged with the task of selecting a chaplin to lead the House of Representatives in prayer before each session.Are we to prsume today that James MAdison did not know what was Constitutional?

NOTE:The following I cannot remember where I heard or seen it from,but I will keep searching until I do find the source from where it came.