The Trump Wars

John McNaughton artist:  One Nation Under God

Lately, this blog has turned into a forum that might be renamed, “how to lose friends and not influence people.”

The battles going on between the pro-Trump and anti-Trump groups are often vicious.

At this blog, I have tried to keep blogging friends that may disagree with my personal position regarding Trump, but it appears that some will not accept such a position, so they choose to just tell me that they are “outta here.”

Well…that’s OK I guess.

It saddens me, but that’s life.

During election season, blogging friends may come and go so I just have to accept that fact.

Since this blog is a “little fish in a big pond,” I don’t seem to suffer the same amount of consequence as those bloggers who have a huge audience and large following.

Ran across the following post this morning, and the author shared her heart-felt opinions about Trump and why she could no longer stay with two sites that she was once involved with.  I haven’t even visited such sites, but I do understand the sentiment that she shares regarding those who viciously attacked her for her beliefs regarding Trump,  as well as her disdain for the pro-Trumpeteers who choose to turn into vicious animals and denigrate a famous conservative like Trevor Loudon.

Well, I’ll offer her post in order to let readers see how the Trump wars affect those who do not wish to support him for president.

~ Christine

*******

Many of my readers have noticed that suddenly I am no longer with the USA Transnational Report and that I have departed the Watcher’s Council. I felt I should let you know what is going on and to assure you that I am going nowhere and am in the fight for the long haul.

I’ve spent much of the last couple of weeks mulling over events related to my stance on Donald Trump.

I am appalled at the rancor and abusive tenor of some of the remarks that have come my way, as well as what amounts to slander of the character of a good and decent man, a fighter who has, quite literally, given up everything to save the country he has adopted as his new home – Trevor Loudon. I find this unconscionable.

I really cannot stand idly by as capricious accusations impugn the foremost researcher and subject matter expert on topics relating to communist and socialist subversion and corruption of our system of government, while a vile, unprincipled, arrogant, ego-maniacal narcissist is held up as the nation’s “last best hope” after a campaign devoid of any ethical foundation, fraught with pandering and ironic contradictory promises, espousing positions exactly opposite those he has spent decades and hundreds of thousands of dollars supporting, offering not so much as a pivot point or epiphany to account for his positional gymnastics.

In the beginning, I really wanted to like Trump. I was willing to accept a Trump nomination if it afforded us an opportunity to finally rid ourselves of the brazen, unindicted felon running on a platform largely constructed of “it’s my turn” and promises to eliminate at least two amendments from the Bill of Rights. As much as I wanted a man such as Ted Cruz, whose loyalty was pledged to the Constitution, a man whose vision was a reduction of the D.C. leviathan, a man — the only one in the field — with an actual track record of standing before the Supreme Court and defending that same Bill of Rights, I was willing to accept the Reality TV Ego if he could deliver a victory which did minimal damage to Constitutional principles.

As the campaign wore on and the veneer of civility peeled away, as incitements to violence, along with slander and outright lies became a staple of the bully rhetoric, I found myself struggling increasingly with the compromises needed to accept the man whose ego was as “HUGE!” as his promises to make the “smartest” deals and compel people and nations to comply with his wishes.

Finally, as the mask fell away completely, he chose not just slander, but suborned false witness to be parlayed into outright character assassination of his opponent’s family. And in that moment the amoral monster emerged, and my ability to justify supporting him, at all, was at an end. Winning was all that mattered, and if wrecking a few reputations and leaving a few metaphorical corpses by the wayside was what it took, then the means was justified if it obtained the desired ends.

I cannot, in any conscience at all, support a man who conducts himself in this way. All decency has fled, all civility has crumbled, and all that’s left is the grinning façade of the godfather-in-waiting as he “apologizes” that it was nothing personal, just business, you understand.

And yet, when one of the world’s foremost researchers of the vectors of communist/socialist/fascist corruption and subversion in our government dares make mention of the presumptive nominee’s ties to a hostile regime, the response is open hostility, bordering on threats.

It has become clear that dissenting opinions are also unwelcome in many “conservative” forums and that, in matters of Trump, it is best to fall in line.

I have spent much of the last several days dealing with all manner of logically fallacious arguments why I should abandon my principles and join the Trump Train, ranging from red herrings and straw men to ad hominem and veiled threats. It seems that many have mistaken my allegiance as belonging to the GOP. Let me put that to rest. My allegiance is not to a man, neither to a party. My allegiance is to the Constitution. My allegiance is to Liberty. My allegiance is to what is right and morally/ethically sound.

I do not owe my allegiance to a man or to a party, nor to the victor of a contest fought without honor. Do not presume to tell me what I must do or what I shall do. Do not tell me I am not “conservative” because I do not follow a man who is anything but conservative. One of the fallacious arguments I’ve seen is that I “must help present a unified front” to meet the threat of the Femme Felon in November. Really? I must, must I? Alright, persuade me. Convince me. Make a clear and principled argument. Show me the money.

To date, all I receive are demands, assertions, insults and threats. What utter tripe! Appeal denied. I reject your demands, your assertions, your insults, your threats — veiled or not.

Further, I reject the slander of a man with whom I’ve worked — literally thousands of hours over most of a decade — to expose the external and internal threats to our nation. Trevor Loudon is one of the most honorable and brilliant men I have ever had the honor of knowing.

I find this comportment beyond the pale. I am saddened and angered that I must now decide to endure this travesty so that I might continue to enjoy the company of people for whom I have great fondness and respect, or to sever myself from various groups, risking thereby the loss of such valued associations.

I was therefore compelled to take my leave of both the USA Transnational Report and the Watcher’s Council. For those of you who have provided friendship and camaraderie, reasoned discourse and balanced discussion, opinion and counterpoint with civility, I wish you the best and hope for your prosperity. I would be pleased to continue our association. Above all, I remain a Constitutional Conservative and the Constitution and our founding principles are what I fight for… not the Reality TV of the presidency.

In that spirit, I remain faithfully yours,

Terresa Monroe-Hamilton
NoisyRoom.net

Next, I would like to share two insightful comments posted in the previous thread by Black3Actual:

Christi,

1. Trump IS drawing heavily from Democrats. No one is paying attention to the numbers, but they are there. In fact, exit polling shows that, had the early primaries been closed, Trump would have lost and we would most likely have Cruz. This is because the open primaries pushed Trump over the top with Democrat cross-over votes. The polls indicated it was a sizeable number, too.

Now Trump is openly courting Democrats — just like he said he would during the campaign. Again, no one bothered to listen. If they had, they would have heard Trump tell people he was playing a role and, once he had the nomination, he would change. He has also said he looks forward to “making deals” with the Democrats and that he will probably even have Democrats in his cabinet — maybe even as his VP.

No one is listening!

Here is where Beck has — once again — demonstrated that he has his finger on the pulse of WORLDLY matters. Beck expressed a concern for all of this months before, and now we see it coming to pass. Beck is no prophet, he just knows to watch the numbers and take people at their word. This is why Beck — just today even — said that the ‘Conservative/Christian” vote has now been pushed into the same corner in the GOP as black voters have been pushed in the Democrat party. We are both being told to sit down, shut up and vote as we’re told because we have nowhere else to go and, if we do not obey, the other side will win.

Well, last time I looked, when two bad choices are running, no matter what you pick, bad wins. This is all I have been telling people — this, and there IS another choice. We have a pen and a write-in blank on our ballots. USE THEM!

2.  Let me try to sum up why people are afraid of Trump with the words of Cicero:

“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear. The traitor is the plague.”

Now, it is not that Trump is a traitor, but a Democrat inside a Party that MISTAKENLY believed it was ‘Conservative.’ With Trump — a self-admitted liberal — with Trump as the presumptive Republican nominee, the enemy is inside the gates.

Now, what patriot that loves his nation (beliefs) would NOT sound an alarm when he noticed the enemy is inside the gate? Better yet, what patriot would see the enemy inside the gate and, rather than warn them, tell their fellow countrymen to ignore him and focus on the enemy still outside the walls?

Tough as it may be, we are faced with having to defend in TWO directions. But then, the Lord likes to put you in impossible situations. If you turn to your own efforts to save yourself, you are doomed. But, no matter how bad it looks, if you turn to and trust in him, He will save you. It’s just that He likes to save us at the last possible second and in the most unlikely ways. But this is so, when he does save us, no one can question that it was God Who saved them!

So, as for me and my house, we will trust in and rely on the Lord, knowing that, no matter what happens, He has a plan and that His will shall be done!

Amen!

Hat tips:

Terresa Monroe-Hamilton at Noisy Room
Black3Actual at Oil For Your Lamp

Kim Davis Released From Jail

“I never imagined a day like this would come, where I would be asked to violate a central teaching of Scripture and of Jesus Himself regarding marriage. To issue a marriage license which conflicts with God’s definition of marriage, with my name affixed to the certificate, would violate my conscience. It is not a light issue for me. It is a Heaven or Hell decision. For me it is a decision of obedience. I have no animosity toward anyone and harbor no ill will. To me this has never been a gay or lesbian issue. It is about marriage and God’s Word.”

Kim Davis has been released. And the two commenters here (who have bashed her personal failings in the comment section of my previous post) should read the true story about this brave woman!

In Perspective: Kim Davis – State Criminal? Church Discipline?

Excerpt:

THE SUPREME COURT AND THE LAW OF THE LAND

The first reason is to confront a legal fallacy. It is commonly believed that the opinions of the Supreme Court are the “law of the land.” This mantra is constantly trumpeted by the media, the pundits, the commentators and the administration of President Obama. Nine unelected, though elevated, justices do not “make the law of the land” in our system of government. The law of the land—the Constitution—is supreme in the United States, not the Supreme Court. And the Constitution can only be changed by the people through elected legislators at the local, state and federal levels, not the judiciary at any level. Governors and Presidents execute the law established through elected legislators. The Supreme Court renders “opinions” on cases it hears, but it does not create law. If this delegation of duties is not observed then the warnings of Thomas Jefferson concerning the inevitable tyranny of the judicial branch will be a reality, as even James Madison, the architect of the Constitution, eventually admitted could happen!

In a word, SCOTUS is an arbiter of the law. To make this clearer, they are umpires. Umpires do not make the rules, they make ruling judgments, which may or may not be right. So it is with SCOTUS. And like any other umpire, they can, and have been wrong. Sometimes with catastrophic effects these nine justices have historically made rulings and issued opinions which were politically shaped, but legally and Constitutionally devastatingly wrong. Thankfully in some cases they were rightly challenged by citizens and elected officials in the history of our country. For brevity’s sake, here are just two politically and culturally shaped, but Constitutionally and devastatingly wrong opinions.

1. Dred Scott – (Oct. 1857) a slave was less than a person without unalienable rights.
2. Roe v. Wade – (Jan. 1973) Legalized homicide of a baby in the womb for any reason at any time.

Mrs. Davis is right to challenge the Obergefell wrong ruling/opinion as others challenged such legal fabrications in the past. Many in the North and South as citizens and government officials challenged the Dred Scott opinion. If more had done so, there is a good possibility that 700,000 lives in a fratricidal Civil War might have been avoided, and racial hostilities still plaguing this nation might have been rightly addressed. Although Roe v. Wade eventually has been challenged with legislative, ministerial and civil disobedience initiatives, the fact is 57 million plus annihilated lives might have been saved, if citizens, including elected officials had challenged the Roe. V. Wade ruling/opinion from the outset.

Kim Davis is right not to sign and affirm a so-called law affirming “same-sex marriage” with the devastations, sexual anarchy and relational carnage it will bring. Furthermore, she should be commended for not resigning to go quietly away which many would desire. Then admirably she is willing to suffer the persecution of judicial tyranny, thereby forcing a nation to address the Constitutionality of this issue and professing Christians to address it personally. The First Amendment protecting the free exercise of religion (not just the subset of worship), is not forfeited when you become an elected official. As an elected official, she took an oath to uphold the Constitutions of Kentucky and the United States. The Constitution of the United States does not determine marriage laws. Marriage laws are established by the states and the Constitution of Kentucky is clear and unchanged—marriage is between one man and woman.

Looks like the judge in this wrongful incarceration of Davis finally “blinked” on this one. Perhaps he feared tremendous backlash for his stupidity.

When he sought to punish Davis, he must have had delusions of grandeur; thinking that he’s like the king of England who badgered and suppressed the religious rights of the people in his own country, and then when they left to find religious freedom in the colonies, the oppression by the king didn’t stop. Therefore, the Revolutionary War was fought for the freedoms they were being denied.

Incarcerating this woman was a travesty of justice, and that judge knows it. The upcoming rally on Saturday would have continued to show the judge’s error(s) on this issue, so he “decreed” her release.

At the time that our nation was born, after a long, hard-fought and bloody war against the tyrants from England who sent soldiers over to America to kill the colonists into compliance; Benjamin Franklin was asked by a woman, “what kind of government have you given us, sir?” He replied, “A Republic, if you can keep it.”

Our beloved Republic has been on the road to destruction for some time now by the programmed regressives who think their awful policies will lead to some kind of utopia. Their conscientious stupidity, foolish wisdom of the world, anti-God and anti-Christ mindsets, unrepentant hearts, evil intentions, and satanic policies all reveal that they think they know better than God and His Word, the Bible.

One day, they will stand before God at the Great White Throne Judgment and realize how wrong they were. But at that point, it will be too late for them to be redeemed.

How prophetic Franklin was in his answer to that woman during the birth of our nation!

There is still time to turn the tide away from the deceiving spirits of sincere ignorance, sin, evil, death and destruction. I pray that God will continue to see fit to hold us in His loving care during such a time as this.

Hat tip:

In Perspective

The First Amendment guarantees our freedom to practice our faith, and just because she is a public official, I don’t know of any law that says she loses that freedom – Pastor Tom James

Did you read that graphic?  The Constitution states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Where did the Extreme Court get the right to claim that same-sex “marriage” can be made a law by 5 unelected lawyers?

OK.  Maybe you have come to this blog thinking that allowing a made-up-out-of-thin-air “right” to same-sex “marriage” could not possibly hurt anyone?  Well, think again!  Regardless of the way that it was improperly and lawlessly imposed upon all 50 states (remember that at least 35 states had constituents who VOTED to ban same-sex “marriage” – which were all whisked away by the whims of 5 pro-homosexual activists on the Extreme Court) this disastrous decision has placed those who love God, His written Word the Bible, and His Living Word Jesus Christ all in the crosshairs of being destroyed by the radical homosexual agenda!

Don’t believe that this is true and a FACT?  Read all the blog posts where I shared what destroying the true definition of marriage would lead to!

For years, at this WordPress Talk Wisdom blog and previously at my former Talk Wisdom blog, I have been sounding the alarm and warning what would happen to people of faith  (particularly born-again Bible-based Christian believers) if, and when, the fraudulent same-sex “marriage” activists got their way via the courts to change the true, God given definition and over 2,000 year old existence of marriage as being the union of one man and one woman.

Well, we are now seeing the harmful ramifications of that awful, defiant, unlawful, and unconstitutional Extreme Court decision by five unelected lawyers back in June.   It has not only led to Christian bakers, florists, marriage venue owners, etc. being taken to court and fined; but now a pro-homosexual judge decided to throw a Kentucky clerk into jail because she had the nerve to stand up for God and her deeply held Christian beliefs in regards to not issuing same-sex marriage licenses because doing so would go against her religious convictions.

There are many articles out there, but the following one is one of the best that I have read in a long time!  I have included the article (below) in its entirety.

Jesus told us that the closer we get to the end times, the more that we would see the fulfillment of Bible prophecy. He warned us that it would be as in the Days of Noah, and as in the Days of Lot.

Such days are upon us right now!

Look up, for your redemption is nigh…

In Christ,

~ Christine

*******
Cruz rips federal judge’s ‘tyranny’ in clerk’s case.

‘Where is the call for President Obama to resign for ignoring and defying our immigration laws’

GOP president hopeful Sen. Ted Cruz, on Thursday accused U.S. District Judge David Bunning of “judicial tyranny” for jailing a Kentucky county clerk who refused to violate her Christian faith and issue licenses to same-sex couples.

He said those who are calling for her removal from office – she can’t be fired, she can only be impeached if she chooses not to quit – are hypocrites.

“Where is the call for President Obama to resign for ignoring and defying our immigration laws, our welfare reform laws, and even his own Obamacare?” Cruz said. “When the mayor of San Francisco and President Obama resign, then we can talk about Kim Davis.

“Those who are persecuting Kim Davis believe that Christians should not serve in public office. That is the consequence of their position. Or, if Christians do serve in public office, they must disregard their religious faith – or be sent to jail,” he continued. “Kim Davis should not be in jail. We are a country founded on Judeo-Christian values, founded by those fleeing religious oppression and seeking a land where we could worship God and live according to our faith, without being imprisoned for doing so.

“I call upon every believer, every constitutionalist, every lover of liberty to stand with Kim Davis. Stop the persecution now.”

Bunning summoned Rowan County clerk Kim Davis to his courtroom on Thursday after she defied his order to violate her faith and issue licenses to same-sex couples.

Bunning, who previously has ruled in favor of partial-birth abortion and homosexual clubs for high schoolers, said a fine simply wasn’t enough punishment for her and ordered her to jail until she agrees to issue the licenses.

Then he ordered her assistants to either issue the licenses or join her in jail. Five of the six agreed, several under protest.

Bunning later tried to resolve the case by telling Davis to come back to his courtroom and she could go if she agreed not to interfere with her deputies’ actions, according to reports.

She refused.

Cruz said: “Today, judicial lawlessness crossed into judicial tyranny. Today, for the first time ever, the government arrested a Christian woman for living according to her faith. This is wrong. This is not America.

“I stand with Kim Davis. Unequivocally. I stand with every American that the Obama administration is trying to force to choose between honoring his or her faith or complying with a lawless court decision,” he said. “In dissent, Chief Justice Roberts rightly observed that the court’s marriage decision has nothing to do with the Constitution. Justice Scalia observed that the court’s decision was so contrary to law that state and local officials would choose to defy it.

“For every politician – Democrat and Republican – who is tut-tutting that Davis must resign, they are defending a hypocritical standard. Where is the call for the mayor of San Francisco to resign for creating a sanctuary city – resulting in the murder of American citizens by criminal illegal aliens welcomed by his lawlessness?”

Paul Kengor, author of “Takedown: From Communists to Progressives, How the Left Has Sabotaged Family and Marriage,  today “it’s the county clerk, tomorrow it will be the florist, the baker, the photographer, the pastor, and on and on,” warned

“Get ready for the persecution coming near you – all, of course, in the name of ‘love’ and ‘tolerance,’” he said. “This has only just begun.”

Kengor was not surprised by the jailing. He said a moment like this became inevitable as soon as Anthony Kennedy and four other Supreme Court justices declared “same-sex marriage” a constitutional right in June.

“For the apostles of tolerance and diversity, this is what their ‘tolerance’ and ‘diversity’ actually look like in practice,” Kengor told WND. “It is intolerance. It is coercion. It is pickets, boycotts, fines, penalties, demonization, and, in some cases, incarceration. Welcome to the Left’s new America, where those who disagree with the Left’s ongoing invention of new ‘rights’ are penalized by the state.”

Michael Brown, a WND columnist, said the case exemplifies why he wrote his new book “Outlasting the Gay Revolution.”

“There will be a price to pay, but it is only as we stand firm that change will come,” Brown told WND. “Kim Davis is paying a very real price now.”

Prior to her court appearance, Davis told Fox News’ Todd Starnes she was prepared to go to jail for her beliefs, saying, “This is a fight worth fighting.”

She actually stopped issuing any marriage licenses after the Supreme Court’s Obergefell decision so she would not be discriminating against any group.

“This is why the very first principle in the book is ‘Never Compromise Your Convictions’ and the fourth principle is ‘Refuse to Redefine Marriage,’” Brown said. “This is the great moral, cultural, and spiritual test of our generation. Will we do what is right in God’s sight – which is in the ultimate best interests of our society – or will we cave in and capitulate?”

Kengor warned that progressives will be ruthless on this matter.

“Be prepared for something even more shocking from the Left – the lack of apologies and regrets,” he said. “Liberals will defend and even applaud the sight of this woman being hauled off to jail.”

Indeed, hundreds of people outside the courthouse chanted, “Love won! Love won!”

Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee tweeted his support for Davis: “Kim Davis in federal custody removes all doubts about the criminalization of Christianity in this country. We must defend #ReligiousLiberty!” he said.

Brian Brown of the National Organization for Marriage said the fault rests with the Supreme Court, which created the conflict between the enumerated constitutional right of free religious exercise and the newly created “same-sex marriage” right.

“It is outrageous to jail Kim Davis because she does not want to personally be part of certifying same-sex ‘marriages’ that violate her deeply held religious beliefs about the nature of marriage,” said Brown. “What this judge is saying is that now that the Supreme Court has illegitimately redefined marriage, every single person in government if not in the country must stand in salute and participate in the act. That is profoundly wrong and violates the spirit of federal law which provides that the government must seek ways to reasonably accommodate people’s religious views in the workplace.”

He said: “While Judge Bunning is the instrument of the inhumane punishing of Kim Davis, the authors of it are the five justices of the U.S. Supreme Court who illegitimately, without a shred of constitutional authority, redefined marriage without any regard to the profound implications their ruling would have on law-abiding, faithful Americans. With this ruling, the idea of religious freedom that is at the heart of our constitution has been eliminated when it comes to exercising beliefs about marriage. It’s a profound shredding of the constitution on the altar of gay activism.”

Penny Nance, president of Concerned Women for America, said that Davis’ “predicament is the direct result of the lawlessness promoted by the Supreme Court of the United States itself with its unconstitutional Obergefell decision.”

“It’s flippant, and frankly insulting, treatment of religious liberty and Obergefell is a disgrace to that great institution.”

AL.com reported Davis’ lawyer, Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel, said, “While she may be behind bars for now, Kim Davis is a free woman. Her conscience remains unshackled.”

Raw Story reported the White House expressed no concern for Davis or religious freedom, with spokesman Josh Earnest saying: “There’s a rule of law and the principle of the rule of law is central to our democracy. And it’s appropriate in this instance for a federal judge to determine the best way to enforce the law.”

A legislative leader in Kentucky had asked the judge to delay the case until lawmakers could provide a resolution, but Bunning refused. He also refused, according to Davis’ supporters, to provider her due process.

WBKO in Bowling Green quoted one pastor raising a question that Bunning failed to address.

Tom James of Eastwood Baptist Church told the station: “The Supreme Court didn’t make a law, they just interpreted the one that was already on the books. … The First Amendment guarantees our freedom to practice our faith, and just because she is a public official, I don’t know of any law that says she loses that freedom.”

Another pastor criticized her for not following the ruling in her position as county clerk. However, “same-sex marriage” was not the law when Davis was elected.

Hat tip:

WND

Make Calls to Rehear The Marriage Case!

Janet Porter of Faith 2 Action Ministries is encouraging all Americans who believe that natural marriage is God given (has always been and should continue to be only the union of one man and one woman) to make phone calls to Attorney General Mike DeWine (800-282-0515 ) and ask to have the case reheard.

Excerpt:

Rehear the Case

July 06, 2015

 

Are you upset about what the Supreme Court did to marriage? Now, there’s something you can do about it.

We can ask the court to rehear the case because two justices violated the federal law which states, “Any justice… of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.”
[ 28 U.S. Code § 455]

Justices Kagan and Ginsburg both officiated homosexual so-called weddings, which disqualifies them from ruling on the case.

Ask Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine to file a motion for rehearing the marriage case at: 800-282-0515 because it was illegally rendered. Ask him to call for a motion for rehearing the case.

Does THIS look like impartiality to you?

“Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality may reasonably be questioned.”

–28 US code #455 – Disqualification of justice, judge or magistrate judge

Supreme Court Rule 44 allows a party to file a motion for rehearing within 25 days of the June 26 hearing. That means if Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine files a motion before July 29th, the case can be reheard–without Justices Ginsburg and Kagan.

The dissenting justices didn’t want to risk antagonizing the Justices before the April oral argument, but there is no reason to ignore this now. If you read the dissenting opinions, they are scathing–Justice Scalia calls the decision a “threat to American Democracy”–and he is right. Now there is something you can do about it.

Call the number below with this message:

Please file a motion for rehearing the marriage ruling because Justices Ginsburg and Kagan violated Federal law by not recusing themselves.

Attorney General Mike DeWine: 800-282-0515

*******

It only takes four Justices to accept a case.

We HAVE the Four:

Roberts:  “Just who do we think we are?”  “The Majority’s decision is an act of the will, not legal judgment.  The right it announces has no basis in the Constitution or the Court’s precedents.”

Scalia:  “A system of government that makes the People subordinate to a committee of nine unelected lawyers does not deserve to be called a democracy…Thus, when the rights of persons are violated, the Constitution requires redress by the courts.

Thomas:  “…to allow the policy question of same-sex marriage to be considered and resolved by a select, patrician, highly unrepresentative panel of nine is to violate a principle even more fundamental than no taxation without representation:  no social transformation without representation.”

Alito:  “I assume that those who cling to old beliefs will be able to whisper their thoughts in the recesses of their homes, but if they repeat those views in public, they will risk being labeled as bigots and treated as such by governments, employers, and schools.

Five people should not be able to take away the votes of 50 million Americans.

The Motion for Rehearing could literally protect the voter in nearly 40 states, our state constitutions, the institution of marriage, and our Freedom of Speech and Religion.

Think that is worth a call to Attorney General DeWine?  800-282-0515.

 

Never give up! Please help in this endeavor by sharing it everywhere on social media!

Thank you,

Christine

Hat tip: Faith 2 Action.org

John Roberts’ dissent in Obergefell that blow the majority’s opinion out of the water.

Charles Krauthammer appeared on the O’Reilly Factor and explained why America is changing so rapidly.  One reason that this decision is seen by at least 40% (if the polls being revealed are correct) of Americans, which is 128 million of us (if, again, the polls are correct) as wrong is that the judiciary, according to the Constitution, does not have the right to create new law.  Those of us that disagree with this ruling do so for several reasons. The biggest one is the fact that many Americans know that the Supreme Court is not supposed to make new law!  That is what the Legislative branch is for, and the legislatures of each state where making such decisions through the voting process within their states. Thirty of our fifty states had passed laws declaring that the thousands of years old definition of marriage (instituted by God) should remain as the union of one man and one woman.  Unfortunately, liberal judges in the courts started to strike down these decisions.  But several states gained court decisions that upheld the We The People decisions that were voted on within their states.  Was it right to just sweep them away as the Extreme Court did?  No.  Of course not!

The second reason why this ruling was wrong is because two judges who performed homosexual marriages should have recused themselves from this decision.  The third reason why is the chief justice’s dissent which explained why this should not have been done the way that it came down.

Near the end of his 29-page dissent, Roberts registered this strongly worded reprimand:

“If you are among the many Americans — of whatever sexual orientation — who favor expanding same-sex marriage, by all means celebrate today’s decision. Celebrate the achievement of a desired goal. Celebrate the opportunity for a new expression of commitment to a partner. Celebrate the availability of new benefits. But do not celebrate the Constitution. It had nothing to do with it.”

In other words, the Constitution was completely ignored in this case!

But that’s not the only reason for Justice Robert’s dissent in this case. The Federalist provides: Here Are The 11 Most Devastating Quotes From John Roberts’ Gay Marriage Dissent.

Excerpt:

The dissent of Chief Justice John Roberts, however, contains a number of real gems. Here are 11 quotes from John Roberts’ dissent in Obergefell that blow the majority’s opinion out of the water.

On the proper role of the federal judiciary:

[T]his Court is not a legislature. Whether same-sex marriage is a good idea should be of no concern to us. Under the Constitution, judges have power to say what the law is, not what it should be. The people who ratified the Constitution authorized courts to exercise “neither force nor will but merely judgment.

Nowhere is the majority’s extravagant conception of judicial supremacy more evident than in its description—and dismissal—of the public debate regarding same-sex marriage. Yes, the majority concedes, on one side are thousands of years of human history in every society known to have populated the planet. But on the other side, there has been “extensive litigation,” “many thoughtful District Court decisions,” “countless studies, papers, books, and other popular and scholarly writings,” and “more than 100” amicus briefs in these cases alone. What would be the point of allowing the democratic process to go on? It is high time for the Court to decide the meaning of marriage, based on five lawyers’ “better informed understanding” of “a liberty that remains urgent in our own era.” The answer is surely there in one of those amicus briefs or studies.

The truth is that today’s decision rests on nothing more than the majority’s own conviction that same-sex couples should be allowed to marry because they want to, and that “it would disparage their choices and diminish their personhood to deny them this right.” Whatever force that belief may have as a matter of moral philosophy, it has no more basis in the Constitution than did the naked policy preferences adopted in Lochner.

On the constitutional basis for a right to same-sex marriage:

Although the policy arguments for extending marriage to same-sex couples may be compelling, the legal arguments for requiring such an extension are not. The fundamental right to marry does not include a right to make a State change its definition of marriage. And a State’s decision to maintain the meaning of marriage that has persisted in every culture throughout human history can hardly be called irrational.

The majority’s decision is an act of will, not legal judgment. The right it announces has no basis in the Constitution or this Court’s precedent.

The Constitution itself says nothing about marriage, and the Framers thereby entrusted the States with “[t]he whole subject of the domestic relations of husband and wife.”

Stripped of its shiny rhetorical gloss, the majority’s argument is that the Due Process Clause gives same-sex couples a fundamental right to marry because it will be good for them and for society. If I were a legislator, I would certainly consider that view as a matter of social policy. But as a judge, I find the majority’s position indefensible as a matter of constitutional law.

On the natural and historic basis of the institution of marriage:

The premises supporting th[e] concept of [natural] marriage are so fundamental that they rarely require articulation. The human race must procreate to survive. Procreation occurs through sexual relations between a man and a woman. When sexual relations result in the conception of a child, that child’s prospects are generally better if the mother and father stay together rather than going their separate ways. Therefore, for the good of children and society, sexual relations that can lead to procreation should occur only between a man and a woman committed to a lasting bond.

On how the majority opinion basically requires legalization of polygamy/plural marriage:

Although the majority randomly inserts the adjective “two” in various places, it offers no reason at all why the two-person element of the core definition of marriage may be preserved while the man-woman element may not. Indeed, from the standpoint of history and tradition, a leap from opposite-sex marriage to same-sex marriage is much greater than one from a two-person union to plural unions, which have deep roots in some cultures around the world. If the majority is willing to take the big leap, it is hard to see how it can say no to the shorter one. It is striking how much of the majority’s reasoning would apply with equal force to the claim of a fundamental right to plural marriage.

When asked about a plural marital union at oral argument, petitioners asserted that a State “doesn’t have such an institution.” But that is exactly the point: the States at issue here do not have an institution of same-sex marriage, either.

On what our Founders would think about five unaccountable oligarchs in robes deciding what does and doesn’t constitute marriage:

Those who founded our country would not recognize the majority’s conception of the judicial role. They after all risked their lives and fortunes for the precious right to govern themselves. They would never have imagined yielding that right on a question of social policy to unaccountable and unelected judges. And they certainly would not have been satisfied by a system empowering judges to override policy judgments so long as they do so after “a quite extensive discussion.”

You can read the full opinion here.

These eleven points help explain exactly why at least 128 million Americans have the right to also dissent on this decision!  Yet, we are being viciously attacked and demonized by the supposedly “tolerant” leftists on the winning side.  However, two days did not go by before the gay gestapo activists stated their continued goal to destroy our First Amendment freedoms.

When people say “it’s all about marriage equality” or “equal protection” we all should respond with a question regarding that other awful decision on abortion over 30 years ago:

That was another sweeping decision made by the Extreme Court that also took away States rights on protection of babies in the womb.

Back to the topic.

Charles Krauthammer also shared three reasons why America has been in the throes of secularism since Darwin.  He did state that at least our churches are not empty like many churches in Europe.

The secular left realized that it wasn’t going to win in the public square, so they had to go through the culture.  Many parents can no longer resist what is being pushed in the social media, Hollywood, and the rabid progressive push found in non-Christian colleges and universities.

Bill O’Reilly explained why Americans should not be forced to participate in homosexual marriages. There is nothing in the Constitution that allows them to re-define marriage. But that is what they did. Justice Kennedy, in his opinion, stated that the ruling was done to provide equality.  But the consequences of this bad decision go much further! Rush Limbaugh explains it very well!

Excerpts:

Now, that debate’s been shut down because Anthony Kennedy and his four renegades rode in, shut off the debate, and determined, “Right here it is! It’s right there in the 14th Amendment, see? See? It’s right there, that people in this country who are not happy ’cause they’re left out of things have a right to be included in those things, and it says it right there in the 14th Amendment.” It does? “Yeah! Yeah! Yeah! It’s right there.” I don’t see it. “Well, you have to be a lawyer and be thinking like we do to see it. But it’s there.”

A-ha. The same thing that happened with abortion. See, there’s gonna… The culture has now, society has now been roiled and the debate is gonna rage on. It’s not over. It isn’t gonna be over, because never forget this. No matter what victories the left, the socialists, the liberals, the Democrats, whatever you want to call ’em — no matter how many victories they have — it is never enough. No matter how much money they get to spend, no matter how much money they get in benefit, no matter what it is that they demand, it is never enough.

Do you know why? Because when Justice Kennedy and the rest of these people talk about dignity and self-esteem. That’s exactly what’s on the table here. I don’t care if it goes gay marriage to Obamacare. I don’t care what the issue is. The Confederate flag? You’ve got people over there who are miserably unhappy about something, and they believe that getting something — taking something away — from other people will make them happy. And it never does. It’s never enough.

And it’s going to be the case with gay marriage. It is not going to make them feel the way they want to feel. It’s not going to erase whatever baggage they have. It never is. This is not specific to gay marriage. It’s specific to liberals, because their targets, their quests or what have you, are rooted in a void, if you will. I think they’re absent God in many cases in their lives. Not just gays. I’m talking about the global warming crowd. Everybody who denies the existence of God in favor of a different god somewhere over here, it’s not enough.

[In] fact you could almost say, if you study leftists — the welfare state, the benefits state, whatever you want to call it — the more they get, the angrier they become. The more they get, the more unhappy they become. This is something that I have noticed, particularly these past six years. Black America’s angrier than it’s ever been. Various special interest groups on the left are angrier, more unhappy than they’ve ever been, while at the same time we are hearing it’s the greatest week for Obama in his presidency last week.

[So] as I was saying, to “fix” that, you have to take other parts of the Constitution that do exist and deemphasize them or ignore them. Freedom of speech and religious liberty. And I’m telling you, it’s a toss-up which is gonna come first. No, it’s not. Religious liberty. The attack on religion is next, on organized religion. There’s already… I got a couple of stories in the Stack about leftists making an immediate concerted move to remove the tax exempt status from all churches if they will not perform homosexual marriages.

It’s not enough for you out there to say, “Okay, well, the court said gay marriage is legal, fine.” That’s not enough. You must actively embrace it. You must actively support it. You may not oppose it. You may not even dis it. In fact, folks, in Kennedy’s opinion… Get this. In Kennedy’s majority opinion, when talking about religious liberty (this is just so big of him), he grants that people of religious disagreement will continue to have the right of dissent.

But he didn’t say anything about the right to practice religious liberty. Not in this decision. They made all kinds of references — a couple/three — that if you are a deeply religious person, a priest or a pastor of a church, you’re free to dissent, meaning you’re free to tell people you disagree. But you are not free to act on it. In other words, “You can’t deny the constitutional right we just ordained. You can argue against it, you can say you don’t like it, and you’ll be okay. But you cannot practice that. You can not!”

Any person with any semblance of logic, reason, and wisdom can plainly see that important decisions like these are being made outside of what is written in the Constitution. Those on the other side of the issue may have the right to their own beliefs, but they don’t have the right to demonize and punish those who disagree! Our belief in natural marriage – as it was instituted by God – has been a life-long personal and religious belief for me and millions of other Christians. We should continue to have the right to follow the Bible, our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, and our own religious consciences and convictions.

My next post will discuss how and why such moral depravity as this bogus decision is being forced upon Americans and why Bible based Christians recognize such sinful actions as signs of the times pointing towards Christ’s return.

Hat tips to all links.

May You and I Be Found Faithful to the Task

America is now officially within what Jesus Christ warned about regarding the signs of depravity, sin, and evil which would point towards His return.  Jesus said it would be  As In The Days of Noah and As In The Days of Lot.

Joel C. Rosenberg had written a post back in March, 2015, which is entitled, Three existential threats facing America. (My address to the National Religious Broadcasters convention.)

Rosenberg first discusses Ezekiel chapter 33.  It is about the role of the “Watchman on the Wall.”   Rosenberg (as well as I) believes it is deeply relevant to our times.

Joel writes:

More than 2,500 years ago, the Lord spoke these words to the Hebrew prophet Ezekiel.

• A man of God
• Born in Israel
• Exiled and living in Iraq
• Amidst grave dangers rising

What was Ezekiel commanded to do? The text is clear.

• Listen to God
• Watch for threats
• Warn the people, come what may

This was a divine calling – an enormous responsibility. And God was clear. Some would listen to Ezekiel’s warnings. Some would not. Ezekiel was not going to be held responsible for the decision others made to obey the Lord or not. He would be held responsible for obeying the Lord, teaching people the Word of God and warning the people when God told him to speak. Fortunately, Ezekiel was faithful to the task.

As followers of Jesus Christ — and as pastors and ministry leaders and religious broadcasters — each of you are, in our modern times, also watchmen on the walls. In many ways, you have the same calling. The same responsibility.

• To listen to the Word of God, found in the Bible
• To speak the Word of God — to tell people the bad news and the good news according to the Scriptures
• To warn people of threats that are rising
• To speak the truth in love, come what may

God warned Ezekiel — as He warns us today — that if He speaks and we don’t share His Word with others, we will be held to account. What’s more, if we see threats rising, and we do not warn people, we will be held to account.

In the first threat facing America, Rosenberg asks the question:

Threat #1 — What if America is not simply in a season of decline but heading towards collapse, towards implosion?

Within the list of “season of decline” threats we face here in America, he mentions one of the most important factors – the 58 million children in the womb that have been aborted since 1973. That awful Extreme Court decision has wreaked havoc upon the lives of many Americans – especially women! The question is whether or not we, who are called by the name of Jesus Christ will stand in the gap and continue to condemn the evil practice of abortion for the sake of saving this nation from judgment.

Joel writes:

Since 1973, Americans have aborted 58 million babies. Think about that — 58 million. It is a staggering number. And if something doesn’t happen soon to change course, in less than two years we will hit 60 million.

If this happens, we as Americans will have murdered ten times more human beings than the number of Jews murdered by the Nazis.

We know the judgment of God that fell upon Nazi Germany. What do we think is going to happen to a nation that exterminates ten times more people than the Nazis?

The judgment of Almighty God is coming. There is no way out. The souls of 58 million babies are crying out for justice – and they will get it. But for this to happen we need to be pleading with God to have mercy on us. We need to be calling people to prayer, fasting and above all repentance.

At this point in my post I would like to interject another “watchman on the wall” landmark decision which will be coming any day now…perhaps even today, June 26, 2015. The decision on whether or not the Supreme Court of the land will decide to sweep away state’s rights regarding the legality of same-sex “marriage”; and thus change the thousands of years definition that God gave us that marriage is the union of one man and one woman!

Well, the decision has just come down and in a 5-4 vote, the Extreme Court struck down individual state right to ban same-sex “marriage.”

Instinctively, I knew that this would happen. The “deciding” court justice – Kennedy – apparently has a lesbian sister. Who would think that this man would care about the constitutional rights of states to make these decisions? It’s apparently more important to make a decision this huge based on his own personal preferences, rather than what God says in the Bible about marriage; or what our Constitution says about states rights on such decisions.

America is now officially within what Jesus Christ warned about regarding the signs of His return.  Jesus said it would be  As In The Days of Noah and As In The Days of Lot.

Jesus was asked what would be the signs of the times on the earth to indicate his return?

Mat 24:37

“But as the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be.

Luk 17:26

“And as it was in the days of Noah, so it will be also in the days of the Son of Man:

Luk 17:27

“They ate, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all.

Luk 17:28

“Likewise as it was also in the days of Lot: They ate, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they built;

Luk 17:29

“but on the day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven and destroyed them all.

Luk 17:30

“Even so will it be in the day when the Son of Man is revealed.

Luk 17:31

“In that day, he who is on the housetop, and his goods are in the house, let him not come down to take them away. And likewise the one who is in the field, let him not turn back.

Luk 17:32

“Remember Lot’s wife.

Luk 17:33

“Whoever seeks to save his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life will preserve it.

There was an excellent post in my reader last night that explained the dire consequences of a sweeping same-sex “marriage” ruling for all 50 states here in America. I need to find it again. When I do, I will post it here.

Found it!  Here is a copy in its entirety:

IT IS NOT ABOUT “GAY” MARRIAGE!  IT IS ALL ABOUT DESTROYING THE FIRST AMENDMENT!

The Supreme Court is set to decide whether or not there is a Constitutionally protected right to ‘gay’ marriage, but this is not what is actually being decided.  What is really being decided is whether or not rights can contradict.  The goal is to establish that rights can contradict because it opens the door for government to decide which rights take precedence over others.  I have already explained why rights cannot contradict and why.  This then begs the question as to why the Courts would even consider this case about ‘gay’ marriage.  The answer is simple: this is not about rights.  That claim is just propaganda aimed at creating an emotional appeal so you will not use reason to examine what is really happening.  However, if you can set the emotion aside and look at what is actually happening, you will quickly see that this is about giving the government a path to destroy the First Amendment!

The process is simple: if there is a ‘right’ to ‘gay’ marriage, then it suddenly becomes a ‘hate’ crime to oppose ‘gay’ marriage in any form.  This opens the door to the destruction of faith-based organizations.  It will not matter whether they are churches or businesses, they will have to comply with the government dictates or be shut down.  But it goes further than that.  If you are a doctor but disagree with homosexuality, you could lose your job.  Same for lawyers, firemen, police officers: anyone who disagrees with homosexuality will be at risk of government persecution.

You see, what the Supreme Court is actually about to rule on is whether or not the government has the authority to define bigotry and then use that as a justification to persecute anyone who has just been declared a bigot.  This is one of the reasons I write so much about language, both here, but especially on my other blog, The OYL.  If the government is allowed to redefine the meaning of words at will, then it does not matter what the law says: it will change according to the whims of the government.  This is the very definition of tyranny.  Yet, this is what the Supreme Court is about to decide: whether or not the government has dictatorial powers.

If you doubt me, consider this: what happens is someone you disagree with politically gets into power?  And once in power, that person reverses the definitions of words?  And hatred is suddenly defined as anyone who opposes Islam?  It may not bother you that Jews and Christians will still be persecuted, but now, so will homosexuals.  Yes, the court and law will still say you cannot ‘discriminate’ because of homosexuality, but the government will have just put the rights of Muslims over those of homosexuals.  So now, where the law will allow homosexuals to claim their rights over those of Christians, it will also support the rights of Muslims to exercise their rights over both homosexuals and Christians.  Now, just in case you do not understand what this means, I’ll explain: it means Christians will have to either convert to Islam, pay a punitive tax or die.  However, homosexuals only have one option — to die!

There are other scenarios that I could use to illustrate how this will work, but the point is this: it is not about ‘gay’ marriage, it is about opening a path to destroy the First Amendment.  It is about destroying the right to conscience, and by extension, freedom of expression. It is about the Supreme Court finally handing the government dictatorial powers as a matter of law.  But understand, if the Court does this, it will actually be destroying the law.  So this ruling is not about ‘gay’ rights: it is about the final destruction of the U.S. Constitution — period!

H/T: The Road to Concord

After reading that post over at “The Road to Concord,” I was reminded of a post I wrote back in 2010. At first, I was confused about the following photo which was taken in a “World Can’t Wait” protest march. The photo and brief excerpt below (written in 2013) describes what (and why) there is this unholy alliance of Islam and Communism.

Notice that the man holding the sign is wearing Muslim terrorist garb.  The man walking next to him is wearing a commie red t-shirt with the image of Che Guevara!

How ironic that the Muslim man is holding that sign (below)!  Here’s a quote from Che Guevara that may explain their union of nefarious ideologies:

“I don’t care if I fall as long as someone else picks up my gun and keeps on shooting.”

Che Guevara

H/T Brainy Quote

I wish that more Americans would heed Ronald Reagan’s advice:

“How do you tell a Communist? Well, it’s someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an anti-Communist? It’s someone who understands Marx and Lenin.”

― Ronald Reagan

 

What those two men (seen in photo above), marching together, BTW, in an anti-Israel demonstration during the Bush presidential years) represent is the forming of an alliance between radical Islam and Communism!  Also, notice what the sign says:  “Thank You S.F. (San Francisco) Liberals – You Die Last.”  How ANYONE could possibly support either group is beyond any semblance of reason!  Liberals are being USED by both!  Yet they are either complicit in either ideology or just too damn ignorant to realize it!

Only one of these evil and nefarious ideologies will win out (meaning, here on this earth – in a temporary way – while the Lord Jesus Christ tarries) and the bloodbath will be ugly!  With all of this in mind, let’s re-read what  the author at The Road to Concord stated:

You see, what the Supreme Court is actually about to rule on is whether or not the government has the authority to define bigotry and then use that as a justification to persecute anyone who has just been declared a bigot.  This is one of the reasons I write so much about language, both here, but especially on my other blog, The OYL.  If the government is allowed to redefine the meaning of words at will, then it does not matter what the law says: it will change according to the whims of the government.  This is the very definition of tyranny.  Yet, this is what the Supreme Court is about to decide: whether or not the government has dictatorial powers.

If you doubt me, consider this: what happens is someone you disagree with politically gets into power?  And once in power, that person reverses the definitions of words?  And hatred is suddenly defined as anyone who opposes Islam?  It may not bother you that Jews and Christians will still be persecuted, but now, so will homosexuals.  Yes, the court and law will still say you cannot ‘discriminate’ because of homosexuality, but the government will have just put the rights of Muslims over those of homosexuals.  So now, where the law will allow homosexuals to claim their rights over those of Christians, it will also support the rights of Muslims to exercise their rights over both homosexuals and Christians.  Now, just in case you do not understand what this means, I’ll explain: it means Christians will have to either convert to Islam, pay a punitive tax or die.  However, homosexuals only have one option — to die!

There are other scenarios that I could use to illustrate how this will work, but the point is this: it is not about ‘gay’ marriage, it is about opening a path to destroy the First Amendment.  It is about destroying the right to conscience, and by extension, freedom of expression. It is about the Supreme Court finally handing the government dictatorial powers as a matter of law.  But understand, if the Court does this, it will actually be destroying the law.  So this ruling is not about ‘gay’ rights: it is about the final destruction of the U.S. Constitution — period!

Next, go back and read what Joel Rosenberg wrote regarding these two points:

RADICAL ISLAM AND APOCALYPTIC ISLAM

Threat #2 — What if America is not simply at rising risk of attack by Radical Islam but heading towards the risk of annihilation by Apocalyptic Islam?

ISRAEL

Which brings me finally to Threat #3 — What if America is not simply entering a season of strained relations with Israel, but we are heading towards total American abandonment of the Jewish State?

We need to heed Joel Rosenberg’s words:

This is the most dangerous moment in the history of the U.S.-Israel relationship.

What do the next two years hold?

I’m not sure. But this much I know: on top of all America’s national challenges and sins, we dare not also abandon or turn against Israel and the Jewish people. If we do, we will seal our fate with God.

Which brings me back to you — the watchmen on the walls.

Are you warning the nation and the Church of the dangerous road the President has us on vis-à-vis Israel?

Are you mobilizing Christians to love and bless and pray for and stand with Israel and the Jewish people in this critical hour?

CONCLUSION

I am afraid I cannot tell you whether God will grant America a Third Great Awakening and/or raise up a King like Josiah (see 2 Chronicles 34-35) and thus forestall the coming judgment.

I cannot tell you whether the American government will do its job to protect us and our allies from Radical and Apocalyptic Islam before it’s too late.

Or whether the Church will do her job in fulfilling the Great Commission and standing with our persecuted brothers and sisters in the epicenter.

Or whether America and the Church will stand with Israel and bless her and the Jewish people.

All I can tell you is that you and I have been called to be watchmen on the walls.

Our job is to:

• Listen to and study and know the Word of God
• Teach the Word of God
• Watch for threats
• Warn the people, come what may

We are not going to be held responsible if people do not listen to us or to the Word of God. We will be held to account if we fail to speak and act when the Lord commands us to do so.

Much is hanging in the balance. May you and I be found faithful to the task.

 

We need to heed God’s Word even more!

 

1Pe 3:12

For the eyes of the LORD are on the righteous,
And His ears are open to their prayers;
But the face of the LORD is against those who do evil.” [fn]

1Pe 3:13

And who is he who will harm you if you become followers of what is good?

1Pe 3:14

But even if you should suffer for righteousness’ sake, you are blessed. “And do not be afraid of their threats, nor be troubled.” [fn]

1Pe 3:15

But sanctify the Lord God [fn] in your hearts, and always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear;

1Pe 3:16

having a good conscience, that when they defame you as evildoers, those who revile your good conduct in Christ may be ashamed.

1Pe 3:17

For it is better, if it is the will of God, to suffer for doing good than for doing evil.

1Pe 3:18

For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us [fn] to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit,

1Pe 3:19

by whom also He went and preached to the spirits in prison,

1Pe 3:20

who formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine longsuffering waited [fn] in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water.

1Pe 3:21

There is also an antitype which now saves us—baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

1Pe 3:22

who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, angels and authorities and powers having been made subject to Him.

ISIS: The Fourth Reich?

I first heard about this idea via my Word Press reader when I found willisbryanblog: The Coming of the Fourth Reich.

There are certainly connections between Islamic terrorism and Nazism.  Books have been written that document these connections!

[Update: Book excerpt and HT for graphic: HERE]

Today, I received an email from Act for America which linked to the original source of this information which is found at The Daily Mail.com UK.  Upon doing a search with the term “ISIS: The Fourth Reich”  through Start Page, I found over 83,000 results!  Therefore, this story took off like a firestorm ever since it was originally published on March 21, 2015.

Excerpt from The Daily Mail article:

The Nobel Prize-winning author V.S. Naipaul has warned that Islamic State are the most potent threat to the world since the Nazis.

In a hard-hitting article in today’s Mail on Sunday, the revered novelist brands the extremist Muslim organisation as the Fourth Reich, saying it is comparable to Adolf Hitler’s regime in its fanaticism and barbarity.

Calling for its ‘military annihilation,’ the Trinidadian-born British writer says IS is ‘dedicated to a contemporary holocaust’, has a belief in its own ‘racial superiority,’ and produces propaganda that Goebbels would be proud of. 

A long-term critic of Islam as a global threat, he also challenges those who say the extremists have nothing to do with the real religion of Islam, suggesting that the simplicity of some interpretations of the faith have a strong appeal to a minority.

The author of A House For Mr Biswas, who was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature in 2001, is known for his sharp views.

Read it all at The Daily Mail.com UK.

Months ago, Glenn Beck did a story on the desire of ISIS/ISIL to collapse the Sykes/Picot agreement that was created after World War I.

This previous post entitled The 100 Year-Old Agreement You Need to Know About to Understand What’s Driving the Islamic State will catch you up to speed on Sykes/Picot and exactly why such an agreement was made in the first place!

Via Free Republic, I found the following photo with quite a disturbing message!!!

Wow!!!  Notice the date on the illustration! Read the comments there, too. Chilling!

Take note of these two:

To: C19fan

Imagine a world in which the president of the United States is “sympathetic” to Islamic terrorism, who aids, abets and excuses Islamic outrages, and never misses a chance to denigrate the state of Israel.

19 posted on ‎3‎/‎23‎/‎2015‎ ‎8‎:‎54‎:‎16‎ ‎AM by mojito (Zero, our Nero.)

Hmmmm….looks like I’m not the only one who calls “O” “Zero.”

To: C19fan

Obama’s Arab “Spring” is exactly the success he dreamed of.

20 posted on ‎3‎/‎23‎/‎2015‎ ‎9‎:‎02‎:‎54‎ ‎AM by Pollster1 (“Shall not be infringed” is unambiguous.)

Also, for one dollar you can view Glenn Beck’s Armies of Armageddon

Glenn connects the dots between Russia, ISIS, and coming global conflict.

I have shared several links to read, plus a video to view. However, I agree with willisbryanblog when he states that “The Fourth Reich” would most likely go through a name change. No group – no matter how nasty, evil, and filled with terrorism – wants to be “outed” as another Hitler Nazi-type regime. Besides, the Islamic “titles” always have radical Islamic intentions behind them (e.g. “Boko Haram” means “no education” and ISIL means “Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.”  Note: The “Levant” includes Israel!)

Excerpt from willisbryanblog:

One tactic and tool a tyrannical despotic ruler could use was a Nationalized Police Force, sort of like the Gestapo. Another would be a “secret police force”, where one citizen would spy on another citizen and report back on any activity the government thought to be anti-what ever the case may be that day. The most useful tool would be a “national registry”, where all citizens are required to produce their “papers” at the request of some bureaucrat or nationalized police.

Hmmm… I think I recall Ozero stating that America needs a “military-like civilian national security force” of some sort.  Oh yes, Ozero made the statement way back in July of 2008!

Exclusive: Joseph Farah exposes senator’s desire
for military-sized ‘civilian national security force’

Published: 07/15/2008 at 12:00 AM

Read more at WND

Back to willisbryanblog excerpt:

The national registry could be established in many ways, but the easiest is mandatory voting. If everyone that is eligible to vote has to vote, everyone must register. But, even this draconian measure would only net a portion of the population. It would only be a partial list, registry, as only those eligible to vote would be registered, but this would be a huge start. But how to finish the registry? That would be easy in a tyrannical despotic empire. All that would be required is for some bureaucrat in an agency that oversees travel to come up with a requirement for in-country travel papers, an in-country passport. That would only require a triggering event, such as a terrorist attack, even if it were staged. It would then be required for safety and security. The government would say they are only looking for suspected terrorists, and the terrorists would not have an in-country passport. If you are not in possession of one you must be a terrorist.

Ah yes! Ozero more recently discussed the need for “mandatory voting”, until it was found out that it might be raaaacist! [This just can’t be made up people!!! *sigh*] The more proper objection is found at the end of the article:

Fox News reports that Frank Askin, a law professor at Rutgers University, argues:

“I don’t think you can do it in this country because I don’t think the First Amendment would permit it…People have a right to opt out of elections.”

No one can accurately predict the impact of mandatory voting, but any such mandate would be likely to face a constitutional challenge if attempted.

willisbrianblog excerpt:

The Fourth Reich is coming, of that you can be sure. Maybe it is already in existence, though yet early in its founding. When it is fully formed for the world to see it will be given a more sanitized name than the Fourth Reich. There is probably some bureaucrat sitting in an office in the Department of Slogans that is busy working on a sanitized name, while another bureaucrat in the Department of Scams is busy working out the final details of it implementation. The whole thing will come under the control of the Department of Misery, formerly known as the Department of Fairness and Equality.

Like I stated earlier it will not be in Germany, and not in Europe. Where will it be you ask? To that I say stay informed.

Hat tips to all links.

*******

No matter what is happening in this fallen world, there is the hope of Jesus Christ!

How To Know God Personally [Click on link to discover the principles!]

What does it take to begin a relationship with God? Devote yourself to unselfish religious deeds? Become a better person so that God will accept you?

You may be surprised that none of those things will work. But God has made it very clear in the Bible how we can know Him.

The following principles will explain how you can personally begin a relationship with God, right now, through Jesus Christ…

There’s No Place Like Utopia – Joel Gilbert [Important Update]

 

IMPORTANT UPDATE!!!

This morning, the video posted here (and the YouTube one) have been removed due to “a copyright claim by Highway 61 Entertainment.”

Sorry about that!  😦

You can purchase the video at Highway 61 Entertainment for $14.95.

Perhaps the film is also available for rental or purchase on iTunes.

Found this excellent and outstanding film over at another website/blog and the title intrigued me enough to take the time to watch it.  WOW!  It was definitely worth my time!

The film was published on Youtube on Dec 9, 2014.

I would like to encourage readers here to view it!  Then, if you are led to comment (positive, negative, and any views in-between) please do so.  I would love to read your opinion(s) on the content of the film!

Thanks!

~ Christine

*******

Apologies…Youtube video taken down due to copyright issues.

If video doesn’t play here (which, unfortunately, often happens) then please go to the Youtube site to view it:

There’s No Place Like Utopia – Joel Gilbert

Apologies…Youtube video taken down due to copyright issues.

*******

There is a good review over at American Thinker, including a video of the movie trailer (2:23 minutes) and a video of Joel Gilbert discussing the film (11:33 minutes)

American Thinker: There’s No Place Like Utopia

Excerpt:

July 19, 2014

Joel Gilbert’s There’s No Place like Utopia

By Thomas Lifson

Last night saw the premier in Denver of Joel Gilbert’s There’s No Place Like Utopia, a film that gets to the heart of the progressive/communist project for America and where it is leading us. Joel uses the Wizard of Oz as an extended metaphor for the trickery and fraud that underlies the quest to perfect human nature and bring about heaven on earth that Marx promised.

The film is disarming in many ways, for it tackles great intellectual themes, usually the province of dense prose, and uses images and personality to tell the story in a highly accessible way. Readers of American Thinker will be familiar with such topics as the Cloward-Piven strategy, but in There’s No Place Like Utopia, it comes alive, leaping from the pages of The Nation magazine into cartoon characters bearing a certain resemblance to Lego figures. Political philosophy has never been handled quite this way.

It is also a road trip, guided by Joel himself, as he is swept up in a tornado, like Dorothy, and finds himself on a literal yellow brick road, which leads him to explore what happens when politics tries to create utopias. Along the way, he travels to Detroit, Newark, Miami, Washington, DC, Hollywood, Dearborn, Los Angeles Chicago’s South Side and Hyde Park, and Denver, as well as Joel’s hometown of Oak Ridge, Tennessee. We visit the house where Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn live, talk to Michelle Obama’s mother through her closed door at the house where Michelle grew up, and attempt to walk down the street where the Obamas lived in Hyde Park. We speak with Jack Cashill, Jerome Corsi, David Horowitz, and former KGB agent Konstantin Preobrazhensky, who provide background and context. And we meet all kinds of ordinary and extraordinary Americans coping with what Obama has wrought.

Joel is an engaging traveling companion, with his goatee, shirt tail frequently hanging out, and his deadpan expression as he chats with denizens of the progressive version of Utopia in various languages (with subtitles), including French, Spanish, and Arabic.  He’s the thinking man’s conservative Michael Moore when he questions a black Democrat politician on Chicago’s South Side, eventually getting himself prevented from any more filming at the community event.

As someone who uses words to tackle the very same subject matter Joel takes up, I was very impressed with the visual qualities of the film. Joel is an artist who has obviously thought long and hard about communicating to people’s subconscious  minds directly, using the dreamlike state of mind that film can produce, and employing the metaphor of the Wizard of Oz that is such a prominent part of our collective consciousness. I cannot ever forget the image of Barack Obama speaking as Oz.

 

Also see: Joel Gilbert.net

You may also be interested in:

Filmmaker Joel Gilbert: Obama’s Real Father Exposed!

More information via my former blog: Frank Marshall Davis

*******

How To Know God Personally [Click on link to discover the principles!]

What does it take to begin a relationship with God? Devote yourself to unselfish religious deeds? Become a better person so that God will accept you?

You may be surprised that none of those things will work. But God has made it very clear in the Bible how we can know Him.

The following principles will explain how you can personally begin a relationship with God, right now, through Jesus Christ…

It Begins…

First, I would like to say that it has been a long time since I felt happy about the political direction last night’s GOP victories gained for America!  To have captured the Senate, 52- (whatever) was a great victory!  Booting Harry (who has blocked most House bills from coming up for a vote) Reid out of the Senate will be the first important step in helping the middle class in this nation to be brought back up to the status that they deserve regarding job creation, pay, and hopefully the replacement of Zerocare – which has devastated millions across our beloved nation.

With that said, I want to continue to focus on what my last two posts discussed:

1. I Stand Sunday.
2. ADF: Protecting Your Ministry From Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Lawsuits

When the “HOUSTON! WE HAVE A PROBLEM” debacle occurred, it FINALLY WOKE UP Christian Pastors not only in the state of Texas, but also across this nation to take a stand and fight for their Christian and biblical values. It has been a LONG TIME COMING for this, but I’m so glad to see pastors across the nation taking action and not allowing the continued outrageous political-landscape suppression and  trampling of our God-given and Constitution-affirming rights; namely, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom of association!

I received an email this morning about another pastor who previously took a stand for our freedoms back in July.  The email came from the Family Research Council (which led the I Stand Sunday rally) and I’d like to share it here at my blog today.

 

Pastor Robert Dekker of New Covenant Presbyterian Church in Rehoboth Beach, Delaware took a stand after city officials denied him a permit to hold church services on the public beach, largely due to their misinterpretation of separation of church and state. What is ironic is that there is a plaque on the beach commemorating the fact that the Rehoboth Beach community was established as a permanent Christian camp.

On July 4th, Pastor Dekker didn’t take “No” for an answer. He went forward with a “Freedom Rally” at the beach featuring music, prayer, and a sermon he preached titled: “Drawing a Line in the Sand,” based on John 8. The celebration also honored our Founding Fathers and the men and women in uniform that know firsthand that freedom is not free.

HT for photo:  The Blaze.com

Although they normally would expect to have 20 or 30 people at a beach service, they had several hundred. “Freedom is to be cherished,” Dekker told the crowd. “We are exercising the liberties that happened 237 years ago.”

We honor the courage of Pastor Dekker for exercising his First Amendment freedom. He is indeed a Watchman Pastor. In fact, Pastor Dekker made a commitment to 1) Pray for the nation, 2) Preach the whole counsel of God, and 3) Partner with other like-minded pastors. This simple “P3” commitment by pastors to pray, preach, and partner has the potential to impact our nation in a profound way. Would you draw a line in the sand and stand with Pastor Dekker and thousands like him?

PRAY, PREACH, AND PARTNER in order to impact our nation in a profound way?

CERTAINLY!

This blog has always been dedicated to this goal as you can see from what is written in the header of my title page:

Talk Wisdom

Talk Wisdom’s goal is to defend the tenets and values of Biblical Christian faith. We defend our Constitutional Republic and Charters of Freedom, especially when speaking out against destructive social and political issues. As followers of our Savior and Lord, we should boldly stand up for Jesus Christ in our present circumstances. He is our Savior, Lord, and King, and His love needs to be shed abroad in our hearts and in our world – now.

ADF: Protecting Your Ministry From Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Lawsuits

HT for graphic:  blackcommunitynews.com

In a negative response to my previous post –  I Stand Sunday – a commenter came along and wrote the following:

 

Patricia:

 

This crowd looks eerily like the crowds we saw when integration of minorities into ‘whites Only’ schools was happening in the 60s. They look the same as the crowds who railed against interracial marriage. Conservatives are excellent at spreading hate and fear. If only they could understand that everyone’s equality is an inalienable right and not up for bigots and haters to control.

This is the typical argument given by homosexual activists and their supporters.  I think that Christians and Conservatives who believe in the God-given definition of marriage should “have an answer” as instructed in the Bible:

 

2Co 5:12  For we do not commend ourselves again to you, but give you opportunity to boast on our behalf, that you may have an answer for those who boast in appearance and not in heart.

 

The “hate and fear” argument often sidetracks believers from responding.  Well, I found an excellent tool to use via the Alliance Defending Freedom site.  My answer to “Patricia” includes some of what is written at the ADF site:

 

 

 

Reply to Patricia:

 

Hello Patricia,
Thank you for stopping by and taking the time to comment.
From what you have written, I cannot determine whether or not you understand the entire issue that prompted the event.
There have been several lawsuits brought against Christian owners of businesses whose deeply held religious faith does not allow them to participate in same-sex weddings. When they politely declined, the homosexual activists sued them (instead of simply going to another baker, flower shop, wedding venue?) and destroyed not only their religious liberty but also their businesses.
This is not the same as the interracial marriage issue. Skin color cannot be changed in a person, whereas, sexual orientation can. I always find it ironic that homosexual activists celebrate when a formerly heterosexual person “comes out” as homosexual in later years (e.g. Meredith Baxter – formerly Birney – when she was married to a man), but refuse to celebrate when a person who was previously caught in unwanted homosexual behavior (in some cases, because they were abused as a child by a predator of the same sex) gratefully changes their sexual orientation to heterosexual.
What’s up with that?
Anyway, besides the cases involving forcing (or closing down) Christian owners of businesses to participate in ceremonies that violate their religious beliefs, the case that triggered the I Stand Sunday event was because what was done to the Houston Five pastors. Here is what happened:

 

It’s not something many are willing to believe. Europe may encroach on its churches, and Christians have long been persecuted in Asia, but this – this is the land of the free. We put “In God We Trust” on our money. We say “under God” in the Pledge. We sing “God Bless America” at ballgames.
How bad can it really get?
Ask “the Houston Five.”

HT for graphic:  GulagBound.com

In June 2014, the City of Houston’s leaders implemented a sexual orientation / gender identity law which, among other things, prohibits discrimination on the basis of “gender identity” in places like public restrooms. It was not a popular decision: 82 percent of Houstonians opposed the decree. Petitions rapidly circulated throughout the city, signed by citizens demanding that the new law be repealed, or placed on a ballot for the voters to decide. Some of the City’s pastors openly discussed the law and its implications from the pulpit – a right the First Amendment protects.
The Houston law requires a certain number of valid signatures for such petitions to result in a law being placed on the ballot. The citizens of Houston supplied more than three times the required number. The city secretary legally certified the petitions – meaning that the City Council either had to repeal the law or it had to be put to a vote of the people. Yet the mayor and the city attorney refused the certification, saying that less than the required number of signatures was valid.
In response, a group of citizens filed a lawsuit, pressing the city to comply with the law and honor the petitions. Instead, in the course of preparing for trial, the city’s attorneys served a subpoena against five local pastors, demanding 17 categories of information – including copies of their sermons “related to… the Petition, Mayor Annise Parker, homosexuality, or gender identity prepared by, delivered by, revised by, or approved by you or in your possession,” as well as any personal communications they might have had with church members or others about the bathroom law, homosexuality, or gender identity.
ADF <Alliance Defending Freedom> attorneys have filed a motion in a Texas court to block that subpoena – along with an accompanying brief pointing out that neither the pastors nor their churches are even involved in the lawsuit, and that the information being subpoenaed has nothing to do with the lawsuit. City officials apparently want to see if the pastors have ever opposed or criticized them … and to intimidate them, other pastors, and any other citizens from ever doing so again. In effect, it’s an aggressive bid to control – through explicit legal action or implicit political pressure – what preachers preach, and what Christians believe about social issues.
The City of Houston’s actions pose a “clear and present danger” to religious freedom. This is a critical “trial balloon” being floated in the culture. Those pressing the agenda the council supports are watching closely to see not only how the citizens of Houston and the media react, but how Christians across America respond to this direct onslaught against their most basic, cherished liberties.

 

Source: Alliance Defending Freedom website.
What is at stake?

 

Well, it boils down to the following opposing viewpoints below:

 

“There can be a conflict between
religious liberty and sexual liberty,
but in almost all cases the
sexual liberty should win…”
CHAI FELDBLUM
Commissioner, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)

 

 

“A time is coming when the government will
demand that churches accept and promote
an understanding of sexuality and gender
that directly opposes God’s Word.”
DR. JIM GARLOW
Lead Pastor at Skyline Church, La Mesa, CA

 

The key words in Dr. Garlow’s statement is “government will demand.”

 

HT for graphic:  oneoldvet.com

 

The mayor of Houston was clearly abusing her power within her governmental position to trample the electorate who petitioned the government about their rejection of the “bathroom bill”;  and since the ordinance was rejected by 82% of the public there, they should be allowed to vote on the issue. In addition, the religious freedom of Christians was trampled upon with her illegal request for sermons from the pastors. Each of these freedoms are guaranteed and written in the U.S. Constitution. This was a blatant attempt by the mayor and her staff to destroy the basic, cherished liberties of Christians.

 

 

 

As Christians, we need to remember that those spewing hate towards us and using the “discrimination” mantra regarding their want for absolute approval of homosexual behavior and same-sex marriage are perishing in their sin.  Without repentance, there is no remission of sin.

 

1 Co 1:18 – For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

 

2 Co 2:15 –  For we are to God the fragrance of Christ among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing.

 

2 Co 4:3 –   But even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing,

 

One of the best resources that I have found in combating the current onstaught of homosexual activists against Christian pastors (in Houston and anywhere) and Christian believers whose businesses are being targeted is:

 

Alliance Defending Freedom PDF Handbook:  Protecting your ministry from sexual orientation and gender identity lawsuits

 

Such a resource as this is absolutely necessary today because as you will read in the examples of lawsuits filed in the PDF handbook, many judges who hold to the ideology of homosexual rights are trumping religious rights and are deciding cases in courts against the deeply held religious beliefs of Christians.  They are imposing huge fines (and even threatening jail time!)  and running them out of business.  At the same time, the actions of that mayor in Houston shows that given political power, many homosexual activists will pass “ordinances” against the will of the people of any particular city, and even go so far as to demand pastors of Christian churches to hand over their sermons in a Nazi-style statist governmental way in order to punish those who do not adhere to increasing homosexual demands which are now not-so-veiled attempts that are being used to silence us.  It is absolutely necessary to have the written documents BEFOREHAND, in the possession of the Christian churches and businesses, in order to counter against the lawsuits before they even happen!

 

I hope that this great resource will be passed along to every Christian pastor, ministry, and church, and Bible believing follower of Christ to be utilized in protecting their God-given (and Constitutionally given) rights from activists’ lawsuits that intend to punish and silence the church of Jesus Christ and His Word, the Bible.

 

Thank you for reading and God bless!

 

~ Christine

 

My thanks to: