Archive

Archive for March, 2011

A Call to Churchillian Action

March 21, 2011 1 comment

If you’re like me, you’re wondering what we have to do as a country to remove putative President Barack Obama from the White House as well as his attorney general, Eric Holder. Millions of rallies, pickets, protests, e-mails, calls, faxes, letters, etc. to members of Congress to either impeach Obama or simply call for his removal due to his all but certain lack of U.S. citizenship has fallen on deaf ears. No matter how much we cry out because of Obama’s countless unprecedented and unconstitutional actions, it seems as if the U.S. House & Senate have become immune to the voices of the American people.

So does that mean we toss in the towel and wait until Nov. 2012 to remove the impostor?  Not on your life!  We may not even have a country by then and I do not say that lightly. It’s almost beyond arguable that the actions of King George and his British armies prior to our nation’s founding pale in contrast to today’s constitutionally dubious president.

There are two things we absolutely must do on a daily process while the political process (and our prayers) plays out.  First, we must recall some of Winston Churchill’s most notable quotes such as, “Never, never, never give up”, “If you’re going thru hell, keep going” and “We shall never surrender”.  We must be in this to win.  We cannot even entertain the thought of losing.  Our country is literally at stake.

Second, we would do well to look to the Good Book for guidance, like Luke 18:1-8.

1And he spake a parable unto them to this end, that men ought always to pray, and not to faint;

2Saying, There was in a city a judge, which feared not God, neither regarded man:

3And there was a widow in that city; and she came unto him, saying, Avenge me of mine adversary.

4And he would not for a while: but afterward he said within himself, Though I fear not God, nor regard man;

5Yet because this widow troubleth me, I will avenge her, lest by her continual coming she weary me.

6And the Lord said, Hear what the unjust judge saith.

7And shall not God avenge his own elect, which cry day and night unto him, though he bear long with them?

8I tell you that he will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?

Vs. 1 instructs us to pray and not faint, or in other words, not to give up.  While the premise of this scripture is to continually seek and petition the Almighty for answers to our prayers, the analogy Jesus describes is the one we should look to in a political sense. However, it is imperative we do not forget God and Christ throughout the process for without staying attached to the Lord, we can accomplish nothing (John 15:5).

Verses 2-5 in our vernacular could be construed (though it has yet to occur) in our modern day to be the equivalent of asking America’s courts to hear the merits of the dozens of lawsuits challenging Obama’s constitutional credentials to be president.  The suits continue to be filed and the cases continue to be dismissed without full hearings.  It’s tempting to give up because the system appears to be rigged.  But we mustn’t do so.

Perhaps that is how the abused woman in this parable felt.  There’s no justice anywhere.  Yet she continually pounded the judge’s chambers to hear her out and eventually he waved his own white flag because he was tired of being pestered. As a result, as the scripture says, he gave her the justice she sought.

Then the Lord reminds us in vs. 6 that the judge who rendered his verdict was “unjust”. And boy, do we have enough of them in today’s courts or what?

It is important in our prayer times (for those of us who know Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior) to “never give up”, even when things seem bleak.  It is, however, also important to be reminded that God does not always say YES to our prayers.  He sometimes says NO or tells us to wait or He may answer in an entirely different manner. But it’s vital to never surrender in on our prayers, unless the prayers are totally contrary to the nature of God.

In the same way that we petition to God we must petition Congress continually to begin the constitutional process of removing the putative president.  It appears that no matter what Obama is doing, Congress either ignores it or explains it away.  A willing failure to secure America’s borders, suing a state that chooses to do so and thus protect its citizens, publicly refusing to defend the lawfully enacted Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and now going to war in Libya sans congressional authorization are all impeachable offenses.

We don’t know what it will to take for the U.S. House and Senate to agree that Obama has committed constitutional atrocities that warrant his removal.  If refusing to defend our borders, our marriage laws and refusing to heed Congress before firing strikes on a foreign nation do not qualify as impeachable in the minds of our elected men and women, we don’t know what will.  But that does not mean we quit.  Yes, it’s terribly distressing for those of us with a keen sense of the obvious. Yet we must regularly pray to the Almighty for our protection and for Congress to do its job. We pray, petition our elected senators and representatives and repeat – every week, every month – until Obama is gone.

For sure this will be tedious. But like the poor woman Jesus described, we don’t abandon our constitutional obligation.  We must persist until Congress says YES to the American people. And if we lawfully hassle them enough and show them the monumental proof that our likely illegitimate prez warrants removal, then they may act.  To put it in the late Edmund Burke’s words, Congress may not see the light they have felt the (intense) heat.

Only then would Churchill likely be proud.

Advertisements

Congressman King: No Need for Hearings on Islamic Extremism

March 13, 2011 4 comments

The list of individuals lining up to attack Rep. Peter King’s decision to hold hearings on so-called “Radical Islam” is far and wide.  From Muslim “crybaby” Congressman Keith Ellison to Texas Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee to the sheriff of Los Angeles to hip hop model Kim Kardashian to leftist ministers to the effervescent whiners and terrorist sympathizers at the Council on America-Islamic Relations, it appears folks from all folks of life and politics are ganging up on the New York Republican for this supposed stigmatic decision.

And you know, perhaps these folks are right.  Maybe this was an unnecessary move on the part of Congressman King.  Maybe there was no need to hold these hearings.

Yeah, the more I think about it, the more I agree.  What a waste of time and money it was to call CAIR and other Muslim groups and individuals for something that has already been known for well over 14 centuries.  Let’s go straight to the “good” book to find out.

Koran (4:89)“They but wish that ye should reject faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing: But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah. But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks.”

Koran (5:33)“The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement”

Koran (5:51)“O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.”

Koran (8:12)“I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them

Koran (9:5)“So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them.”

Koran (9:23)“O ye who believe! Choose not your fathers nor your brethren for friends if they take pleasure in disbelief rather than faith. Whoso of you taketh them for friends, such are wrong-doers

Koran (9:29)“Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.”

Koran (9:30)“And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!”

Koran (33:60-62)“If the hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease, and the alarmists in the city do not cease, We verily shall urge thee on against them, then they will be your neighbors in it but a little while.  Accursed, they will be seized wherever found and slain with a (fierce) slaughter.”

Koran (47:3-4)“Those who reject Allah follow vanities, while those who believe follow the truth from their lord.  Thus does Allah set forth form men their lessons by similitude.  Therefore when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners”

Crucifixion, chopping off heads, fingers and feet, slaying infidels, nah, that can’t be radical, can’t it?  Of course not!

Or this most recent “act” of Islamic “kindness”.

So yeah, I agree with Ellison, Jackson and company.  This is not “radical Islam”.  This is mainstream Islam, straight out of the Koran. Look it up.  Or if you want to isolate and check the verses about violence and avoidance of Muslims to non-Muslims, go here.

Oh, but, Nedd, you do know most American Muslims really don’t believe or do that stuff, don’t you?

I suppose.  Perhaps you’re referring to Muslims who don’t know their Koran, right, the so-called “moderate Muslims.”  OK, fine.

But what about those who do? Does the Koran instruct Muslims to kill unbelievers, cut off body parts and crucify them or does it not?  I mean, do these verses exist in the Koran or don’t they?

So depending how you want to look at it, all Muslims are radical.  It all depends on how you want to interpret “radical”.  Most any rationally minded individual would classify crucifiers, beheaders and supporters of such heinous activities as radical.

But if a Muslim is defined as an adherent to the texts of the Koran, then regardless of their knowledge of what their so-called “holy book” contains, they all are radicals.

Or, to put it in oxymoronic fashion, they’re all mainstreamers; thus affirming a saying known in Internet circles, “there may be moderate Muslims but there’s only one Islam.”

So why should Rep. King say that he wants to track down all the radical Islamists who are part of the Al Qaida network?  Should he be concerned about all Muslims?

Oh, but, Nedd, you are a bigot.  You hate Muslims.  You want to stereotype them all.”

Actually the Koran has done a good job of stereotyping without my assistance. I mean, there’s one Koran, right?  And there’s just one Muslim religion, right?  I’m not aware of there being various sects of Islam, unlike Christian denominations like Baptist, Methodist, Lutheran, Catholic, etc.

Let’s take a couple examples of denominations, like the Lutheran and Presbyterian churches.  The Lutheran Church has three different synods: the Wisconsin Synod, the Missouri Synod and the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America (ELCA).  The Wisconsin & Missouri Synods are conservative in their worldviews, opposing same sex marriage and abortion.  The ELCA is more supportive both.  The Presbyterian Church has two synods: the Presbyterian Church of America and the Presbyterian Church USA.  The Church of America, of which the well known Coral Ridge Church of Ft. Lauderdale, FL is part of, is socially the equivalent to the Wisconsin & Missouri Synods.  The Church USA is more in line with the left leaning ELCA.

Both denominations and their factions generally embrace the Bible as the Word of God, even though the left wingers in the ELCA and Church USA stray away from some portions of it.  Both denominations and their factions, as well as others like Methodist, Baptist, Catholic, Episcopalian, Church of Christ, Church of God, etc, generally regard Biblical principles as ones all should live by, though they may have varied interpretations of the Bible.  They all believe in different forms of church government they, based on the interpretations they see in the scriptures.

But we know of only one Islam.  You cannot find in the phone book church headings that categorize Islam into different denominations the way Christian churches are split. You certainly won’t see “Moderate Islam” next to any Yellow Pages ads under church listings on church, umm, mosque doors.

So how are we supposed to interpret Islam?  How is Rep. King supposed to interpret it?  Frankly, he is more or less beating around the edges of the truth.  The fact is all Islam is radical (or “mainstream”) by virtue of the texts in the Koran.

This means all Muslims should be treated suspiciously, especially those we don’t know personally.  After all, who can always tell by an outward appearance that one is a “normal” Muslim?

But, Nedd, there you go again, stereotyping, lumping all Muslims into one basket”.

Sorry, I can’t help that.  Based on what’s written in the Koran, if I were to sit down at the table with a Muslim (actively practicing or not) stranger in one’s home or at a restaurant, what assurance(s) do I have that I won’t be attacked with a butcher knife, ax or similar object because I do not believe in Allah or Mohammed?  How do I know for sure that at any given moment that he won’t suddenly recall a graphic text in the Koran and literally apply it by clubbing me or taking on some other form of violence?

I have no such assurances.  I can’t guarantee that just because I don’t live in a Middle Eastern nation that I won’t be attacked.  The more than ample numbers of Islamic killings here in the U.S. and disproportionate number of Muslim onslaughts (compared to other religions) do not necessarily persuade me that I am safe around any Muslim, particularly those I do not know.

But isn’t Christianity violent?  Doesn’t the Bible sanction killing in the same way you read the Koran?”

Those are two good questions.  As for Christianity being violent, if you want to call it that, about the only claims to that can be made over the last 25 years are the shootings of two abortionists, “Dr.” Barnard Sleppian in 1998 and “Dr.” George Tiller in 2009.  Those murders, while not sanctioned by any God fearing and loving Christian, were strictly targeted at those who killed babies in the womb and not indiscriminately.  You did not hear the words “Jesus Akbar” or something similar shouted prior to the attacks.

However, you will find little, if any, other examples of any murder or attack done in the name of the Christian faith.

Now as for contrasts between the Bible and the Koran, this page will provide some help to your thinking.  But on a strictly scriptural level, may I offer my personal experience as a Christian why any such comparison between the Christian and Islamic text totally fails.

In the strictest of contexts, the Christian scriptures have never advocated violence in any way, shape or form.  This can be stated since the Christian faith is based on the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ as laid out in the New Testament.  But since the Christian faith includes the Old Testament and since Old Testament prophecy predicted the coming of Jesus Christ (or as Jews call Him, the Messiah), we can and should look to the Old Testament, also known as the Old Covenant.

There are indeed passages of violence in the Old Testament that are adequately explained for the average reader.  And there are a few others, such as God’s destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 19 (for deviant homosexual activity, not inhospitality as homosexual groups claim) with fire and brimstone, and passages in Leviticus calling for severe punishment on those engaging in sexual conduct with relatives of one’s family or spouse’s family.

But such should be viewed more in line with the fact that the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob hated sin and when its practitioners did what God told them not to do, they were sometimes met with the fate of death.  God was a pure and holy God and certain groups and individuals met their fate thru their willful disobedience and sin.  Not all sins committed resulted in death.  But some did.  Some of the wicked were punished by the sword and some were struck dead by the Lord.  Why the Lord did what He did back then, I confess I don’t have all the answers.  I admit that.  And many won’t be revealed, if at all, until we get to “the other side” (Heaven for those of who proclaim Jesus as Lord).

However, at no point in the Old Testament do you find any torture on the part of any of God’s people.  You also cannot find an instance of crucifixion.  You do find an instance of beheading in the Old Testament when David slew Goliath; however, the chopping off of Goliath’s head occurred after he was dead, not before.  You also do find an instance of hanging as occurred in the book of Esther.  And yes, there were slayings (by the sword) but again, that should be interpreted as punishment for gross sin and not necessarily because the ones killed were disbelievers in Jehovah God.  God did use the wicked at times (such as Pharaoh and Jehu) to achieve His purposes.  So it is perfectly reasonable to conclude that punishment in the Old Testament was not necessarily for refusal to believe in Jehovah God and that punishments that did occur were for gross sin.

In the New Testament, there are ZERO instances of Christians fighting for jehad.  You will find the slaying of Christian leaders during the Book of Acts as well as John the Baptist’s beheading in the gospels.  But since Jesus Christ paid the price for all sins of all humanity in the New Testament (or New Covenant) by being crucified for us, there was no more need for God to strike down people for their gross sins, to continue to institute human efforts to destroy evil or animal sacrifices to atone for sin.  Jesus paid it all in full!

By contrast, Allah has required for over 1400 years for Muslims to kill those who do not believe in Islam.  The atrocities done in the name of Islam are too innumerable to list here but many are well known, not the least of which was 9/11.  The two religions are diametrically opposed to each other.  The differences are stark and are too many to be named here but if you want a fairly exhaustive list of them, check them out here.

Aren’t there good Muslims, like Dr. Zuhdi Jasser”?

By all human understanding, Dr. Jasser is a fine patriot.  He probably is a person I would enjoy a good lunch or dinner with.  I have no qualms about that.  But he does have a problem.  And that is his faith.  He identifies Muslim groups and organizations like CAIR as radical and political.  And from all signs he has sought to distance himself from them.

As to the faith Dr. Jasser claims to love, as he notes in his testimony to Congress, frankly, it’s hard to see it.  As stated earlier, while there may be moderate Muslims, there is only one Islam.  And I cannot find anywhere on his site or in any quotes or articles of his elsewhere that he repudiates any of the verses like the above ones that cause division and hatred to exist between Muslims and Jews and Christians.

But if Dr. Jasser were to call for any of those verses to be removed, he would be excommunicated as a Muslim. Like the Bible, verses in the Koran warn of those who seek to remove them.  Thus my question is thus this – is Dr. Jasser willing to pay that price?  I certainly cannot see the beauty of the faith he claims to love.

A website that specifically called for divisive verses to be removed, www.reformislam.org, was online for years but a recent search for it now results in the appearance of a portal page.  The site was run by a so-called reformer to the Muslim “faith” but it appears he was either cast out of Islam or no longer believes what he originally penned.

(UPDATE 3/13 10:30 AM – Thanks to my good friend here, we now have the missing page from this courageous individual who said these verses should be excised and invalidated.)

But that aside, notwithstanding Dr. Jasser’s apparent patriotism and love for his version of Islam, it appears that form of religion does not exist.  So while I will not call him out on this matter, I do not feel he can sufficiently reform his religion. Virtually none of these so-called moderates come out and do so. Plus we don’t know what qualifies as moderate.

In the end, I have to come to the conclusion that all Muslims are either hypocrites or terrorists.  They’re hypocrites if they don’t believe in the whole Koran or terrorists if they do.  I see no middle ground.  Thus as much as I may hate to say it, I have to put Dr. Jasser on the hypocrite list since he doesn’t subscribe to the jehad verses in the Koran.

As such, the sooner the public and elected officials come to view Islam and the Koran literally for what it is and that technically all Muslims are potential terrorists, the sooner we will be able to eradicate this problem from our shores.

And if that means deporting all Muslims or asking them to renounce their affiliation to Islam, so be it.  The nation’s safety is more important than their religion since Islam is not the religion of peace but of war and hate, something even the hard leftist comedian Bill Maher agrees with.

Of course I admit this may seem truly radical in the definition of the word but if the public cannot differentiate hypocritical Islam from terrorist Islam, then what are we supposed to do?  We can live with hypocrites. We do every day. But we cannot live with terrorists, meaning those who are literal adherent of every word of the Koran.  The sooner Rep. King and others like him who both have the power and will to put a stop to this can frankly address this critical problem, the sooner our nation will be safer.

Profiling Muslims is absolutely essential to the safety of America.  We may be pilloried and pummeled for this view but there are no terrorist Jews, Christians, Buddhists, Sikhs, Hindus and atheists committing atrocities in the name of Allah and Mohammed.  Groups like CAIR can howl and threaten to sic the ACLU to keep America unsafe but in the end we must profile and view Islam exactly as it laid out in the Koran without a scintilla of denial or we will end up paying a stiff price for not doing so.

Dr. Martin Luther King paid heftily in the 1960s to ensure the conveyance and protection of civil rights for blacks as well as all Americans. The question nearly a half century later is this: is the New York Congressman by the same last name (as well as other members of Congress) willing to pay in the same fashion (if necessary) in order for the right of all Americans to live, let alone be entitled to their civil rights.  Because if we don’t have the right to live, civil rights are moot.  And we may well lose both unless we do the politically incorrect and unprecedented thing and look at Islam and the Koran exactly for what it is.  And if that means purging Muslims from our shores, it must be done.  The right to life comes before liberty, pursuit of happiness and civil rights.  Civil rights means zilch without life. And life and lives will be lost unless political correctness on Islam is buried 6 feet under.

God save America!

Categories: CAIR, Congress, Islam, Koran

What’s with the Westboro Baptist Church?

March 6, 2011 1 comment

Although the current intent of my blog is to continue pushing for Obama’s removal from office (and we will not stop until he’s gone), I want to set aside that just for the moment to comment on the U.S. Supreme Court ruling earlier this week involving the Westboro Baptist Church and a lawsuit against it by a grieving father of a deceased U.S. Marine.  I have followed the actions and theology of this church almost since I first got online nearly 10 years ago (don’t ask me how I first heard about them as I can’t recall) and would like to throw in my personal two cents and more.

I am the son of former Navy dad who served during the Korean War.  My dad did not die while in combat (he later committed suicide from acute alcoholism) but he did serve his country faithfully.  I later received a beautiful naval flag from President Reagan in honor of my dad’s service.  I did not serve myself but suffice it to say that I know a few things about the military.  And I am a huge supporter of our troops, though I have come to question why we’re fighting wars overseas against a 1400 year old religious ideology hell bent on killing those who don’t subscribe to it.  However, that’s a subject for another day.

Although not in the same right, I can and do have the utmost empathy and compassion for Albert Snyder for the loss of his son Matt in combat. I can only imagine what he went thru to know his son paid the ultimate price for his country.  I can’t say I personally know what this father is feeling but I do have a pretty good idea.

However, as much as I feel the dad’s pain (acknowledging President Clinton’s famous words), to be true to the U.S. Constitution, I must concede that the pariahs of Westboro Baptist had the constitutional right to do what it did in protesting, even if it didn’t have (and never will) the moral right to do so.

In all the years the WBC has conducted its galling protests against our deceased men and women in uniform, its members, largely comprised of Fred Phelps and his extended family, have faithfully complied with all state and local laws wherever they have been. They picket on public sidewalks and have never disrupted the ceremonies conducted at churches, funeral parlors and cemeteries.  They have even obeyed ordinances to stand hundreds of feet away from such facilities, though those ordinances are now facing legal scrutiny as a result of the 8-1 high court ruling.  So say what you wish about this church’s obnoxious protests, they aren’t illegal.

Yes, I know I may take some heat from those criticizing my position here, considering nearly every attorney general in America sided with Mr. Snyder.  It almost sounds like I’m defending the ACLU, the one organization that should be on the societal scrapheap and one whose agenda I fought for several years to thwart.

But rest assured I am not.

Although we can’t read into the minds of our Founding Fathers as to what they would think if they were alive today, I daresay they would frown on the actions of the WBC. But knowing their steadfast fealty to the Constitution they wrote, I seriously doubt they would abrogate their fiduciary duty to it.

It’s great to see the public come to the financial aid of Mr. Snyder so he doesn’t plunge into bankruptcy and financial disaster. But he could have avoided it all because in reality, he stood little chance of victory, despite a favorable judgment in a Maryland lower court.

The article in USA Today points out that Mr. Snyder “sued for damages based on the emotional distress Westboro picketers caused him”. Although I’m not a lawyer, I do have a logical legal mind.  And my first thought is this – how does one determine an appropriate sum of money to punish someone or some group based on emotional pain? To me, this is the first sign I knew this case was flawed from the start.  Anytime one has to come to subjective conclusions as to how much money one is due for some intangible action, you know you could be headed for trouble.

For example, if a hospital is sued because its doctors damaged an organ in the course of surgery, the patient is most certainly entitled to have all medically related injuries to that organ fully covered.  Lost time from work and home that would otherwise not be an issue should be fully compensated as well.  These are objective costs as specific monetary dollars come into play.  And even a fixed punitive fine may well be appropriate (provided the bulk of it goes to the patient and not the lawyer.

But how does one properly determine appropriate compensation for emotional damages, often known as “pain and suffering”?  It’s literally anybody’s guess.  One dollar amount may be right for one person; another person may disagree and believe such “pain” should result in more money being given than the first person; a third person may yet have another figure.  Is $5 million, the original jury verdict at the district court in favor of the father, a fair sum for him?  It’s all about what one thinks and feels.

Listen, I am not standing up for these Kansan loose screws. These protests are despicable.  But where does one draw the line?  Was Mr. Snyder forced to watch the Phelps’ clan? Granted, as ABC reported, there was a 30 foot gap between the protesters and the front entrance of the church where Matt’s funeral was being conducted, ”forcing” the family to reportedly use a side entrance.  It’s arguably difficult to escape seeing those nasty signs when you’re just 10 yards away from them.

But unless Phelps members stepped on private property, as much as I hate to say it, and I do, they didn’t do anything constitutionally wrong.  Their presence was obnoxious and noxious, no doubt.  But is $5 million a fair price for obnoxiousness?  That is the question.

It is stunningly shocking that 48 out of 50 attorneys general would go to the lengths they did to write amicus statements in favor of the Snyders.  It’s perfectly understandable to stand with the family.  The moral high road is to do so.  But the higher road is to stand with the Constitution, not withstanding the church’s juxtaposed view of morality here.

Now I said all I said as a born again Pentecostal Christian of over 30 years.  I confess Jesus Christ as my personal Lord & Savior and I know if I were to die today, I would go to meet the Almighty in Heaven because of that relationship.

But on a constitutional level, if this is today’s legal mind of America’s attorneys general, we are in heap big doggy doo.  The proper role for them should have been to not support the church because of its warped view of America and its military, nor Mr. Snyder, but to pray the public obtains a correct understanding of the Constitution in today’s society.  The 48 men and women in this capacity should have taken a spectator’s role and not that of a participant.

https://thatsafact.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/divider_line-1.jpg

Aside from the case, I have wanted for a long time now to talk about my own personal knowledge and understanding of the WBC, perhaps from an angle not previously perceived by the public.  And this court ruling helps pave the way.

It appears something has happened to the WBC website at this time as I am unable to access it to provide details.  Perhaps the site’s web host pulled it after the ruling or after one of the Phelps gang promised to “quadruple” the protests, I don’t know.  If the church can’t get hosting because its most recent host terminated it or if no other host wants to be paid to display this church’s literally hateful message, all I can do is smile. The only concern I have is if the feds had something to do with the site’s shutdown. Otherwise, it’s a great thing.

For the record, if my memory is correct from past visits to the main site, hosting was provided by the appropriately named First Amendment hosting.  We speculate but cannot prove since the site is down that this was (and perhaps still is) the web host.

We tried GodHatesFags.org and .net and both are currently shown as registered and parked by GoDaddy.com (the .com site is registered and parked by DirectNic.com). There are other sites the WBC has registered but I cannot recall what they are except for GodHatesAmerica.com which, like the others, currently isn’t working.

So since the site is inaccessible for the moment, I will rely on my experience and personal knowledge of the group to share with you, my readers.

As I said at the start, I don’t recall how or when I first heard of the WBC (2003 or 2004 would be my best guess) but I soon started finding out who they were.  And without having networked with anyone, I soon began to see how this church’s theology was in conflict with my Christian faith and how I was brought up.

Back then, the church was one to be reckoned with.  It was not because they had a large following.  They had anything but that and still don’t to this day. The church is largely comprised of family members (admittedly they have heed the Lord’s command from the Book of Psalms, “blessed is the man whose quiver is full of them”).  And amongst those members, several of them are attorneys.  Perhaps Shirley is the most recognized of them.  I don’t know who the others are offhand.  Regardless, the fact these folks had the oddest doctrine unlike anything I ever heard did not detract from their astute legal minds.  They do not lose cases.  In fact, I can’t recall one they have lost.  They know their Constitution. They know the 1st Amendment as well as any constitutional expert. They’re not dummies.

And they have collected tidy sums of money for their legal victories.  One I recall was a 1st Amendment victory from the city of Topeka (KS) where the church is located.  I don’t specifically remember what the suit was about except I believe it had something to do with the city’s failure provide police protection during a picket when an outsider instigated an altercation.  The church went after the city and I believe settled out of court for $170,000.  And the Phelps were proud of it, having made a copy of both sides of the $170K check and then posting it online.

Before the Phelps clan started picketing funerals (which had been roughly since 2007 or 08), their main thrust was protesting at any and every facility that was knowingly and publicly promoting homosexuality in any context.  It didn’t matter where and what the specifics were. If the church found out that homosexual perversion was going on anywhere, they made a point of being in attendance.

And anywhere didn’t necessarily just mean the United States.  The Phelps folks protested along the Canadian border.  Since the Canadian government would not permit them to cross their borders, referring the WBC as a hate group (which it most definitely is), they were confined outside Canada’s points of entry. They also went to Sweden and even Australia.  Their legal business made the Phelps gang rich and they spent their money accordingly.

Here are just a few examples where the WBC would go:

  1. Schools, colleges and other venues where the play or film the Laramie Project (it was both) was occurring or where known homosexuals were going to speak
  2. Legislative offices and bodies, city halls, courthouses, preparing to enact or enforce laws promoting civil unions, same sex marriage or hate crimes legislation
  3. Theatres and entertainment centers where celebrity homosexuals (like Elton John, Ellen DeGeneres, Melissa Etheridge) were performing on a given day or night
  4. Churches preparing to either bless civil unions or same sex marriage or conducting ceremonies (legal or not) for those wanting such recognition
  5. Denominational headquarters where talk of approving homosexuality in any form in the denomination was being planned

Say what you want about the church’s message, they are not afraid of carrying it out.

But what is most unfortunate is that with the church being financially “blessed” (and I use that term towards the WBC in an oxymoronic way) is that its members could be going to these above establishments to do a lot of good.  It is certainly appropriate in a proper context to confront practitioners and promoters of homosexual activities.  It’s even fitting on occasions in a firm but loving way to directly warn them of their behaviors; that such invariably lead to pain, misery, disease, death and worst of all, a Christless eternity.

However, to tell people that God hates them, and worse, that they have no hope, is a horrible message to send, let alone completely unbiblical.  If God hated the world, He would have never sent Jesus Christ to the cross to die for our sins and theirs.

Yes, God does hate sin and He hates the acts avowed homosexuals commit. Homosexual activity was the only sin in the Bible (Gen. 19) met with punishment by fire and brimstone.  And seducers of children into it (or for that matter, any activity that keeps a child from knowing his or her Creator) potentially face the wrath of God (Matt. 18).

But to never give anyone the option of leaving this lifestyle (or any other sinful activities) runs contrary to the scriptures and the heart of God.  And yet that’s what the Westboro Baptist Church does. They lump pretty much all America and the world with the sinners.  In other words, the Phelps clan believes that we are all responsible for other people’s sins.  It contradicts scriptures like in Ezekiel 18 about the father not being responsible for the son’s sins and vice versa as well as Romans 14 about each person solo being accountable to God for their sins of commission and omission.

Yet this has been the WBC’s theme across so many of their press releases.  For example, in the fall of 2003 when the Episcopal Diocese of New Hampshire chose to ordain an avowed homosexual minister to be bishop, the WBC stated in one of their releases that all Episcopalians are headed straight for hell with Gene Robinson.

And in some of their other releases targeting Catholic churches, the Phelps folks boldly state that all Catholics are going to hell with their fag priests.  This runs very contrary to scripture.  All one has to do is go check out Revelation 2 & 3 and read what Jesus said to the apostate churches as Pergamos, Thyatira and Sardis.  The Lord had read indictments to the church leaders and congregations but singled out those who were not caught in their corruptions.  There is no way one can honestly read those verses otherwise.

A few months after I began getting acquainted with this church, I wrote to it at an e-mail address posted at their website and asked the people there how they could reconcile this blatant doctrinal error.  I had received replies from two of their members but one of them, Shirley, one of Pastor Fred’s daughters, exchanged several e-mail chats with me (the name of the other escapes me) before I reluctantly concluded that I could not persuade them of their errors.  I pled with Shirley to show me where their views were scriptural.  She couldn’t except to engage in name calling. So suffice it to say that her responses were terse, angry and with twisted use of the scriptures (see II Pet. 3:16 which refers to people who do this kind of stuff).

I wish I had saved the chats for everyone to see but unfortunately I didn’t.

Virtually every press release had these words on it (the press releases for the homosexual protests before they began targeting the military:

WBC to protest ….. in religious protest and warning.  God is not mocked.  God hates fags and fag enablers.  God hates so-and-so…… blah, blah, blah.

This is a horrible message to send.  It gives those who are trapped in the homosexual lifestyle no help.  And it gives more ammo to the radicals and others on the left to condemn Christians and to pressure lawmakers to clamp down.

And if that isn’t bad enough, the church’s website reminded its visitors on a daily basis how many days Matthew Shepard is supposedly in hell.  There was also a list of days a California lesbian who died some years ago in a freak incident with a dog is allegedly in hell.  They may well be there if they rejected Jesus Christ.  But only God knows their hearts – who knows, they could have confessed Christ as the moment they were about to leave this life. Regardless, the constant condemnation is something no bonafide Christian would ever do.

The church essentially believes “once a sinner, always a sinner”.  No hope, no help, no change.  It’s an extreme form of Calvinism which I believe many of its adherents reject.

This makes you wonder if the Phelps members have a genuine relationship with Jesus Christ.  Only God really knows but all signs point to just the opposite.  I had tried addressing this in my online conversations with Shirley, all without success.

If the church had even an iota of compassion, it would adopt the principles and actions embraced by one of the most fabulous pro-life groups I have ever encountered.  I am referring to David Bereit, National Director of 40 Days for Life, his assistant Shaw Carney and a vastly growing network of motivated pro-lifers.

David, who founded the organization and helps run the website and its action network, is one of the finest individuals I’ve ever encoutered.  Although I have not met or spoken with him personally, I have had several e-mail chats with him and have watched his videos.  He’s a bonafide born again Christian with the heart of God for the unborn and mothers considering abortion.  His credentials (he originally came from the venerable American Life League) and character can be summed up in one word: impeccable.

David and his 40 Days have a mission which began as a once a year project in 2007 but now occurs twice annually.  That mission comes from passages in the Old and New Testaments whereby God used a 40 day period to achieve the miraculous, which includes saved babies, persuaded moms and even ex-clinic workers. This group goes out 40 consecutive days to abortion clinics across all 50 states (and now even outside U.S. borders) to pray, hold signs and when the occasion arises, witness and counsel to those preparing to enter the clinics as well as those who work in them.  From what this observer has seen, this project has had more impact than any other planned pro-life activity with the possible exception of legal victories gained.  And proof of its impact shows in that abortion clinic personnel have become terrified at the successes obtain.

And it’s all done well within the context of the law and the fact it has never had any legal trouble is a testament to the character of the young Mr. Bereit and his army of pro-lifers.

Here’s a great write up on 40 Days and what it does.  It is the antithesis of the WBC and their God Hates Fags motto.  If the Phelps folks ever decided to adopt and implement the heart and soul toward the homosexual that David and his great legion of pro-lifers do toward pregnant women considering abortion, the continually propped up three legged table that that agenda sits on would rapidly collapse.

It certainly is appropriate to speak out against the homosexual agenda and those who are pushing its evil to cover America.  It is important to take firm and even aggressive stands when necessary.  But it is thoroughly wrong to stereotype everyone in it as collaborators. Those trapped in it but seeking help must have access to all appropriate useful resources.  Condemning them is completely wrong and hurts the cause the same way attacking abortionists and clinic workers does.  Thankfully such is virtually non-existent in the pro-life movement.  This must be the same attitude reaching the homosexual.  The lifestyle is tantamount to seeking an abortion.  It’s a dead end wrought with heartache and sorrow and nothing redeeming.  But homosexuals need the love of God applied in the same fashion as to pregnant women going to the abortion mills.  The WBC fails miserably at it.

So as such, let me close by asking this – is there any group across America who, like the WBC, will picket and protest at facilities promoting the homosexual agenda and speak out against it?  And at the same time, is there any group across America with the financial means to do what the WBC should be doing if it was true to the Lord’s call.

If there is, I want to know about it.

I intentionally did not want to emphasize the WBC’s more recent calls to picket the funerals of those who died in battle or otherwise.  I feel covering the court ruling and understanding of what this awful church does in that regard more than enough explains their mission in America.  It is a dastardly one that has no place in decency.  The church may have the 1st Amendment on their side to do what they do but it has the American people squarely against it.  I defend their right to do what they do.  But their actions are defenseless.

The military has been under fierce moral assault by Barack Obama and his cadre of leftist buds working to make girly men out of our finest men in uniform as evident in the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.  The forced homosexualization of our troops is frightening and dangerous.  The calls to increase perversion in our armed services by allowing cross dressers and transsexuals to serve are even more troubling, let alone repulsive.  Obama’s agenda must be abruptly halted.  This is where the focus of the WBC should be, not the men who wear the uniform and pay the ultimate price, even if the wars are not justifiable.

But since the WBC focus is elsewhere, who will step up to the plate and be the equivalent of 40 Days of Life for the homosexual agenda?

https://thatsafact.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/divider_line-1.jpg

P.S.  When I began writing this article on Friday, as I noted at the start, the WBC website was for some reason inaccessible. As of yesterday morning (Saturday), someone was apparently hacked into the website or otherwise accessed it as a gay porno site had appeared when typing in GodHatesFags.com.  But by yesterday evening, the porno site was removed. Since then, typing in the above comes up with literally nothing.  So it appears the church’s site is still down or its hosting has been terminated with no one to pick up the slack.  That’s fine by me.  As I said earlier, as long as government isn’t censoring free speech, I’m all happy to see the church’s hate message be gone.

For now, good riddance!

Oh, if you want that relationship with Jesus Christ that I have, along with God’s eternal piece, look no further than here.

What We Must Do Now

March 4, 2011 1 comment

On the heels of my previous post, which has generated a lot of attention (though not so in terms of petition signatures and letters to Congress, according to personal info relayed to yours truly), a fairly new contact of mine offered a suggestion as to how to up the ante on calling for the impeachment of America’s putative president and Attorney General Eric Holder.  I think it’s an outstanding one which should be implemented at once.  Without further adieu, let’s go.

This individual, who shall remain anonymous except to say she is a patriotic woman, suggested We the People being organizing en masse outside each and every local office of every Congressman and woman throughout the nation.  Considering that not too many folks have the time and money to travel and stay in Washington until Barack Obama is (hopefully) forced out of office, this appears to be the best alternative and perhaps even more effective than going to DC.  If all 435 offices (minus the couple current vacancies) of our Congressmen and women (and we may include all 100 U.S. senators as well) was manned from Monday thru Saturday every week with signs and calls for the removal of our usurper president, the media would not be able to ignore the impeachment calls as they are largely doing so now.  And of course, neither would Congress.

This would have to be a consistent operation.  While having a mass turnout at every office is ideal and something we should strive at, the seemingly more pressing concern would be to have at least bodies out on a daily basis.  In other words, it would be great to have 100 men and women outside of every local congressional and senate office. However, it would be better to have 10 of them 6 days a week, than, say 100, three days. Consistency is what is needed, though numbers are also essential.

This would strictly be a grassroots effort without some big name organization wanting to lead the way.  It must be run by We the People.  However, organization in terms of putting together individuals and groups wanting to participate is very necessary.

Although this is just for starters, my theory of an organizational flow chart is as follows:

  1. We would need 50 state coordinators who would oversee operations in all 50 states.  Although I have not decided whether we should include senate offices at this time, since senators only conduct trials after impeachment are approved, for the moment we will proceed with just the 435 members of Congress.
  2. Underneath these coordinators will be local coordinators who will be assigned (geographically speaking) to a member of Congress.  The local coordinator will oversee sign and picket operations with that Congressman or woman.  He or she will be encouraged (but not required) to establish a relationship with a person or persons working for the particular lawmaker.  It may be especially difficult to do so with a liberal Democrat.
  3. State coordinators in states with one legislator representing the entire state (Vermont, Delaware, N. Dakota, S. Dakota, Montana) will be local coordinators as well, however, they will be able to select individuals underneath them to represent individual district offices.  This is necessary in both Dakotas and Montana since they are geographically speaking large states.  It will be at the coordinator’s option in Delaware as it is a tiny state geographically, though there are three district offices. It will be necessary in Vermont as there is only one district office for its one rep.
  4. Local coordinators will have individuals underneath them if the Congressman or woman has more than one office in his or her district.  If the district has only one office, then the local coordinator obviously represents that district.
  5. Information as to locations of district offices as well as other contact info for each of the members of Congress can be found here.  Although I haven’t counted how many offices there are altogether, it is somewhere in the range of 1000-1500.  So this will be a massive operation.

Anyone interested in being a state or local coordinator or someone willing to work under a local coordinator (if applicable) should reach me at the234project@rocketmail.com.

This operation must be peaceful but firm and determined and it must be consistent.  We will hopefully arrange for impeachment and other signs to be held outside these offices for public awareness; however, individuals and groups may (and are encouraged to) bring their own signs as well.

Messages on signs cannot be physically threatening in any way.  They can and are encouraged to be strong in content but foul language will not be permitted.  The pickets and signs will create public awareness as to what Obama is doing to America and will hopefully spur drivers and other passersby to participate.  The message on the signs, for those bringing their own, must somewhere state the need for Obama to be impeached or otherwise removed from office.  It can state reasons for his removal but it must signal a call for removal, bottom line.

We need to get things going soon as the longer we wait, the more we risk losing our country.  We need to put the fire to act in our elected men and women.  There is private talk of impeachment in some respects.  But we need to stand up for America and insist that Congress do its duty to the Constitution and the American people.  It likely won’t occur without us doing the legwork (literally).  Let’s get the ball rolling now.

Contact me at the above e-mail address with any questions, suggestions or comments.