The Spirits of Freedom

by Don Hank

As breathed by the Author of Freedom to me as I ran across a stubble field a long long time ago

Spirit of the Wind!

‘Tis you who give me this desire,

Who madly fan my zealous fire,

To run like you who never tire,

Spirit of the Wind.

Spirit of my legs!

Even though my strength were gone,

I would make you run alone,

On the power of flesh and bone,

Spirit of my legs.

Spirit of my lungs!

Though you give me blood to taste,

I will spit and keep my pace,

And go on to win the race.

Spirit of my lungs.

Spirit of my heart!

Only you can make me quail,

Should you for a moment fail,

Stoutest limbs were no avail,

Spirit of my heart.

Spirits All!

Do I think you make me free?

You rather do imprison me.

And it’s you I vainly flee.

Spirits All.

Never before and never thereafter had I received or would I receive another message from the Unseen Messenger. This was His message to me, a warning, but also a promise, of what I must expect now that I had defied Him by seeking freedom FROM Him rather than freedom IN Him. It turned out to be true, every Word, just like every other Word of His had proven true in the end. Because He is the Word and the Word is with Him.

Christian Conservatives, Watch Your Backs!

Dear Friend,
I remember very clearly that day in December of 2004 when the first report appeared about the jailing of the group of Christians now known (to those who followed the story on the Internet) as  the “Philadelphia 11,” belonging to Repent America. These 11 Christians had attended a gay event with placards saying that homosexuality was a sin. Nothing new in America. All pastors had said that in my day. What was new was that now this message was not only poo-pooed as old fashioned, it was not even tolerated by law in our constituional Republic, in a state founded by the banished English Quaker William Penn for the express purpose of providing a haven for persecuted Christians. Not even a Christian pastor in “Penn’s Woods” could now be allowed to state a Biblical message that was considered “inflammatory” by a small group who wanted to declare themselves above God. It was a brazen attempt on the part of gay activists to muzzle Christians. And it almost worked.

 

I waited anxiously that day to hear what courageous Sean Hannity and the lion-hearted Bill O’Reilly would say about this outrageous attempt to deprive us of our First Amendment rights.

 

I waited all day. I even stayed up past my bed time. But they said nothing. Neither one of them. And Fox News hardly mentioned the event on the news segments. Not that day, not the next or the next or the next…

 

The fearless Rush Limbaugh didn’t mention it either. To say nothing of the mainstream media. The story of the first clear-cut open challenge to religious freedom and freedom of speech was spiked by conservatives everywhere in the Big Media, as if it had never happened!

 

What can we conclude? Obviously, so-called “conservative” commentators give the gay agenda a pass and care not a fig for the First Amendment except as it relates to their right to broadcast the neocon political message that brings home the bacon to them and their families.

 

Thus the astounding fact of the matter is that, despite the resounding successes of “conservative radio,” the major players are stringing us along. They’re not on our side.

 

There is no major conservative voice in any of the American media! Instead of siding with persecuted Christians, Hannity cozies up to Howard Stern the foul-mouthed shock jock,making the point that Stern deserves his “First Amendment rights”! Are Christians chopped liver here, Hannity? I feel the snub. How about you, Dear Friend? Are you getting the message? Read on.

 

Michael Savage had said inflammatory things about gays, but they were just mean statements intended to aggrandize himself even more in his own eyes. He had once told a gay caller: “You should die of AIDS.” That didn’t help because: 1) it really was said out of hate, 2) it gave conservative gay agenda opponents a bad name, and 3) it didn’t address the real issue that so few (including the apparently agnostic Savage himself) grasp, even today, namely, that the gay agenda has absolutely nothing to do with the gay cause and everything to do with suppressing the First Amendment rights of Christians. To focus on the issue of homosexuality alone is to go wide of the mark.

 

To set the record straight, the Christian message is and always has been: love the sinner but hate the sin. Repent America had stuck by this traditional message, based on the standard American playbook, the Bible. But unbeknownst to them, they were no longer in America. They were in an alien Global Community that was already becoming the home turf of the international gay acitivsts.

 

On June 19, 2004, Pastor Aka Green was sentenced to one month in prison in Sweden for the “hate crime” of preaching against the sin of homosexuality. He had violated a Swedish law that protects gays from any form of dissent. They are indeed a privileged group there, while Christians keep a low profile.

 

Of course, these are isolated cases, right? There couldn’t possibly be an international plot to suppress global free speech, right?

 

Wrong:

 

There are now hate crimes laws on the books in Canada, England and New Zealand, where egregious violations of human rights have already occurred as a result. In Canada, an ex gay distributed literature describing the medical risks of gay sex. For his trouble he was fined $17,500 in a civil suit brought by 4 gays who said they were “offended.” The man may spend his life in jail because he has said he will not pay the “ridiculous” fine.

 

A Canadian pastor protested a school policy of handing out Korans and setting aside a room for Muslim high school students to pray, while prohibiting Christians and Jews from doing the same thing. He was found by the Canadian Supreme Court to have “willfully promoted hatred” and was forced to undergo probation and 340 hours of “community service” at the Islamic Society of North America.

 

And here in America, there have been several cases of employees dismissed from their jobs because of “hate speech.” Matt Barber, an Allstate exec, was dismissed for posting his Bible-based opinion on a private web site on his own time! There is at least one instance of a company that prohibits heterosexuals from placing photos of themselves and their straight families on the desks of their offices. Only gays have that right. Photos of straight families offend them. Normal people have no right to claim offense.

 

A Massachusetts father was arrested for protesting the homosexual indoctrination of his son in kindergarten! The father was then permanently banned from the school. He had only asked that the parental notification law be respected. The school had violated that law. He was the one arrested.

 

The AFA Journal reported on 8/03/04, that some pro-lifers were arrested in Connecticut for driving a truck showing posters of aborted babies. He had broken no law. The law enforcement officers had to trump up charges to nail him.

 

Of course, the Left has always won its battles incrementally, by mainstreaming its radical views under the mantra of “culture change.” And once they have accomplished this despicable deed, they can then bring the power of the “law” down on dissenters. The feminists learned how to do this early on, infiltrating the courts to misuse Interstate Commerce law to silence protesters at abortion clinics and have them jailed and fined. Not to mention dracionian legislation that caused men to be evicted from their homes on the strength of accusations alone. Feminists and their protegees took charge of the “family” courts. And even though radical feminism is now in disrepute, they are still firmly in charge there, because, while culture change was relatively easy going forward, unchanging a culture is another matter. The former Soviet Union is a grim example. When no one remembers what good government was, it’s pretty hard to restore it. Only with God’s help.

 

The gay agenda is the Left’s next “culture change” vehicle.

 

The Right, on the other hand, will not necessarily silence you by force. But if you seem too “radical” in your views, your fellow “conservatives,” Christians or other, will take you aside and “counsel” you. And if you should say something “inflammatory,” they will change the subject or find a way to abruptly end the conversation.

 

Neocons like McCain will even side with the enemy, as he did in McCain-Feingold, a bill intended to silence you around election time, to the benefit of incumbents and to your detriment. It passed.

 

These RINO and neocon operatives are like the French traitors who urged their countrymen to cooperate with the nazis in the interest of “peace.”

 

They are worse than the declared enemy. They are sold out. The Almighty has shown his contempt for such people: Because you are neither hot nor cold, I will spew you out of my mouth.

 

Nowadays, when someone says to me “Im a Christian,” my first thought is: by whose definition? Yours or God’s?

 

American Christians, genuine ones walking with Christ in the traditions of the original church, had better learn the difference. Our lack of discernment is costing us our freedom of expression. And it could cost us our nation, the whole shooting match. We are so close to losing it all. So close. John McCain, the man who would silence us even further, is poised to become our next president.

Pray that the religous freedom we enjoyed at the founding of this country will somehow be preserved.

May God richly bless you,

Laigle

A Homophobe Comes Out: Free at Last!

by Don Hank

 
I was once afraid people would find out I was “different” (if you know what I mean).
I am really angry at having to keep all those feelings pent up all those years. Angry at those who put me in this straight jacket, and actually even angry at myself.
But I recently heard about a new theory that I have come to accept as fact: there is a gene that makes people like me, see? I know it because I feel it.

And I know liberals will be able to appreciate this, because there is not a shred of evidence for it, just my feelings.

In retrospect, I guess it all started at Uncle Wilber and Aust Selma’s farm, the summer Mom got TB and my parents were too busy with doctors and rearranging their lives to take care of me.

During my first afternoon nap, Cousin Fred, who was 2 years my senior, opened the door and sneaked in. I squinted at him with one eye as he came over to the bed in big giant steps. A lot of quick thoughts went through my mind but the main ones were those rumors the neighbor kids had told me. It seems Fred was the barnyard Casanova. At least one goat, a number of cows and even a hen had apparently succumbed to his manhood. As Fred daintily pinched a portion of the bed covers near the foot end of the bed, I remembered the mending basket that Aunt Selma had left on the night table. I reached over and grabbed a big old scissors and said “you lay one filthy hand on me and I’ll cut it all off and serve it to you for breakfast as sausage and mountain oysters.” He cussed me and ran out.

I knew it was wrong to be this way. Mom was a social worker and often brought home literature about how important it is to be whatever sex you wanted to be and not to pay any attention to biology, which could be easily changed by lopping it off (or lopping it on if you were born a girl). Preferably at taxpayers’ expense once we completed our “culture change” according to plan and became an enlightened society. I knew she worried about me and thought I might reject her kindly ways toward “those with different sexual orientations.” She was right to worry. I was born a freak. And I hated myself for it.

But that was then. This is now.
That’s right. I was BORN to be a homophobe, I am proud of it and I am COMING OUT!
Oh Lord, it feels so good to get that off my chest.
Oh, no, that’s not ALL I have to say on the subject, not by a longshot.
You see I have a feeling deep down inside, a kind of fantastic dream, that someday, we homophobes will be able to hold our head up high and gain full societal acceptance, just like liberals and gays, in academe, in Hollywood, in the media, even in the the schools of California and Massachusetts, where we are openly scorned and made to feel ashamed of ourselves, like we should never have been born. I am sure this will happen once people understand that homophobia is a genuine sexual orientation that you are born with.

I can’t explain the feeling of sheer exhilaration to be able to say it, at long last:
Yes, Mom, yes, Dad. I AM A HOMOPHOBE! Yes, get over it, World:
Homophobia is here to stay!
And it is absolutely magnificent, exhilarating, liberating beyond anything I could have ever dreamed of!
I not only accept myself. I adore myself. And I can’t wait to live the lifestyle, give myself over completely to perversion: maybe get married in a church, have kids, read the Bible with them, homeschool them. Who knows?
Oh yeah! Good morning world. You are truly beautiful!

Dear Reader, if you are a closet homophobe: Hey, you were born that way. It’s ok to come out now and be all you can be. I invite you to stand with me, unafraid.

You’re in a safe place here!

Hillary, Thou Fake!

            One of the first words I learned from the New Testament when I was a kid was “hypocrite.” It seems like Jesus was always saying “thou hypocrite” to someone or another, kind of mad-like. I wasn’t sure what he had against these hypocrites and what that word meant, but grownups said it was because the religious leaders of his day were hypocrites. I asked Daddy what a hypocrite was and he said it was someone who was kind of a fake.

So Jesus didn’t like fakes and he told them so to their faces, even when they were powerful, important people. I guessed these were people who would pretend to be all pious and phony-smiley, but down inside they weren’t good at all. Jesus could see into their hearts and knew they were evil.

I like to imagine what Jesus would say to powerful phonies today.

            Speaking of phonies, I once actually sat in a book store and scanned Hillary’s “It Takes a Village to Raise a Child” from cover to cover.

            My main reason for doing this was to see if Hillary mentioned anywhere which country in Africa used this proverb.

It seemed strange to me, partly because my job, as well as my educational background, takes me across cultural and linguistic barriers daily. I have read and heard a fair number of proverbs in various languages, most of which hark back hundreds, even thousands, of years, and the word “village” was something I had never encountered in a proverb. It also didn’t sound like a proverb to me for other reasons, notably:

1—The function of proverbs is normally to admonish, reprove, remind, teach or warn someone of a universally recognizable fact or condition.

2— Proverbs are almost always intended for an older person to use to teach a younger, less experienced, person, and hence are passed down from generation to generation. A saying that has no obvious teaching function would not be in use and would die out.

3—Because of their universal nature, proverbs generally do not vary much from one culture to another, so that a proverb in one language, even one not even remotely related to another, will usually have some counterpart in another.

4—Proverbs more often than not relate to rural or life or work, not usually life in towns.

Let’s take some examples:

Spanish: Cria cuervos y te sacarán los ojos (raise crows and they’ll peck your eyes out.) This is a warning (1), most likely from an older experienced person (2), reminding us “be careful of the company you keep” (3), and it relates to the countryside, where crows are found (4).

German: Wer mit Hunden zu Bette geht wacht mit Flöhen auf (he who goes to bed with dogs wakes up with fleas). This is a warning and admonition (1), most likely from an older to a younger person (2); we also say this in English and other languages (3), and it relates to an animal that can be found in the countryside (4).

Russian: ???? ?????—?? ???? ?????? (zhit’ zhizn’–ne pole proiti, life is not a walk through the field). This too has all the qualifications listed above.

Latin: Aquila non capit musca (Meaning literally, the eagle does not catch the fly, or in other words, don’t waste your time going after small fry, or when someone insults you: “consider the source”). This one also qualifies on all counts.

My all-time favorite is this tongue-in-cheek Italian one: Fidare è bene, non fidare è meglio (to trust is good, to mistrust is better). Essentially meets the criteria.

This Chinese one illustrates the incredibly cross-cultural nature of proverbs: ? ? ? ? (chenre datie, strike while the iron is hot! Yes, this is how similar proverbs can be between totally unrelated cultures!).

Considering criteria (1) and (2) above, i.e, the old-to-young teaching function of proverbs, it is very hard to imagine an occasion that would trigger the proverb “it takes a village to raise a child.” Would you say it if a child misbehaves? If so, what lesson would it teach? Would an elderly woman say it to her daughter, implying “next time let the village help you raise your child”? I don’t think so. This one would die out in one generation if it could come into existence at all despite the incredible odds. As for criterion (3), I know of nothing remotely resembling this anywhere in any language. And (4)? No, it’s certainly not rural.

And here’s the part that really puzzles me: if this proverb really REALLY came from Africa, why wouldn’t Hillary tell us its country, or dialect, or language of origin?

We have all heard the expression “there’s an old Chinese proverb (or Polish proverb or German proverb) …”  But let’s see how this sounds:

“There’s an old European proverb…”

You see the problem?

Could it be that Hillary thinks Africa is a country with only one language and culture?

Maybe not, but does she think Americans are all that un-curious that we wouldn’t wonder exactly where in Africa her proverb came from, especially since her whole book is predicated on the proverb’s content?

Isn’t it more likely that Hillary simply made up this non-proverb in an attempt to pander to African Americans while also trying to get them to break away from their traditional American way of thinking? I mean, trying, like all liberal Democrats, to persuade them that they are different from the rest of us, and have different traditions from ours. Heaven forbid they should some day wake up and realize they believe in Jesus and Biblical principles just like the political conservatives they’re supposed to feel alienated from!

When slaves started to revolt in the South, slave holders tried to discourage blacks from identifying with American traditions, especially reading the Bible, and even occasionally burnt their churches down. (Both sides understood that the Bible teaches against slavery).

The Democrat plantation hasn’t changed much since then, with liberals hell-bent on bringing “their blacks” away from Christianity and other American traditions that discourage people from voting Democrat.

The use of factoids from Africa is also convenient because, while pandering to unsuspecting African Americans, it also provides a source of “information” that is hard to check up on, leaving their little game unexposed. The feminists on big-name campuses have long understood this tactic and refer in their pseudo-intellectual exposes to African ways that either never existed or were extremely rare in Africa (such as matriarchy, which existed only briefly in a tiny region).

This phenomenon of manufacturing facts in itself doesn’t have to scare us. After all, there aren’t that many Harvard-indoctrinated (don’t expect me to say “educated.” Those days are over) fruitcakes out there to corrupt our culture and the education of our children.

But here’s what does scare me:

Over 40% of you have said you would vote for Hillary, suggesting you either believe her lies and deceptions, or you think it’s fine that the Ship of State should have a sleight-of-hand artist at the helm.

Jesus isn’t walking physically in our midst any more. But young people like to ask “what would Jesus do”? It’s a good question, provided you know who the real Jesus is and understand that he was no sissy, and in fact, used a whip to chase money changers out of the temple. And He called a spade a spade.

In light of that, I think He would say:

Hillary, thou fake!

 

May the Almighty richly bless you this day, Dear Reader,

Laigle

Vicente Fox, Tear Down That Facade!

Vicente Fox, Tear Down That Façade!

 

Please send this around to as many people as you can, first, in English to your American patriotic friends, then to other US recipients who you think should have it (including the Minutemen, Tom Tancredo, any groups that help combat illegal immigration, etc):

 

To Vicente Fox, President of Mexico:

You and your nation are responsible, first and foremost, for providing a homeland for your people. If you insist on sending them here, then just admit that your government is washed up and can’t help your constituents have a decent life in your country and on your watch.

And stop pretending that you and your country are victims.

Think about it: What do your national police do when they catch an illegal immigrant from, say, Guatemala, Mr. Fox? Immigrant Central Americans I have spoken with consistently confirm stories of the Mexican police and border guards stealing money from male immigrants and raping or molesting immigrant women. You the Mexican authorities are the ones most responsible for abusing your poor Hispanic brothers. Yet you shamefully blame Americans for all abuses and make us responsible for the welfare of those who enter our country illegally.

How dare you abuse your own brothers like this and then every time there is a minor incident at our border in which your lawbreakers get hurt, play the abused victim?

We North Americans are proud of the country that we have built. That’s why we stay here.

Tell your people to be proud of the country they have built.

And if they think they haven’t built a country to be proud of yet (which apparently you do, Sir), now’s the time to stay and build one.

Viva México! But not here. There!

Sincerely,

[Your name]

 

IN SPANISH below. SEND TO TV STATION UNIVISION IN MIAMI, TO MEXICAN NEWSPAPERS AND TO VICENTE FOX HIMSELF, etc:

 

Al Sr. Vicente Fox:

A Usted y a su nación les incumbe proveer una patria para su pueblo. Si Ud. insiste en mandar a su pueblo aquí a Estados Unidos, admita entonces que es Ud. un fracasado que no puede darle a su pueblo una vida decente y una economía suficiente para sostenerlo. Y no hable de su orgullo de Mexicano. Porque un Mexicano que quiere a su país no lo deja tan facilmente así y tampoco hace que su pueblo abandone su país. Eso no se llama orgullo. Se llama hipocresía.

Ud. bien sabe lo que hace su policía nacional (obrando bajo su autoridad) al encontrar a un guatemalteco, por ejemplo, pasando ilegalmente por su país.

Si se trata de un varón, le quitan al pobre todo su dinero. Si se trata de una mujer, la violan. Este es un hecho muy bien conocido entre la comunidad centroamericano en mi país, Sr. Vicente. Deje de engañar al mundo dándole a entender que son Ud. y su pueblo las víctimas en este asunto de inmigración illegal, !porque son ustedes, las autoridades mexicanas, quienes más abusan de sus pobres hermanos hispanos!

Nadie más cree en esa mentira que sean Uds. las víctimas. Aprenda a aceptar la responsibilidad de sus proprias acciones. Aprenda a ofrecerle a su pueblo la patria que se merece–no aquí en EEUU sino allá en donde está. Los norteamericanos somos orgullosos de nuestro país. Por eso nos quedamos aquí. Sean orgullosos también del suyo. ¡Quedense allí! Gracias.

¡Viva México! (Allá en donde está.)

Atentamente,

[Your name here]

 

—————-Gay Agenda: You’re Going DOWN!—————

 

Remember how cool smoking was? If you’re 45 or older, you do.

Whatever happened to that politically correct, cool, suave, debonair, mundane habit that was all the rage among college students, profs, teachers, Hollywood actors, big busines and just about everyone purporting to have “intellect”?

In a nutshell, some scientists at the National Institutes of Health got together and did some pioneering studies, with our money, that proved beyond the shadow of a doubt that this cool habit could kill you.

Today, they’re at it again. Only it isn’t smoking. That’s a dead issue, thanks to science and lawyers.

The activists then were Big Tobacco, supported by Hollywood, the advertizing industry, the media and academe. Even politicians, like FDR, smoked and helped sell the image. But these activists were silenced by the nuclear option: lawsuits, brought by the smokers, the victims themselves.

Now “alternative” sexual lifestyles are all the rage. They too are killing people. And again, it’s the “intellectual” cool, liberal, worldly, suave thing to do. The usual suspects are involved. All the big name colleges have special programs for promoting “alternative” sex. Businesses promote the Gay Olympics. Politicians like Barney Frank think they can foist alternative sex on people through their power positions. Hollywood uses its influence to turn the Marlboro Man into a spokesman for today’s popular deadly activity. It’s just like the bad old days of Big Tobacco, and the Grim Reaper is having a gay old time (pun intended).

Even high-ranking officials, like Stephen Glassman, Chair of the PA Human Relations Committee, for example, are urging people to accept this deadly habit as a mainstream institution that deserves the sanction of the State and our religious institutions. Clergy would certainly be strongarmed into performing “alternative marriages” if this happened, of course. Otherwise they’d be in violation of civil rights law. Freedom of religion would be thereby abolished, via the backdoor, like every other liberal agenda item.

Of course, the promulgation of knowledge and data concerning the link between alternative sex and disease is in its infancy. Only a few facts are known at all to some of the public (such as the fact that males pursuing the cool “alternative” lifestyle die on average in their 40s), and these facts aren’t mainstream, thanks to the media blackout on this issue and the muzzling of opponents under color of law. And that in turn, thanks to the activists.

So what will turn this movement around? Again, as in the case of smoking, I believe it will be the victims themselves. As soon as they smell the money.

After all, the biggest losers aren’t the Christian Right or grassroots Americans, who have voted overwhelmingly against “alternative” definitions of marriage. The biggest losers are those who gayly fling themselves into the arms of the deadly beast that devours them whole.

Once enough of the victims have seen how they have been duped by the universities, politicians, the media, business (deep pockets), Hollywood, politicians, and, yes, the gay agenda itself, to throw away their health and life expectancy, they will come out swinging, marching boldly behind their lawyers.

And once science does its work, they will “win.” The way the smokers “won.”

Hopefully Americans aren’t as slow this time to accept the findings as we were when all we did was smoke.

If you have a friend who has been persuaded by the media, big business, politicians or by university programs, including courses of study, to try this deadly lifestyle, and especially if your friend is already suffering from a serious disease contracted as a result of it, talk to him or her at the first opportunity about the very real possibility of starting a class action lawsuit against the group that persuaded them to enter into the activity that did them in. If you happen to be in a care-giving profession, that is a shoe in the door.

When it comes to trend setting, money is the root of all motivation. Let’s make judicial use of it.

And God Will Bless You,

Laigle