This is not the kind of country that…

By Donald Hank

Fill in the blanks, especially if you are a liberal or RINO, and no matter what you say, people will applaud.
In the Republican presidential debates, someone asked Mike Huckabee about his policy as governor of Arkansas to allow the kids of illegal aliens to take advantage of the state tuition subsidies at the state colleges there.
His answer was to redefine America: “We’re a better country than to punish kids for what their parents do.”
Wait a minute, Mike.
First, we, along with every other country in the world, do in fact punish children for what their parents do. When parents are evicted from a home for not paying their property taxes, we don’t allow the children to stay in the home in question, do we? And we don’t refrain from jailing parents who commit crimes and we do send their kids to foster homes when that happens, right?
Second, these just aren’t manly words. They sound like a little sissy boy whining to the school bully: “if you don’t stop that, I’ll tell the teacher on you.”
Lyndon B. Johnson, architect of welfare, was one of the first to use such weasel words, in a successful attempt to shame the people of America into underwriting this biggest boondoggle ever. He said

“But we are not going to the American people and tell them that they never had it so good, or don’t rock the boat, or let’s keep what we have, or stand pat, or keep cool.
 
No, that is not the kind of a party you are, and that is not the kind of country this is.”

John McCain recently revived this liberal tradition of redefining America during his presidential campaign. Referring to waterboarding, the now-famous form of torture, he said:

”After we passed the Detainee Treatment Act, the Military Commissions Act then obviously anybody who violated any law of the United States would have to be held responsible.
”That’s not the kind of country America is”.

Senator Barbara Boxer said in October of 2006, 

 “If Congress passes a law he doesn’t agree with, the President issues a signing statement saying he is going to reinterpret or ignore the parts he doesn’t like.
“If Americans question the war, Secretary Rumsfeld compares them to Nazi appeasers.
“That is not the kind of country we are, or the kind of leadership we deserve.”

During the current presidential campaign, John Edwards, who wants to raise taxes and nationalize drug patents, said:

“the top 300,000 earners in this country now pay less in taxes than the bottom 150 Million Americans.” Think about that for a minute. That is not the kind of country I want to live in and it’s not the kind of America that the rest of the world needs us to be at this point in time.”

Notice that real conservatives seldom try to define you this way. When they use the expression “not the kind of country,” they are referring the way America once was before it became an upside-down cake.

Referring to the Clinton’s declaring war in Yugoslavia, Pat Buchanan said:

What happened is Serbia was bombed for 78 days and we’re right now boycotting heating oil, and people who never did a thing to this country are freezing to death in the winter. Now that’s not the kind of country I grew up in, and that I revere and that I love. And I regret to say the Republican establishment were as much for it as Mr. Clinton.

Amen.

What is worrisome is not what the liberals and RINOs say. It’s how Americans react when they say these manipulative things that attempt to redefine us.
Just after Huckabee said “we’re a better country than to punish children…” there was loud applause from the all-Republican audience.
The way I see it, G.W. Bush has conditioned Americans, particularly the religious “right,” to give evangelical Christian pro-life politicians carte blanche and to tell us how we should think. We shed a lot of blood asserting our independence from the British king, but it seems that lately, we have started looking for another head to crown.
Our Constitution says we the people are the leader. Yet we seem too timid, or perhaps too ignorant, to lead.
That is not the kind of country I grew up in and it’s not the kind of country I am prepared to die in.
 
At least not without a fight.

This WILL happen here!

Americans have lost their will to fight and Christians have lost their discernment. How far off is this in our country? 2 years? 5 years? Congress has taken another step in this direction. They can’t dismantle Christianity all at once. It must be incremental, a step at a time. They’re making amazingly fast progress.
LF  

Brazilian Homosexuals File “Hate” Charges Against Brazilian Christians

By Matthew Cullinan Hoffman

SAO PAULO, November 27, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The Brazilian Association of Gays, Lesbians, Bisexuals, Transvestites and Transsexuals (ABGLT) has lodged a criminal complaint against Christian activist Julio Severo and the National Vision for Christian Awareness (VINACC) for inciting “hatred” against homosexuals, and “homophobia”.

The complaint was made because Severo, on his website (http://juliosevero.blogspot.com), regularly denounces homosexual behavior as immoral, and opposes the goals of the homosexual movement.  VINACC is also accused because it reposts Severo’s material.

Luiz Mott, who is generally recognized as the leader of the homosexual movement in Brazil, rejoiced at the news. “We are all proud of the ABGLT for filing charges against our archenemy, Julio Severo,” he was quoted as saying in a Yahoo homosexual email list.  “I hope that he is condemned to perpetual imprisonment in Sodom and Gomorrah.”

Mott is a militant promoter of the “gay rights” agenda in Brazil and an ally of the socialist regime of Luiz Lula. He is also an open promoter of the legalization of pedophilia and pederasty, a fact that Severo has helped to expose (see previous LifeSiteNews coverage at: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/jul/07073011.html). 

Severo denies promoting hatred of homosexuals. “I am opposed to the homosexual behavior, and this is very clear in my blog,” Severo told LifeSiteNews. “I think this behavior is harmful to gays and society, spiritually, mentally and physically. Yet, I do not hate people living in homosexuality, adultery, fornication, thefts. I hate their acts. By God’s Word, I love sinners and I try to lead them to Christ through the Gospel.”

The offending text that formed the basis for the complaint bears no hint of “hatred” of homosexuals, but strongly criticizes their behavior.

“The homosexual minority loses numerically to the vast Christian majority, but is growing in political, legislative, social, and media power, threatening a frighteningly oppressive domination,” he wrote.  “The majority – composed of Christians, nominal or not – stand with their mouths open while the minority cries out for rights.  Their cry is essentially, ‘Sodomy now!  Down with sexual normalcy!  Down with male-female marriage!'”

The text goes on to criticize liberal Catholics and protestants for supporting Brazil’s socialist regime, which in turn supports the homosexual “rights” movement.

There is a significant possibility of a verdict against Severo and VINACC in the current political climate in Brazil, which is extremely sympathetic to the homosexual cause.

VINACC was successfully prosecuted several months ago simply for denouncing homosexual behavior as sinful during a campaign to promote heterosexuality and family values.  The offending act that resulted in conviction was a billboard that read “Homosexuality: And God made them man and woman and saw that it was good.”

As a result, VINACC was ordered to cancel its campaign and all related events completely.  The organization complied (see previous coverage at http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/jul/07073108.html).

Although no laws exist against denouncing homosexual behavior, liberal, activist judges in Brazil often simply behave as if such a law exists, and issue verdicts against those who dare to speak out against sodomy. Homosexual activists, in league with the Lula regime, are attempting to pass legislation that will explicitly outlaw all opposition to homosexual behavior in Brazil.

“For a long time, gay militants have been trying to catch me,” Severo told LifeSiteNews. “Now they think they were successful, because they read my recent article that says Christians should repent. They should do it because their own sins hinder sinners in the world from repenting and help sin (homosexual and otherwise) spread throughout society.”

Related Links:

Julio Severo’s Contact Info (he speaks English):
http://www.blogger.com/profile/03079977728841299575

Julio Severo’s Blog in English:
 http://lastdayswatchman.blogspot.com

Julio Severo’s Blog in Portuguese:
http://juliosevero.blogspot.com/

VINACC Website (Portuguese):
http://www.conscienciacrista.org.br/

Previous LifeSiteNews Coverage:

Leader of Brazil Homosexual Movement Under Investigation for Pedophilia
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/jul/07073011.html

Brazil Attacks Against Family Defenders Backed by Pro-Homosexual Regime of Nation’s President
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/jul/07073108.html

Julio Severo Interview
Introduction: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/aug/07082811.html
Part I: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/aug/07082810.html
Part II: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/aug/07082901.html ;

Source: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/nov/07112805.html

Pimps in Sweden out of luck

This just in from Bill Depner’s statewide network.
This is really good news. Here in the US, prostitution has been defended tooth and nail by feminists who claim it is a woman’s right to sell her body, just as it is her right to do anything stupid and dangerous, but not to know if her daughter has decided to have an abortion. Sweden may be entering a new era of sanity. LF

PA Pro-life & Conservative Coalition – Website http://www.palifevote.org 
=>Subscribe by sending an email address to william@palifevote.org
==> Tell a friend. – Bill Depner, Acting Editor

Pregnant & scared? Suffering the pain of abortion? 1-800-395-HELP

LITERATURE IN THIS ISSUE:
i) Swedish Prostitution Ban An Apparent Enormous Success
ii) ACTION ALERT:  PA Homosexual Hate Crimes Overturned
iii) Duncan Hunter Rated 100% by Eagle Forum
 

i) SWEDISH PROSTITUTION BAN AN APPARENT ENORMOUS SUCCESS
Criminalized the buying of sex, and decriminalized the selling of sex
By Thaddeus M. Baklinski
 
  [ED. NOTE: Send the following article to all concerned about sex trafficking, especially to Congress, anti-trafficking organizations and policymakers.]

  [STOCKHOLM, November 15, 2007, LifeSiteNews.com] – Sweden appears to have nearly wiped out prostitution. How? In 1999 Sweden passed legislation that criminalized the buying of sex, and decriminalized the selling of sex. The groundbreaking principle behind this legislation is clearly stated in the government’s literature on the law:
  “In Sweden prostitution is regarded as an aspect of male violence against women and children. It is officially acknowledged as a form of exploitation of women and children and constitutes a significant social problem… gender equality will remain unattainable so long as men buy, sell and exploit women and children by prostituting them.”

This law is the only one of its kind in the world, and it seems to be incredibly successful according to Swedish officials. The law, which has criminalized the purchase and brokering of sexual services, provides for up to six years in prison for pimps, up to 10 years for traffickers of prostitutes. The john could face up to six months in prison if caught in the act.  In a report in Spiegel, Jonas Trolle, an inspector with the Stockholm police unit dedicated to combating prostitution said, “The goal is to criminalize the demand side of the equation, the johns, rather than putting emotionally and physically imperiled women behind bars.”

        The results of this strategy are impressive. “We have significantly less prostitution than our neighboring countries, even if we take into account the fact that some of it happens underground,” says Trolle. “We only have between 105 and 130 women – both on the Internet and on the street – active (in prostitution) in Stockholm today. In Oslo (Norway), it’s 5,000.”

        Another relevant aspect of the ban is the reduction of the number of foreign women now being trafficked into Sweden for sex. The Swedish government estimates that in the last few years only 200 to 400 women and girls have been annually trafficked into Sweden for prostitution, while in neighboring Finland the number is 15,000 to 17,000.

       An essential element of Sweden’s prostitution legislation is to provide women prostitutes with the avenue to get out of the dangerous businesss and receive the needed social support to reshape their lives.

       According to a study by the Scottish government in 2003 on the consequences of prostitution policies in several countries, those that had legalized and/or regulated prostitution had a dramatic increase in all facets of the sex industry, saw an increase in the involvement of organized crime in the sex industry, and found a dismaying increase in child prostitution, trafficking of women and girls and violence against women. (See the Scottish government report here: http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/committees/histor… lg/inquiries-03/ptz/lg04-ptz-res-03.htm)

        Countries that have considered the possibility of legalizing prostitution, including Canada, would do well to look at the bold and effective strides Sweden has taken against this form of exploitation of women. A Swedish success story! 

View article: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/nov/07111506.html 
  ___

Read related LifeSiteNews.com coverage: Canada Preparing to Legalize Prostitution?  http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2005/feb/05022509.html

Experts on Prostitution Warn Canada on Danger of Legalization
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2005/mar/05031003.html

Canada Considers Further Legalizing Prostitution While Amsterdam Mayor Admits Legalization’s Failure
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2005/oct/05100508.html

Canada to Tighten Laws Against Sex Trafficking with Proposed Bill Blocking Stripper Visas
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/may/07051805.html

Copyright: LifeSiteNews.com.
Permission to republish is granted (with limitation*) but acknowledgement of source is *REQUIRED* (use LifeSiteNews.com).

###

ii) ACTION ALERT:  PA Homosexual Hate Crimes Overturned
1) Urge PA Attorney General Not to Appeal Commonwealth Court’s Ruling.
2) Urge state legislators not to pasa a homosexual hate crimes bill.

Please contact your state legislators about (the following) religious freedom, free speech and Pennsylvania Constitutional issue.

The Attorney General, Tom Corbet at 717-787-3391, should also be contacted as there are less than 30 days left for him to take action on the Commonwealth Court’s ruling.

Thanks,
Fran Bevan
Pennsylvania Eagle Forum
  ___

Letter to the Editor,

On November 15, 2007 in a 4-1 decision, Pennsylvania’s Commonwealth Court struck down amendments to Pennsylvania’s expanded hate crimes law, declaring that the amendments enacted in 2002 were “unconstitutional and therefore null and void,”  as the bill was deviously introduced for crop destruction and strategically morphed by its sponsors and supporters into one that criminalizes citizens for their religion-inspired speech.

The legal challenge to the law stemmed from the arrests and imprisonment of eleven innocent Christians who, in the words of Pennsylvania’s Constitution and the law, were imprisoned because they “worshiped Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences” through public “communication or address” that admonished such sin as sodomy, lesbianism, pedophilia, bestiality, and other such lifestyles, and this communication was “perceived” by the plaintiffs, police, and employees of the state to be “harassment by communication” “toward the actual or perceived. sexual orientation of another individual or group of individuals.”

Governor “Burn the Constitution” Rendell is already calling on the legislature “to immediately approve appropriate legislation reinstating the measure;” therefore, I implore you to fight for your freedom of speech and religion by learning about this critical issue, how this law violates Pennsylvania Constitution Article 1 Sections 1, 3, 7, 25, and 26, at www.ErichLukas.com, where you can contact your state senator and representative to stop any such legislation that imprisons innocent citizens and terminates your freedom.

Sincerely,

Erich G. Lukas
267.566.6583

###

iii) Duncan Hunter Rated 100% by Eagle Forum
 
Presidential Candidate, Duncan Hunter, is rated 100% by Eagle Forum.

Have a look and check out related articles on this website.
http://www.allrightmagazine.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=92

Please forward, especially to manufacturing interests.

Thanks,
Fran Bevan
Pennsylvania Eagle Forum

 ###

For LOVE THEM BOTH program times & national pregnancy helpline, click
http://www.LoveThemBothTV.com.

Pennsylvania Pro-Life and Conservative Coalition
P.O Box 53
New Buffalo PA 17069
info@palifevote.org
 
“Teaming up on pro-life and values issues begins by building relationships.”

__ Changing your email address?  Send us your new email address.

___If you wish to be removed from this email network, just
send a reply email with “Unsubscribe” in the subject line.___

Faithfulness to the written word

Does the Rule of Law Require a Population of Literate Christians?

It is not uncommon for debates to flare up over whether or not the United States was born a ‘Christian nation.’ It should be clear that the majority of the founders were Christians and not only that, but Christians who understood history. The men and women who migrated from Europe fled ‘Christian’ nations and had no desire to create the same oppressive systems in the New World as the ones they fled from in the Old World. However one slices it, it is clear that the founders thought that religion was important and that a nation filled with Christians was a good idea.

The United States has come a long way since then. There still are many Christians around and much of the law of the land can be traced back to morality as Christianity perceives it. This is also due in large part to the fact that the English Common Law was saturated in the Christian worldview and was what the founders were used to. Today, there are many people who have abandoned Christianity and all religion as well as many Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, etc.

Some might argue that we have lost a great deal by wandering away from our guiding principles. It might be argued that the desertion of the entrenched Christian moral system has resulted in numerous terrible effects. I sympathize with those that would argue that way and do not, in the main, disagree. However, I believe that our wandering away from our guiding principles and the Christian moral majority are not causes but rather symptoms which in turn have their own effects.

By analogy, if certain outcomes of moral depravity are the result of the ‘disease’ of moving away from sound moral underpinnings, it was only because the ‘immune system’ was wracked by another, more deadly disease, which let these other more obvious ‘diseases’ take hold.

Just what ‘disease’ has undermined the nation’s immune system?

Positive moral statements about what is good and right are not the only borrowed capital from the Christian religion. “You shall not steal” is an example of such a moral statement. But why should anyone obey this statement? Those who believe that the words of the Christian Scriptures are authoritative are trained to view such statements with respect and deference, and obedience. Except for the exertion of coercive force, the only thing that can force a person to obey words on a paper is the individual’s own conscience.

Over the last two hundred years, the ‘words on the paper’ of the Christian Scriptures have been attacked over and over again. In particular, ‘higher critics’ who have insisted that the Old Testament is a hodge-podge of different editors’ decisions and that the New Testament documents have ambiguous and uncertain origins have created a climate where many feel that obedience to the Scriptures is irrational.

After all, how can one be certain that the texts really did say ‘You shall not steal’? What about everything else we find contained in the texts? How do we know it isn’t corrupted through and through?

From an evidential perspective, I find the findings of these scholars to be nonsense and I am not by any means the only one. However, what is lost here is not merely the certainty in regards to God’s feelings about theft, but also a culture of people accustomed to living their lives based on principles that they know by reading them from on a page.

To put it bluntly, what has been undermined is the respect for the rule of law itself. As the portion of the nation’s populace who is trained to submit to and obey what is written on the pages of the Scriptures has decreased, so too has the pool of individuals who would be willing to take the US Constitution as it has been written and willingly submit to it. It is not merely that they stubbornly won’t. They no longer lack the intellectual training to do so, even if they wanted to. Moreover, the notion of submitting to words written down long ago strikes many today as absurd.

It is often argued by skeptics that it is a great weakness of the Christian religion that so many Christians throughout history have disagreed on various interpretations of passages within the Scriptures. Nonetheless, throughout the history of western civilization, people were directed to the learn grammar and vocabulary precisely so that they could correctly interpret the Scriptures. After the Reformation where Luther and Calvin, building on the works of martyrs like John Wycliffe, put the Scriptures in the languages of the common man, this emphasis diffused out among the masses. The US Constitution was written during a time of spreading literacy where that literacy was promoted as being critically important to being able to reasonably understand the Scriptures.

That day is gone, and with it is the clear rationale for why one should learn how to read, and with that, the loss of a willingness to submit to a written code – not just a religious one, but also a legal one.

No better illustration of how far we’ve come can be given than looking at two different ways in which differences of opinion have been handled in American history.

Consider the first example: Prohibition. In the early parts of the 1900s, the Christian Scriptures had still not come under the vicious attack that would come. The Scopes-Monkey trial still had not happened. A huge number of misguided moralists decided that alcohol needed to be banned. A Constitutional amendment was pursued and it was obtained. And all hell broke loose.

What did Americans do? Realizing the error of their ways, they repealed the amendment with another amendment. That’s the way people behave when they think what is written down really matters.

Consider the second example: Abortion. Well past the snide attacks of liberal scholars in regards to the Scriptures and with the Christian world view clearly on the wane, many activists decided that it was time to get rid of all of the laws restricting abortion. What did Americans do? Why, they passed a Constitutional amendment of course.

No. No, wait a minute. Actually, they didn’t pass an amendment. Come to think of it, there wasn’t a scrap of legislation passed at all. What happened is that activists side-stepped the persuasion approach and went right through the court system. It takes a super-majority to pass an amendment and that requires a lot of persuasion. It only takes enthusiastic activists with a lot of money who can afford to push a court case up to the Supreme Court to take advantage of the court system.

The result, of course, was the Roe vs. Wade decision, where instead of a super-majority of American citizens were persuaded, only a handful of nine men in black robes were. These nine men came to age in a time when respect for the Scriptures had been practically dismantled. Perhaps predictably, they found a ‘right to privacy’ in the Constitution where such language cannot be found. Though I might be persuaded to believe that the Constitution nonetheless speaks to privacy, certainly the next step in the decision – where the life of the unborn is merely a component of a woman’s ‘right to privacy’ is certainly utterly absent.

In our modern climate, what something actually says doesn’t mean as much anymore. Meaning does not reside in the text or the author’s intent behind the text. If there is meaning at all, it resides in the reader, and the reader is often allowed to derive whatever meaning he likes. This is attitude is not constrained to Biblical interpretation, but interpretation of just about any texts. We do not live in a society where an individual is trained to say, “This is what is written, thus, this is what I will do.”

Instead, the individual says, “How lucky I am that what is written conforms to what makes me happy.”

If it does no so conform, the goal is to put people on the bench who are happy about the same things, what-is-written-be-damned.

In the case of abortion, being able to fight it out at the local level where either side could make their case and then let the voters decide, this venue is no longer of much value.

But the point is that this attitude is at work across the board on all sorts of topics. No longer does it matter what the words on the page say. What matters is what you can convince judges to think it says. The disenfranchisement is extended when one considers how difficult it is to overturn such judicial decrees. Our only recourse now is to try to elect a President who will appoint judges who may then overturn the previous Supreme Court decisions. That, of course, requires current judges to resign or die while your President is in office.

Is it any coincidence that judges who are most likely going to overturn something like Roe vs. Wade are conservative judges who insist that they will abide by the words on the paper? Is it a coincidence that these men and women also happen to more often than not be Christians? If we could find judges who would abide by the words on the paper who were not Christian, I would have less of an interest in the issue. My point, however, is that we live in a culture where such individuals are unlikely to arise. They are most likely going to arise out of a community that has trained itself to obey ‘words on a page.’

When one views the situation in our country from this angle, different perspectives on how to go about resolving the problems emerge. For example, trying to pass anti-abortion legislation and pro-heterosexual marriage legislation is attempting important work, but if no one – not even the judges who have sworn oaths to do so – sees fit to abide by that legislation, it is all for naught. Any amendments passed at the state level can be happily overturned at the Federal level.

To expand on my own long list of suggestions on how to remedy the situation would take another 1,500 words. However, I can sum it up by arguing that if I am correct about the connection between respect for the Scriptures and a respect for any written word or command, making more Christians is the best way to effect the long term solutions we are looking for.

Very possibly, some liberals and atheists will read this and be horribly offended by that suggestion. I am not advocating government enforced Christian education. On this, I am agreed with the founders that replacing one set of oppressive Christian regimes with another is not a good idea. Having a large population of “People of the Word” is a good thing in a nation that exists for and by the rule of law. If atheists and liberals can produce the same effect in some other way, more power to them (but good luck!).

Perhaps one way it could be brought about is by realizing that if you live by the judicial system you die by the judicial system. If a slew of conservative judges come to reside in the Supreme Court you will find now the shoe is on the other foot. At that time, you’ll come to see the value of allowing such matters to be sorted out by the democratic process. That is, unless you see no hope of persuading majorities to adopt your position and exploiting the judicial system is your only shot.

Anthony Horvath is the chief apologist at Christian Apologetics Ministries and is the author of Fidelis of the Birth Pangs series.

“Safe” sex education accompanied by soaring STD rates

“Safe” sex education accompanied by soaring STD rates
 
When I was in pubic school, sex ed teachers talked about sex between married couples. We had the sense that that was the predominant mode of sex.
Sex education in the United States is increasingly focusing on safe sex, never daring to suggest that kids refrain from sex, as was once the norm. Educators even say that abstinence causes more sex. Yet, as we see abstinence education practically banned in schools, STD rates are soaring, as reported in the Mission America article below.
 
First, check out the 3 WorldNetDaily sites linked below.
 
 
How sex ed risks girls’ health, by Ashley Herzog:
Quotes:
“There is no right time to have your first intercourse. This is a choice you make,” declares GoAskAlice.com, a popular health website. This canard is repeated ad nauseum in sex education programs and magazines geared toward middle and high school students, such as Seventeen. (Don’t let the name fool you – most of its readership is under 16.)

“There is no correct age at which you are ‘supposed’ to have sex,” declares the health website coolnurse.com. “Everyone has to make a very personal decision about what is right for them.”

Sex educators like the idea of telling teens to have sex as soon as they feel ready not because it’s good for them, but because they see it as the values-neutral position. They don’t particularly care about teens – especially girls, who are more likely to suffer physical and emotional consequences from early sexual activity. They care about undermining traditional values and promoting libertine attitudes about sex.

 

Same-sex marriage book for 2nd graders.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=58034

“Safe” sex bandwagon:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45394

Collision Course

By Jane Jimenez

November 19, 2007

A strange convergence of news stories this past week has come and gone like ships passing in the night, causing no ripples, leaving no wake.  On the surface, all is calm.  Down deep, strong currents pull toward inevitable disaster.

More than 1 million cases of Chlamydia were reported in the United States last year.  Federal health officials state this is the greatest number ever of reported cases for a sexually transmitted disease (STD).  

What would generally generate alarm, though, is being soft-pedaled by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).  We are told this “may not be all bad news.”  We are not victims of a disease, the CDC says, but instead are victims of reporting of the disease.  

Based on their analysis, we have the CDC to thank for these new higher levels of Chlamydia infection.  For more than 10 years, they have recommended annual screening for sexually active women, focusing on teens and young adults ages 15 to 25.  

As good as our testing might be, Dr. John M. Douglas Jr. at the CDC admits to Associated Press that it leaves something to be desired.  “As many as 2.8 million new cases may actually be occurring each year,” Dr. Douglas states, a fact that appears almost as a throwaway footnote buried in the story.

Buried under this throwaway footnote is another story.  Rates of the STD gonorrhea are also soaring, with two consecutive years of increases.  But the biggest part of the story has yet to appear in bold headlines.

In 2006, a surveillance project in 28 cities found that 14 percent of the reported gonorrhea cases were resistant to ciprofloxacin and other antibiotics used to treat it.  This rate is up from the 9 percent in 2005, which was itself also up from the 7 percent in 2004.  Up, up, up.and the CDC responds in April.advising doctors “to stop using those drugs against gonorrhea.”

The rise of a superbug for gonorrhea doesn’t appear to fluster the CDCs own Dr. Douglas, though.  After all, “it doesn’t look like the superbugs are the reason for gonorrhea’s escalating numbers overall.”  What is?  Well, Dr. Douglas and his colleagues are “not sure what is driving the increase.”

Meanwhile, across the country in the Reno Gazette-Journal, a new study on Methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus, or MRSA, shows that this superbug and the deaths it causes may exceed deaths caused by AIDS.  Dr. Steven Althoff managed to diagnose and treat 4-year-old Jordan Roberts just in time.  She lived.  But Dr. Althoff has seen a five-fold increase of MRSA cases in the last year.

And out of Atlanta, U.S. health officials told AP that “a mutated version of a common cold virus has caused 10 deaths in the last 18 months.”  Again, “CDC officials don’t consider the mutation to be a cause for alarm for most people.”  It’s just as well.  Alarm, in this case, will do no good since “there are no good antiviral medications for adenoviruses.” 

Three news stories this week.  Superbugs.  Bacterium and viruses resistant to drugs.  But we are told not to worry.

What are we to do?  Get tested?  Be informed?  Know we have the disease? And then what?  Well, at least, we know what we are not to do.  Don’t worry.

Three news stories this week.  Superbugs.  The CDC twists in the wind, letting ships run a collision course in the night, turning off the early warning system, and massaging us back to sleep.  

You may have a deadly cold, a MRSA infection or a gonorrhea infection.  But the germs are not the culprits.  We are victims of knowledge, of knowing what ails us.  Now go back to sleep.  There’s nothing to worry about.

http://www.fromthehomefront.org:80/07_Nov19.htm

**********
This e-mail is from Mission America, and is intended for news and
educational purposes only.

Get your children out of the public schools NOW, or start today fighting anti-Christian, pro-homosexual teaching!

For the latest in news about the homosexual agenda in our schools, go to our companion web site,

www.truthatschool.org/news.htm

Please help support our work!

Mission America
PO Box 21836
Columbus, OH 43221

Mail list service for Mission America provided by afo.net and
totalnetguard.com filtering service, the Internet service that protects your family on the internet.

Mission America
www.missionamerica.com
See our Risk Audit, assessing schools on homosexuality.

To Unsubscribe: http://listmail.afo.net/cgi-bin/plm/un.cgi?e=zoilandon@msn.com&l=missionamerica 

 

The Truth about Hate Crime Statistics

 

Hate crimes law is based on myths and lies propagated by far-left social engineers and the gay agenda to ensure special privileges for them while removing rights for Christians and Americans with traditional values. It is the most dangerous legislation out there in its attack on your First Amendment rights and on traditional Christianity per se.
Here in York County PA, the home of Laigle’s Forum, our own Republican representative Todd Platts has voted for the pernicious hate crimes law, thereby threatening Christians throughout America. Platts claims that Christians are also protected under this law. Yet, strangely, the Boy Scouts are being evicted from their in-perpetuity headquarters in Philadelphia because sex trumps religion. A group of pro-lifers was arrested and roughed up by police at Chaffey College in California simply for applying for a permit to spread the message of life on campus!
We asked Platts how his new law could be used to protect these people. His response? An empty email, sent as a form of mockery!
If your representative in Washington has vote for this under the pretext that gays are analogous to a racial minority (African Americans overwhelmingly are offended by that association), ask him/her how Christian groups like the ones described above can be protected under Hate Crimes Law.
Of course, they can’t, and the legislator will have to admit it or simply ignore your question, as Mr. Platts did ours.

No matter what state you are in, we ask that you also ask Mr. Platts how these abused Christians can get relief under Hate Crimes Law. It is time the RINOs felt the heat!
Thanks!
Laigle’s Forum

The Truth about Hate Crime Statistics

by John Perazzo

FrontPageMagazine.com | August 30, 2001

URL: www.frontpagemag.com/columnists/perazzo/jp08-30-01p.htm

ELEVEN YEARS AGO, Congress passed the Hate Crimes Statistics Act (HCSA), mandating the collection of data about transgressions motivated by an offender s bias against a victim s race, religion, sexual orientation, or ethnicity. Commissioned by the Attorney General, the FBI s Uniform Crime Reporting program developed a system to compile and classify this information. The crimes tallied would include both personal offenses (such as murder, rape, assault, and intimidation), and property offenses (such as robbery, burglary, theft, arson, and vandalism). In 1994, incidents of bias against persons with disabilities were added as a newly counted category of hate crimes.

The prospect of quantifying the incidence of hate crimes was enthusiastically welcomed by our nation s civil-rights establishment, which in recent years has devoted much time and energy to the task of condemning the supposedly widespread nature of white-on-black attacks. As U.S. Civil Rights Commission chair Mary Frances Berry puts it, “The primary explanation for racially motivated violence against blacks has been the need of a segment of the white population to preserve [its] belief in the inferiority of blacks, and to maintain the social and political subordination of an historically outcast group by any means, including violence.” Ms. Berry’s message closely resembles that of Al Sharpton, who has characterized white-on-black violence as “a national epidemic.” In a similar vein, Jesse Jackson asserts that blacks are not only “despised,” but are actually “hunted for sport.” [and gays too, we might add-LF]

Many academics have joined the chorus as well. University of California sociology professor Dr. Robert Staples laments what he calls “a sort of genocide targeting young black males.” African American Studies professor Vivian Gordon calls black men “a hunted and endangered species.” And Ivy League professor Cornel West refers to blacks as our country s “exemplary targets of racial hatred.”

Let us examine these claims under the light of what the facts actually show. In 1999, law-enforcement agencies nationwide reported a total of 7,876 hate crimes to the FBI, of which 4,295 (or 55 percent) were motivated by racial bias. Because some of those victimizations involved more than one offense (e.g., assault and robbery), the 4,295 incidents actually encompassed 5,240 separate offenses. If we exclude all racially motivated offenses whose perpetrators are categorized as being of “unknown race,” and focus specifically on those offenses definitely involving both blacks and whites, we find that blacks were victims of 2,030 racially motivated offenses committed by whites, while whites were victims of 524 racially motivated offenses committed by blacks. Thus whites were responsible for 79.5 percent of these interracial hate crimes, and blacks 20.5 percent.

While this may appear to support the popular assertion that whites are likelier than blacks to commit hate crimes, we must remember that the total population of non-Hispanic whites is about 6 times larger than the total population of non-Hispanic blacks. When we factor this population disparity into the equation, we find that the “average” black is actually about 50 percent likelier than his or her white counterpart to commit what is classified as a racially motivated hate crime. Because this fact so radically contradicts most Americans prevailing worldview, one would think it might be big news deemed worthy of discussion by activists and academics alike. But in fact these are among the most underpublicized numbers in all of criminal justice.

Another vital fact to consider is that FBI hate-crime statistics list “Hispanics” as a category of victims (of crimes motivated by ethnicity or national origin), but not as a category of offenders. Instead, Hispanic offenders are lumped together with whites. In other words, the current hate-crime classification system allows for Hispanics to be counted as victims of hate crimes, but never as perpetrators of such crimes. This, of course, artificially inflates the share of hate crimes committed by “whites.”

Finally, we must note that while very few of those crimes that cross racial lines are categorized as hate crimes, white-on-black offenses of that nature are far likelier to be called hate crimes than are black-on-white offenses.

For instance, in October 1999, a white man named Troy Knapp was attacked by a mob of black men wielding pipes and trash cans, while riding his bike with a companion in Charleston, SC. Knapp was beaten so severely that part of his skull and brain had to be removed, leaving him barely functional.

Seventeen suspects were arrested and charged with second-degree lynching. However, local prosecutor David Schwacke commented, “We haven’t been able to establish hate as a motive.”

According to a Fox News Report (1), Schwacke, “acknowledged that if it had been 17 white suspects and two black victims, hate would more likely be considered a motive.” The report went on to note that, “Federal hate-crime law could apply in this case, but seven months after the incident the U.S. attorney’s office in South Carolina is not even considering charges.”

It is impossible to know how many potential black-on-white hate crimes have been misreported in this fashion. But, given the political pressure on police and prosecutors from the civil rights establishment, the practice is probably widespread.

The Bureau of Justice Statistics estimates that in 1999, there were about 657,008 black-on-white crimes of violence, as compared to some 91,051 of the white-on-black variety. Yet although black-perpetrated interracial crimes outnumbered white-perpetrated interracial crimes by a ratio of about 7.2 to 1, the official hate-crime statistics showed white offenders outnumbering black offenders by a 4 to 1 margin. Put another way, about 1 out of every 45 white-on-black attacks is classified as a hate crime, while the corresponding fraction for black-on-white attacks is an astounding 1 out of 1,254.

These numbers strongly suggest that thanks in large part to the constant drumbeat of our civil-rights activists, the unfounded presumption that racially motivated crimes are a predominantly white phenomenon has been cemented into the psyche of law-enforcement agencies and has been reflected in deeply biased reporting methods.

1- www.frontpagemag.com/pi_crimes/hate_crime06-16-00.htm

John Perazzo is the author of “THE MYTH THAT DEVIDE US: How Lies Have Poisoned American Race Relations”. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0965126811/centerforthest01A/104-2728083-3345544. For more information on his book, please find at http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0965126811/centerforthest01A/104-3704288-7751118 E-mail him at wsbooks25@hotmail.com

E N D

And let’s not forget that 95% of murder warrants in LA are for illegal immigrants, who are protected by hate crime laws! Don’t let them sell you out in Washington. If your legislator voted for this miscreant bill, join forces with like-minded others to vote him/her out of office.

Boycott Philadelphia!

Dear Reader:
It is time to start a national boycott on Philadelphia, which is now breaking a lease with the Boy Scouts and illegally kicking these overly clean cut kids out of their rightful headquarters because they refuse to accept the gay lifestyle (supporters of hate crimes law, like Republican Congressman Todd Platts, for example, of York, PA, declare this law also protects religious people. Oh really? Please tell us how the Boy scouts can claim their rights under that wonderful legislation).
Just last week, thanks to a moral cesspool created by the city fathers and tolerated by the people of that city, the sixth policeman in just a few weeks was shot in the City of Brotherly Love. This is what you can expect when you ban morality.
That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t go to those wonderful attractions like Independance Hall next summer. What it means is that you shouldn’t be spending any more money than you have to while in Philadelphia, which has declared itself “gay friendly” at the expense of family friendly. You can’t be both, as the message below shows.
We recommend Mission America’s site and subscription list. They give you news that is censored elsewhwere.
Laigle’s Forum

Post Sugarcoats Thuggery Against Philadelphia Boy Scouts

The Post’s description is a classic example of moral equivalence, in which aggressor and victim are co-belligerents.

By Robert Knight
Culture and Media Institute
November 20, 2007

http://www.cultureandmediainstitute.org/articles/2007/20071120152550.aspx

The Washington Post this week stepped delicately around the thuggish tactics employed by Philadelphia City Solicitor Romulo Diaz, who has engineered a coup against the Cradle of Liberty Council of the Boy Scouts of America.

In the November 19 article, “Philadelphia Gives Boy Scouts Ultimatum,” Post staff writer Dafna Linzer noted that Diaz had given the Boy Scouts until December 3 to agree to pay $200,000 or lose the headquarters the Scouts have had in a city park for nearly 100 years.

 
The local Scouts, who serve 64,000 mostly minority boys in Philadelphia and in two adjoining counties, had an agreement to lease the building for a dollar a year.  Urged on by Diaz, the City Council on May 31 invoked a “sexual orientation” law and reneged on the agreement.

Here’s how the Post summarized the city’s crackdown:  “The confrontation between the city and the nation’s third largest Scouts chapter has been building for four years, with each side blaming the other for backing out of previous agreements and for escalating tensions.”

So who’s the bully? Egged on by local homosexual activists, city officials are clearly the aggressors, not the Scouts. But the Post’s description is a classic example of moral equivalence, in which aggressor and victim are co-belligerents.

The Post also noted that the city “has invited the Boy Scouts to remain in the nearly 100-year-old building as paying tenants.”

“Invited?” That’s a little like saying a mugger “has invited” his victim to remain unharmed as long as he forks over his wallet.

Here are a few things the Post story left out:

. The architect of the harassment against the Scouts, City Solicitor Diaz, is openly homosexual, as has been reported in the Philadelphia press.
. The Scouts built the building with their own money, and then gave it to the city in 1928.
. The Scouts had a lease “in perpetuity” with the city, an agreement the City Council broke.
. The Scouts bar openly homosexual Scoutmasters and members for moral reasons and for the sake of protecting young boys from possible harm, not because they are motivated by bigotry or prejudice.  The Post article read as if the Scouts have no rational reason for wanting to determine whether prospective leaders or members are attracted sexually to males.
. The national Boy Scouts of America organization gets no ink to defend itself.  Cradle of Liberty spokesman Jeff Jubelirer told the Post that the local chapter was trying its best in 2003 to cave in, with a statement saying that “prejudice, intolerance and unlawful discrimination in any form are unacceptable within the ranks of Cradle of Liberty Council.”

Quoth Jubelirer: “We were trying to be amendable to all sides, but National would not allow us to keep that language, so we rescinded it. We can’t have a policy where we put in specific words that National won’t allow or we’ll loose [sic] our charter. We can’t afford not to be part of the national Boy Scouts.”

It might be nice to know what the mean, bigoted old National headquarters thinks of this.

. No one was quoted who has any problem with the city “fathers” threatening to kick out the city’s premiere youth organization.
. Philadelphia suffers from the leading murder and violent crime rate among top 10 cities in the United States. Most of it is being committed by fatherless young men.

The chief bully, Diaz, got the last quote:  “If I do not receive an executed lease, signed by the Boy Scouts, to remain as tenants paying a fair market rent, we will begin looking for alternative tenants that can take over the property June 1, 2008.”

How about a Gay Pride Center? No problem there with a lack of money or connections. And it would make a fine kick-off to Gay Pride Month, which the city celebrates annually in June with taxpayer-sponsored activities. Diaz could be the first guest speaker. 

As for the ongoing slaughter in the streets, Philadelphia had 406 homicides in 2006, courtesy of fatherless barbarians who could have benefited from character building offered by the Boy Scouts.

“It’s a disturbing statistic, we’re very concerned about it, and we’re going to do everything we can to reduce it,” Police Commissioner Sylvester M. Johnson was quoted in the Philadelphia Inquirer.

Over at City Hall, the City Council and the mayor are doing their part by blessing the city solicitor’s ambitious social agenda. If the Scouts are forced out of town, it might not make Philadelphia a more livable place.

But let’s look at the bright side.  Taxable champagne sales will soar in some circles.

Maybe the city can put the money toward building a more efficient morgue.
—————————-
Robert Knight is director of the Culture and Media Institute, a division of the Media Research Center.
——————————–
This e-mail is from Mission America, and is intended for news and
educational purposes only.

Get your children out of the public schools NOW, or start today fighting anti-Christian, pro-homosexual teaching!

For the latest in news about the homosexual agenda in our schools, go to our companion web site,

www.truthatschool.org/news.htm

Please help support our work!

Mission America
PO Box 21836
Columbus, OH 43221

Mail list service for Mission America provided by afo.net and
totalnetguard.com filtering service, the Internet service that protects your family on the internet.

Mission America
www.missionamerica.com
See our Risk Audit, assessing schools on homosexuality.

To Unsubscribe: http://listmail.afo.net/cgi-bin/plm/un.cgi?e=zoilandon@msn.com&l=missionamerica 

 

 
 

 

 

Postcard Action for German homeschoolers

This just in from another group. We recommend this site. If you send the post card, check with post office to see how much postage is needed. – Laigle’s Forum

http://principleddiscovery.com/?p=700

Postcard action for German homeschoolers

(11/19/07) I just received an email requesting assistance in a post card writing campaign that I can wholly support without any qualms or misgivings.This affects the Neubronners, a family in Bremen who began homeschooling in response to their children becoming physically ill in being forced to public school.

If you are interested, they are requesting post cards or Christmas cards to be sent to the German Education Senator, Frau Jürgens-Pieper. The tone should be friendly and personal. One suggestion:

    Dear Mrs. Jürgens-Pieper,
    Merry Christmas in the hopes that there will be educational freedom in Bremen by next Christmas!
    (Sincerely, your family’s name)

English is generally ok, especially for something so brief, but here is the German for those interested:

    Liebe Frau Jürgens-Pieper,
    Frohe Weihnachten, In der Hoffnung, dass es bis nächste Weihnachten in Bremen Bildungsfreiheit gibt.
    Mit schönen Grüssen von ………… …

The address is:

    Senatorin für Bildung und Wissenschaft
    Rembertiring 8-12
    28195 Bremen
    Germany

I have an update on the Neubronner case for those interested, but I need to listen to the press conference first and check that what was sent to me was intended to be public. I will add the update to this post.

Update: (11/20/07) The recent decision by the German high court that homeschooling may be viewed as “child welfare endangerment” and was reason to remove custody from parents left the Neubronners understandably uneasy over the weekend. Fearful of a surprise action by the state, they sent the children to friends and waited out the weekend. Willing to face fines and even possible imprisonment, they decided that their line was the risk of losing their children and they decided to send the children to school Monday morning, despite their children’s fears. Then they could have access to their accounts, sell their house and move to Austria.

Then their lawyer contacted them. He had spoken with a judge responsible for custody issues. The previous week, a “Schutzschrift” had been filed which is an application blocking the State from changing the custody status of the children without a court hearing first. The ruling of the high court does not negate this block so the children are safe until there has been another court hearing.

The family decided to remove the children from school and continue the fight for educational freedom in Germany. Educating Germany has more on the background and general issues regarding homeschooling in Germany.Technorati Tags: homeschooling, Bildungsfreiheit