Saturday, November 30, 2013

The Left Is Intolerant of the Right's Tolerance.

The left is getting tired of the tolerance of Christians and conservatives and Republicans and well, Americans for that matter. So tired, in fact, that they are hell-bent on imposing upon everyone their ideology. We must accept what they believe to be true. This is true of history, science, government, and morality. They don't want lip service, they want confession, repentance and acceptance. Their is no room for "diversity" of opinion.

Back in September the California legislature shelved or put on "inactive" SB323, a bill that would have forced you and me to accept “Gender Identity”! Not just be tolerant of individuals (which we already are), but to openly accept it or be taxed "penalized" by force of law -- much like the Affordable Care Act or Obamacare.

Put on your hard hats, the politically correct fascists are at it again. Their utopian visions will be achieved even if it means setting aside their so-called tolerant, peaceful, pacifist self delusions and beating everyone into submission through legislative action. They cannot win with words, so they'll impose through the hammer of law.

Religious based groups from Boy and Girl Scouts to Special Olympics, 4-H, Future Farmers of America and even youth sports teams like Little League baseball and Pop Warner football will be forced to accept and acknowledge LGBT (Lesbians Gays Bi-Sexual and Transgender) individuals under penalty of law by revoking their tax exempt status for non compliance. SB323 has been shelved until 2014, but make no mistake, it will be resurrected.

SB323 is a clever way to kill two birds with one stone. Knowing that devout Christians will not give in to this immorality -- it becomes a shrewd back door plan by the liberal progressive politically correct mob to gain the bounty of tax revenue currently outside their reach of non-profits. But that isn't the end of it. These ideological utopians know full well that -- this foot in the door bill -- will allow them to have their cake and eat it too. Ultimately their desire is to impose their will on all individuals who fail to bow down to the golden calf of gender identity, which must necessarily include the rejection of God's prohibition on sexual immorality.

The tyrannical boot of those intolerant to God's law, will, in good conscience, strip from you your freedom of conscience, under the guise of tolerance, fairness and equality. A foundational fundamental principle our Founding Fathers embedded in our Constitution within the Bill of Rights First Amendment, and ultimately what they pledged their lives, fortunes and sacred honor upon. Make no mistake about it. If this laws passes, you will eventually be forced to accept this abomination in all aspects of your life. You will be forced to accept it in your private organizations, churches, and it will be a tool of indoctrination in the schools, even home schools, through mandatory curriculum.

The issues of LGBT, from gay rights to homosexual marriage, so permeates our society today that we are swimming in it. It is everywhere -- cheered, celebrated -- from Hollywood to the White House, from businesses to universities, from public school class rooms to liberal churches, and they say it must also now be part of your worldview as well.

Actually some of us -- like those in California -- are drowning in it. The religiously intolerant in our culture today wield the club of submission -- albeit falsely -- under the guise of equality and fairness. Many never speak up for fear of the reputation bruising lashes from a bullying political correct clan that forces those who reject their sexual perversions to sit through punitive sensitive training classes or worse have their reputations dismembered in the public square.

We are living at a time of profound cultural degradation akin to having to sit in a vile cesspool of societal sin and pretend not to notice. The stench of immorality fills the air. Many attempt with all their might not to vomit on its vapors because it will only give them away in a culture that seeks them out and turns them in. I, for, one choke on the thought of what our children will face in this brave new world into which America collapses. The nation we are leaving to our children is certainly not the nation our parents and grand-parents left to us, let alone the nation of virtue our


Lies and Hypocrisy Are Essential Components of Liberalism

Recent events once again demonstrate that there is no point arguing with liberals. Reason, facts, truth – these bourgeois concepts mean nothing to the adherents of progressivism. You are never going to change the mind of someone who believes in nothing except the imperative of his own absolute power. You simply have to defeat him.
Progressivism is not a coherent ideology so much as a purpose – to control every aspect of our lives. It is about consolidating progressive power. Nothing else matters. That includes the truth.
This is why we see YouTube videos of Harry Reid, Joe Biden and Barack Obama waxing eloquently, while in the minority, about the moral necessity of the preserving the filibuster that they just shot through the forehead when in the majority.
This is what led to an agreement ensuring that a power that explicitly states its intention to reboot the Holocaust, once it finishes hanging all its gays, will be able to create the means to do so.
This is the reason the President repeated dozens of times that if you like your health plan and your doctor you can keep them even though he knew this to be an outright lie.
Progressivism is not about principles but necessity. Yesterday, the left needed the filibuster to bar conservative judges. Today, it needs to pack courts with allies who will rule in whatever way progressives need, so the filibuster goes.
Sure, progressives pose as friends of Jews and gays when it’s convenient, but now it’s more convenient to get the Obamacare abomination off the front page while simultaneously weakening America and Israel. For progressives, that’s a win-win-win. And if some Jews and gays have to die, well, uh … hey look! Republicans want to make you pay for your own birth control!
Progressives needed to provide cover to their legislators to socialize the health care system, so they simply lied. The only fault the progressive-owned mainstream media can find with that is with us for being stupid enough to believe what the liberals told us.
I agree. If you believe anything a liberal tells you, if you imagine you can count on a liberal to hold to any particular principle when that principle stops being useful as a means to accumulate power, you are a fool.
Such people still get surprised when the pro-woman party slut shames women who object to being used as sex toys by feminist heroes. Teddy got drunk and left a woman to drown in his Oldsmobile after he drove off a bridge on the way to a routine session of joyless, creepy Kennedy adultery. Mary Jo Kopechne died; Teddy was hoisted on a sea of liberal shoulders and hailed as the “Lion of the Senate.”
But Teddy arguably had the moral high ground compared to liberal icon Robert Byrd, the Grand Imperial Cyclops Kleagle of the Senate. Their degeneracy was irrelevant; they were both useful to progressivism. Nothing else mattered.
Yet the squish caucus wing of the GOP still imagines that it can make deals with the liberals, as if this time Lucy Reid is really, truly, totally going to hold that football in place so that the Lindsey Browns can kick it.
Look at these GOP mouth-breathers and their undying fixation on amnesty. Obama won’t enforce the laws we have. In what universe could any idiot be stupid enough to imagine that he might enforce any of the laws that the GOP amnesty appeasers might get in exchange for their abject capitulation?
You can’t negotiate with progressivism. You can’t reason with it. You can’t compromise with it.
You have to destroy it, utterly, root and branch.
Understand that progressivism isn’t just another way of looking at things. It isn’t an equally valid lifestyle that we should treat with respect and courtesy. It is not an intellectual peer of conservatism.
Progressivism is the hapless Cousin Oliver of the collectivist Brady Bunch. Whether you label it “progressivism,” “socialism,” “communism” or “fascism,” it’s all just the same collectivist tyranny, varying only by degrees of bloodshed and fashion choices. Differentiating them is like choosing between herpes strains – it’s just a matter of the size of the chancres.
We need to know our enemy and understand it, because when we do we can destroy it.
Expect hypocrisy. Expect lies. Highlight them certainly, but not for ourselves. We know that hypocrisy and lies are essential components of progressivism. Do it instead for those who don’t yet understand. Do it for the undecided in the battle for the soul of America.
It’s that mass of people who are not aware of just what a sick power grab progressivism really is behind its false front of “caring” and “social justice” that we need to reach. If their hearts and minds weren’t in play, the progressives wouldn’t bother lying to them. They would enforce their will with storm troopers.
We are still at the stage where the opinions and desires of people who aren’t progressive still matter – the hypocrisy and lies are part of the long-term process designed to change that forever.
We must continue to highlight this truth: Progressives care about gays, women, blacks and other groups only to the extent that appearing to do so brings short-term political advantage.
Does anyone think progressives wouldn’t abandon their belief in their right to government-funded abortion at will if having that belief stopped being useful? You could ask the gays in Iran about how pro-gay progressives are when liberal leaders need to change the news cycle, except they’ll be hard-pressed to answer with nooses around their necks.
Arguing with progressives is a waste of time because they believe in nothing except that they should rule over us. Progressives don’t seek justice. They seek power. Treat them accordingly.


One of the world’s leading authorities on genetics says the human race was born into existence after a chimpanzee mated with a pig.
Dr. Eugene McCarthy’s stunning claims were made in an online article, although it was not clear when the startling findings was initially published.
According to the University of Georgia scientist, while human beings share a number of characteristics with chimpanzees, there are others that don’t correspond with the primates.
“What is this other animal that has all these traits? The answer is Sus scrofa – the ordinary pig,” he wrote.
Top Scientist: Humans Emerged After Chimpanzee Had Sex With Pig
A leading scientist suggests human beings emerged after a primate mated with a pig. (Image source: Shutterstock)
“The tentative scenario that I picture is that human beings came into being via hybridization between a pig, whose best modern representative is Sus scrofa, and an ape, best represented today by the pygmy chimpanzee, Pan paniscus,” he added.
McCarthy’s claims even initially stunned him.
“I must admit that I initially felt a certain amount of repugnance at the idea of being a hybrid,” he stated. “The image of a pig mating with an ape is not a pretty one, nor is that of a horde of monstrous half-humans breeding in a hybrid swarm.”
“The image of a pig mating with an ape is not a pretty one…”
“But the way we came to be is not so important as the fact that we now exist,” he concluded. “As every Machiavellian knows, good things can emerge from ugly processes, and I think the human race is a very good thing.”
(H/T: Mail Online)

School Omits “Male,” “Female” Gender Options

The radical left has an insatiable desire to uproot all of our society’s sexual mores. Whether allowing adolescent boys to use the girls’ facilities at school or rationalizing pedophilia, it seems the only form of sexuality these activists do not enthusiastically support is that found within the confines of heterosexual marriage.
The debate extends to gender identity, a relatively recent issue that has been hawked by the mainstream media to the point a casual observer might assume that half of our society suffers from hermaphroditism.
In fact, an infinitesimally small, though incredibly vocal, minority of Americans identify with another gender, switch between genders, or choose to present themselves as androgynous. The rest of the nation, in turn, is expected to change our language to accommodate these individuals.

As prospective college students weigh their options, many fill out multiple applications featuring boilerplate questions regarding age, background, and gender. At Bellevue, however, some of the choices are bewildering.

For instance, applicants cannot chose “male” or “female” when describing their gender despite the fact that the application offers six responses to the query. Instead, the school offers the choices of androgynous, gender neutral, feminine, masculine, transgender, or other.

A response that in generations past would have required no thought whatsoever has now become unbelievably convoluted.

Furthermore, a prompt to choose sexual orientation also offers six potential responses. Applicants may choose from bisexual, gay, lesbian, queer, straight/heterosexual, or other.

The school’s LGBTQ Center adviser, Colin Donovan, said the changes will help determine how “gender variant students” are performing.

A statistically insignificant portion of our society has been afforded undue influence over American culture through the left’s pervasive gospel of tolerance. The vast majority of citizens, meanwhile, are encountering ever increasing pressure to acquiesce to the politically correct worldview.

Friday, November 29, 2013

New MSNBC host on Thanksgiving: ‘Because genocide is a lot more festive 392 years after the fact.

Ronan Farrow, alleged genius and MSNBC’s newest host, took to Twitter to share some thoughts about Thanksgiving on Wednesday:

Farrow is the 25-year-old son of Mia Farrow and Woody Allen, though there is some speculation that his father may actually be Frank Sinatra. He has impressive professional and academic credentials, graduating from college at 15 and Yale Law School at 21 before being named a Rhodes Scholar at 23. He also allegedly worked for Hillary Clinton and the late Richard Holbrooke at the State Department But Farrow’s public comments have not lent weight to his genius reputation. Appearing on MSNBC in October, he declared – to much ridicule — that Bill and Hillary Clinton “represent a style of honesty that the public craves.” With his Thanksgiving tweets, he gives off the impression he is nothing more than a run-of-the-mill leftwing hack.
Farrow’s MSNBC show is set to premier sometime in 2014.

Read more:

Wednesday, November 27, 2013

Liberal Totalitarianism: Conform or Else!




Recently (or perhaps more accurately, finally), I started reading Mark Steyn’s After America: Get Ready for Armageddon.

While I don’t intend to write a review for a book two years old, After America is increasingly relevant as America slowly slides to its own destruction.

However, something jumped out at me while I plodded through the first 60 or so pages. It’s something that we, as a nation don’t discuss nearly enough. Indeed, in our own hubris, we often fail to recognize its reality.

In the modern era — where we are apparently free and liberated to do what we like, where we like, when we like — America is becoming ever more homogeneous.

We are expected to conform to the liberal worldview.

The government is seen as a cure-all for society’s problems. Massive entitlement programs “ensure” that the poor don’t starve or die in the streets. Those programs protect the wealthiest demographic in America, the elderly, from poverty.

If you believe that government coddling a significant fraction of its citizens, far more than are actually destitute, or spending its way to bankruptcy is wrong, then you hate the poor. You must believe that welfare are good and no dissent will be tolerated.

Science must always conform to the leftist/secularist worldview. Humanity must believe in the reality of man-made global change climate, or whatever moniker they happen to be using this week. We must all believe in the nihilistic evolutionary theory of the origin of life. Not to do so would be anti-science, and we can’t have people who aren’t bound by the laws of what the left deems to be the truth, now can we?

No one should be allowed to openly question Darwinism, lest some start to believe that God created a globe that goes through natural cycles.

Sex, of course, must always be loose and unbound. Otherwise you’re just a square who doesn’t understand that loose trousers and spread legs are the way to truly enjoy life. You have to be some sort of sexually repressed control freak to believe that careless sex leads to disease, emotional trauma and, worst of all, pregnancy. Millions of youth never even saw that last one coming, and were encouraged to sleep around long before they’ve had any real life experience.

Speaking of pregnancy, one must of course conform to the idea that abortion isn’t murder. It’s the woman’s right. She should have the right to choose to have her doctor, CNA, corner store butcher (or whoever California wishes to certify next to perform abortions) plunge a needle into a baby and burn it from the inside out as it is sucked dry of fluid. Or be forcefully dismembered in the womb. Our “betters” tell us it is the humane thing to do.

Let us not leave out the leftist view of race, either. If one does not believe in special treatment for the Black or the Hispanic (not the Asian, though — they often succeed on their own merits), he is a horrible, racist bigot only lacking the pointy white hood. And even then, that’s likely tucked away in some chest buried in the backyard, patiently awaiting the day when it is in vogue again.
AfterAmericaIt is not like blacks or Hispanics can succeed if they stay out of trouble and work hard. They must be given special dispensation to enter the country’s universities or government jobs. After all, institutional racism abolished fifty years ago is still alive and well.
If there’s a disproportionate number of minorities being disciplined in schools, it must be due to the schools’ disciplinary procedures. If a disproportionate number of minorities get busted for committing crimes, clearly there’s some sort of outside force (likely with lily white skin) that is responsible.

The media, by and large, excepting the odd element like Fox News Channel, is on the left to varying degrees. All try to cover for Obama in one way or another. All celebrate the cause célèbre of the week, whether it’s the latest state to legalize gay marriage or the newest law cementing the protected status of the black man. Indeed, ABC has an entire hidden camera program, “What Would You Do?” dedicated to this self-righteous feel-goodism.

The point of that long list? If you believe some or all of the aforementioned is bad, you are no good to the left. Even if for the barest of seconds you express an opinion that does not conform to the status quo, you are shamed until you believe what the left wants you to believe.  Otherwise, you are marginalized for your “backwards thinking.”

We live in a world where free-thought is, in reality, thinly veiled totalitarianism. For without conformity of thought, Leftism cannot thrive.


Report: Sixth- or seventh-most obnoxious MSNBC host fired for being obnoxious

This is a rare moment where I’m disappointed that MSNBC doesn’t have better ratings. If it did, publishers would be scrambling to tell the incredible! true! story! of how the most successful cable news network in America hit ratings paydirt by hiring some of the most insufferable jackholes in media. Olbermann, Baldwin, Bashir — the critics said it was madness to bring together egos as combustible as that, but somehow MSNBC harnessed the energy for a ratings moon shot. It’d be the cable-news equivalent of “The Bronx Zoo,” the inside story of how a championship team gelled through conflict, swagger, and general jerkiness.

If it’s not a championship team, though, who cares? Who wants to read at length about an also-ran that perennially finishes 20 games out, even if it’s full of insane rageaholic dish like this?

“The decision has been made. He’s gone,” an insider at the cable channel told me. “The [parent company] Comcast guys have decided. Word is spreading through the building.”
Baldwin’s dismissal was decided on partly because of his diva-like behavior toward co-workers, a source said.
Besides demanding a humidifier because he claimed the air at 30 Rock was too dry, Baldwin alienated staffers when he demanded a separate makeup room being used by a woman with cancer who is sensitive to hairspray.
When Baldwin was told he couldn’t have his way, he allegedly bellowed at the top of his lungs, “I don’t give a f - - k if she has cancer or not, I want that f - - king makeup room.”

So that explains why Baldwin’s confrontation with the photographer earned him a pink slip even though half the MSNBC line-up routinely says nastier things about Republicans, albeit in more delicate terms. It’s not about the photographer; they wanted him out because, as the entire world already knew, the guy seemingly can’t control his anger and wasn’t delivering big enough numbers to make the production team willing to grudgingly tolerate him. That’s the difference between him and Olby.

Does this mean Bashir’s job is safe, then, so long as he’s more courteous to MSNBC staff than Baldwin was? Or does it mean he’s out too on the logic that what he said about Palin was more grotesque than Baldwin’s mindless slur of the photographer? It’d be funny if Bashir ended up as the guy who got canned from MSNBC for hating Republicans a little too much, just because I’ve always had a sense that his shrill, nasty leftism is partly an affectation driven by him wanting to ingratiate himself with the MSNBC audience. He’s a true-blue liberal, no doubt, but some of his attempts to demonize the right are so cartoonishly desperate that I can’t quite believe they’re completely on the level. He’s trying to give his viewers the strongest dose of right-bashing that he can in hopes that it’ll make him a star; what he said about Palin was a byproduct of that. If Roger Ailes bought the network tomorrow and declared that MSNBC’s ideological line is now pro-conservative, I think all of the hosts would quit except maybe Bashir. He’d think about it. A little.

Tuesday, November 26, 2013

American Humanist Association Sues Teacher Who Prayed for Sick Student

The latest allegations from the American Humanist Association are shocking, titillating, and (cue the 1950s soap opera organist) downright scandalous.

In a complaint filed by the organization on November 20 a Missouri public school teacher has been accused of praying for an injured student, organizing a project to feed hungry children and (brace yourself) -- cavorting with a Methodist.

“Teachers simply cannot participate in prayers with students at school, nor can they promote their religious beliefs in any other way to their students,” the AHA said in a statement.

The humanists filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of two students accusing Gwen Pope and the Fayette R-III School District of violating the Constitution by allowing a Christian club to meet before the start of the school day. The school's former principal is also named in the lawsuit.

Mrs. Pope, who is no longer teaching at the school, was the sponsor of the Fellowship of Christian Students at Fayette High School. Since 2010, students have voluntarily gathered before the start of the school day to pray and read the Bible in her classroom.

The American Humanist Association said the two unnamed complainants had been subjected to “unwelcome encounters with the classroom prayer sessions.”

It seems her classroom is near the entrance door of the school and apparently non-believing students could see their classmates engaged in religious activities.

They alleged that Mrs. Pope and the students were seen reading Bible verses and (again, brace yourself) praying for the ill.

“When a student was sick or injured, Pope frequently asked the students in attendance to pray for the afflicted student and joined the attending students in prayer by bowing her head, closing her eyes and saying amen,” the lawsuit alleged.

The lawsuit specifically mentions an incident that occurred during the 2010-11 school year when a classmate had been hospitalized for knee surgery.

Mrs. Pope allegedly encouraged the students to pray for the young man. The lawsuit describes in great detail the aftermath of that request.

“She then bowed her head and closed her eyes,” the lawsuit states. “At the end of the prayer, Pope joined the students in saying aloud, ‘Amen.’”

Can you believe a public school would tolerate such diabolical behavior?

The AHA also took issue with a flier that promoted the club’s participation in the “Buddy Pack” program at a local food pantry. The packs are filled with food and given to elementary school students to take home over the weekend.

Friday, November 22, 2013

Chris Matthews: 'Vulture' Conservatives Commit 'Verbal Terror' on 'Great' Obama

Chris Matthews appears to have a Mad Libs-style list of the worst insults he hurls at conservative. On Wednesday, he chose "verbal terror" to smear everyone on the right who disagrees with all of the "great things" Barack Obama wants to do. The Hardball anchor opened his show by hyperbolically warning, "Political armageddon!" According to Matthews, the fight between the President and conservatives is not a conflict of ideas.
Rather, "it's a battle between a President who wants to do great things -- extend health care to the tens of millions of working people, many of them poor, ending two wars in Afghanistan" and an "almost totally negative force arrayed and barking against him, a campaign of verbal terror and negativity aimed at denying tens of millions decent health care." [See video below. MP3 audio here.]
In the simplistic world of an MSNBC host, "it's a strange, unbalanced battle between a man who wants to do great things and an enemy aimed at ensuring he does not."
Matthews has no problem with using extremist language to demonize his enemies. On July 31, 2013, he labeled Ted Cruz, Rand Paul and Mike Lee "terrorists."
On March 2, 2009, the host wondered if then-Health and Human Services nominee Kathleen Sebelius would survive the "terrorism of the anti-abortion people" who opposed her.
A partial transcript of the November 20 segment is below:

CHRIS MATTHEWS: Political Armageddon. Let's play Hardball.
MATTHEWS: "Let Me Start" tonight with this. The dirty little secret of American politics today is that this battle between President Obama and his enemies is not a contest of achievement.
No, it's a battle between a president who wants to do great things -- extend health care to the tens of millions of working people, many of them poor, ending two wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and preventing a third war with Iran -- and almost totally negative force arrayed and barking against him, a campaign of verbal terror and negativity aimed at denying tens of millions decent health care, denying immigrants the chance to be come citizens, denying people of other sexual orientations and identities an equal chance to provide for themselves, obviously, also denying marriage equality.
It's a strange, unbalanced battle between a man who wants to do great things and an enemy aimed at ensuring he does not. It's a tale of a political party that once freed the slaves and battled the monopolies, built the transcontinental railroad and created scientific agriculture to the land grant colleges reduced now to playing jackal in the moonlight. Howard Fineman's the editorial director of the Huffington Post Media Group and an MSNBC political analyst and Jonathan Capehart is the illustrious opinion writer for "The Washington Post" and an MSNBC contributor.
Howard, I painted this in strong terms and strong black and white, but I have to tell you, I don't see a Republican agenda except to destroy Obama. Let's go with this. The President's enemies have tried to destroy, kill, defund, block or destroy everything in his program.
The President, in contrast, has made it his goal to fight to extend rights to minorities, the uninsured and the oppressed. His opponents are trying to take away these rights.

Atheist Churches are an Admission that Atheism is a Religion.

There’s an old joke that says: How do you describe an atheist at his funeral? “All dressed up with no place to go.”

Now, all jokes aside, there is a place atheists can go on Sundays. There’s a new type of “atheist church” that has been founded by a couple from England, and apparently it’s taking off.

Writing for the AP (11/11/13), Gillian Flaccus penned an article called, “Atheist ‘mega-churches’ are now a thing in the U.S as popularity spreads from U.K.”

These groups, write Flaccus, are “people bound by their belief in non-belief.” They have had large gatherings in Los Angeles, “San Diego, Nashville, New York and other U.S. cities.”

The founders are “British duo Sanderson Jones and Pippa Evans,” who are on a “tour around the U.S. and Australia to drum up donations and help launch new Sunday Assemblies.”

The services consist of singing secular songs, inspirational talks, and times of reflection.

Basically, it’s religion without God.

It’s a free country, because of our Judeo-Christian base (and that of England), so the atheists are free to assemble or not, just as anyone else is. Only in nations tied to a Christian base does that freedom exist. (It certainly didn’t exist in the Soviet Union, which was based on atheism.)

But why accept a cheap imitation when you can get the real thing?Atheist Church Stained Glass
These atheist churches meet on Sunday mornings, the traditional day of corporate  worship. It’s a fact that the Jewish sect known as Christianity 

worshiped Jesus because all the earliest Christians (who were Jewish — Peter, Paul, and Mary, and the Apostles) believed Jesus had risen from the dead on “the first day of the week,” i.e., Sunday.

The idea of atheists going to church brings home to me the notion that we are all hard-wired by the Creator to worship.

The 17th century French mathematician and Christian apologist, Blaise Pascal, said there’s a God-shaped vacuum in every heart, just waiting to be filled.

The Bible says God created us, and we will give an account before Him one day. In the fourth century, St. Augustine wrote in his classic book, Confessions, “You have made us for Yourself, Oh God, and our hearts are restless until they find their rest in You.”
The shorter catechism from the Westminster Confession of Faith from the 1640s asks: “What is the chief end of man? The chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy Him forever.”
I remember years ago when an atheist acquaintance told me he loved to watch a certain preacher on TV every week. He loved his sermons because they were filled with motivation, goal-setting, uplifting stories. If the preacher mentioned God, the atheist would just edit that out in his mind.

Unfortunately, many Christian churches have unwittingly done the same, removing essential tenets of the Christian faith.  It’s sad to think that in some of our Sunday assemblies of professing Christians, there is no longer an emphasis on Christ’s atoning death for sinners and His resurrection from the dead. But that is the heart of the Christian message — from Day One to the present. Note the ancient creed, still repeated in many churches to this day: “Christ has died. Christ is risen. Christ will come again.”

In one sense, a “cross-less Christianity” makes just as much sense as an “atheist church.”

The Apostle Paul said to the Galatians, Do you think I’d still be facing all this persecution if it weren’t for my preaching the cross? He also said to the Corinthians, My goal was to preach Christ and Him crucified.

Meanwhile, the whole idea of organized atheism (especially the militant, full-time kind) seems contradictory: Because they spend all their energies fighting against God, whom they claim does not exist. If they really believed it, they wouldn’t care.
With Thanksgiving coming, and “atheist churches” apparently on the rise, I’m reminded of what G. K. Chesterton once said: “The worst moment for an atheist is when he is really thankful and has no one to thank.” He also said, “If there were no God, there would be no atheists.”


Post Office Fires First Salvo in Annual Christmas Wars.

Every year as Christmas approaches, the Christmas Wars heat up as various groups, agencies and individuals do their darnedest to get the Christ out of Christmas and get Christmas out of town.

The honor of first shot this year apparently goes to the Post Office, which is advertising its holiday stamps series with an image of stamps that include a menorah with the word "Hanukkah," candles and people with African garb above the word "Kwanzaa," and ... a gingerbread house.

It's not only not Christ, it doesn't even say "Christmas."
To be fair, the Post Office does offer stamps with pictures of the Holy Family and the Virgin and Child for Christmas.  It just didn't choose them for its ad as representative of the holiday.

Instead, Christians get a gingerbread house, scene of the famous story about witch killers Hansel and Gretel.

That will probably happen sometime after Thanksgiving, when some hapless Target checkout clerk forgets his corporate orders and mistakenly says "merry Christmas" to some hipster wannabe who's purchasing the autobiography of Richard Dawkins.It could be worse, of course. The Freedom From Religion Foundation could be suing for equal space, requiring the Post Office to subdivide and reissue Christmas stamps of gingerbread duplexes.

It's beginning to look a lot like Christmas. Kindly disregard that babe in the manger.

Read more:


School Teaches White Voters Are Racist

Opponents of the federal Common Core standards being implemented in schools across the U.S. have made significant hay out of numerous reports that many of its lesson plans promote leftist propaganda. Apparently, those responsible for compiling the supplemental coursework are intent on proving that point.

One of the latest outrageous items included in the curriculum is a book filled with the same race-based talking points common among the most rabid leftists on MSNBC.

A school in Dupo, Ill. has added the book, a biography of Barack Obama, to its fourth grade syllabus. Included in the material is the blatant accusation that white voters are inherently racist.

Despite the fact that Obama won both of his elections only with a great many white votes, Jane Sutcliffe’s book claims “white voters would never vote for a black president.”

Furthermore, the biased book claims that “angry voices” were responsible for raising concerns about Obama’s qualifications – including his allegiance to the unhinged theology of Rev. Jeremiah Wright.
While many Americans were upset that a man running for president supported an ideology that denigrated this nation, it had nothing to do with his race and everything to do with a desire to protect our common culture for future generations.

A group advocating against U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan exposed the unbelievably partisan rhetoric being taught to young children. According to the Facebook page for “Moms Against Duncan,” those in the Illinois school were required to answer questions about the book for a grade.
The group is asking concerned parents to stand up against Common Core and Duncan, who recently made the false claim that most of the criticism of this curriculum plan comes from “white suburban moms.”
Everything this administration does is tinged with racial overtones. The left relies on such allegations to avoid dealing with actual issues.

By exposing students to the same type of indoctrination, the spirit of honest debate on which our nation was founded will be even further eroded.


Thursday, November 21, 2013


An MSNBC panel exploded on Wednesday after Georgetown University professor Michael Eric Dyson accused conservative columnist Matt Lewis of deploying “white privilege” to “silence a black man” because he didn’t want to talk about race.
The tense exchange occurred after Dyson cited and seemingly agreed with Oprah Winfrey’s recent claim that, in many cases, opposition to President Barack Obama is due to the color of his skin. The panel was debating Obamacare and immigration reform when Dyson suddenly brought up race.
“It took ten minutes — ten minutes to get to the race issue,” Lewis interrupted.
After some heated crosstalk, Dyson told Lewis not to “deploy the very principles of white privilege to silence a black man on the panel because you don’t want to talk about race.”
“So be quiet!” Dyson added.
MSNBC Panel Explodes After Georgetown Professor Accuses Conservative Columnist of Deploying White Privilege to Silence a Black Man
Outraged at his co-panelist’s accusation, Lewis asked host Martin Bashir if he would step in and call out Dyson over the remark. He did not get any support from the host.
“Matt…please allow professor Dyson to speak,” Bashir said.
“You can’t even talk about policy without bringing up race can you?” Lewis shot back.
Bashir again urged Lewis to let Dyson talk, but the explosive crosstalk continued.
“The vast majority of Republicans are mindless and incapable of articulating a solid, serious, intellectual conception, or a political fix or remedy to the problem we have here,” Dyson later argued, adding that “race plays a role in constantly contaminating the entire process.”
“This is a joke!” Lewis retorted.
Watch the exchange via MSNBC:
(H/T: Ben Howe)

Northeastern Illinois University in Chicago PLAQUE LABELS PRESIDENT LINCOLN A DEMOCRAT,Lincoln was a Republican?

CHICAGO – A public university in President Abraham Lincoln’s home state of Illinois is adorned with a plaque that states Lincoln – arguably the most famous and influential president in American history – was a Democrat.
Lincoln was a Republican.
The plaque, located on a historic building that’s part of Northeastern Illinois University in Chicago and installed in 1905, states: “This building is dedicated to public service honoring the memory of Abraham Lincoln   Democrat.”
When a picture of the memorial recently surfaced on social media sites, it quickly went viral, and prompted anger among many Republicans, who called the dedication not only inaccurate but also a prime example of revisionist history. But the university stands by the inscription.lincolnplaque

“According to building archives, the word democrat was used because Lincoln was an advocate for democracy—the political or social equality of all people,” campus officials stated in a press release. “The word was not chosen to reflect a political affiliation. … Northeastern Illinois University recognizes the context that this plaque was created and intends to uphold its integrity.”
One nonprofit advocacy group vows to fight to reword the plaque. Charlie Kirk, founder and executive director of the Illinois-based Turning Point USA, a nationwide young conservatives student movement, said Monday in an interview with The College Fix that “now is the time for removal and replacement.”
Kirk, who drove to Northeastern Illinois University on Nov. 4 to view the plaque for himself, said he has since launched a fact-finding mission determine if the 108-year-old tablet has ever been altered.
“Before we go hard at it we want to know if this is the original plaque, or was it replaced, because it might have eroded due to corrosion,” he said, adding ultimately his group will lobby for its correction.
Kirk scoffed at the notion the word “Democrat” on the plaque simply refers to Lincoln’s social advocacy, as campus officials have asserted. He notes the Democratic Party was active when the plaque was dedicated in 1905, citing President Woodrow Wilson, a Democrat who served in the White House from 1913 to 1921, as one example.
“Any student who walks by that – it’s miseducation in its purest form, whether intentional or not,” Kirk said. “As a citizen of Illinois, my taxes are subsidizing something that is inaccurate. … This is only a microcosm of what is happening every single day at universities across the country.”


Saying atheists are bullied and ridiculed, the Secular Student Alliance this fall launched a “Secular Safe Zones” program at campuses across the nation.
“Every time the Pledge of Allegiance is said or a sports team says a prayer before a game, secular students are pushed to the margins of society,” the alliance’s website claims.
Organizers say these so-called safe zones, or classrooms designated on campuses, will protect students who don’t believe in God from alleged persecution by peers, give atheist or agnostic students a chance to develop camaraderie, and allow students to discuss ideas to promote secular issues.
The alliance openly and proudly cites the gay-rights movement as a source for developing its own public relations strategies.
“We’re taking a page right out of (the LGBT) playbook,” alliance spokesman Jesse Galef recently toldThe Washington Times.
Secular safe zones are needed to “create safe spaces in which secular students can question, criticize, and discuss topics and issues important to them,” according to its website.
“Unfortunately, many Americans fallaciously think that being secular is the same thing as being immoral or un-American,” Phil Zuckerman, a Pitzer College professor of sociology and secular studies,told Religion News Service. “So there is a lot of negative stereotyping that often emerges, and this can sometimes create an uncomfortable environment for secular students.”
The Secular Student Alliance encourages its members to launch safe zones on their campuses, and the group boasts 359 affiliate groups at universities and high schools across the nation, according to its website. An estimated two dozen secular safe zones have been created on high school and college campuses thus far through the fledgling program.
Andy Cheadle-Ford, the secular safe zone coordinator, told The College Fix in an email that the program launched about two months ago and is still in its early stages, but “we have heard from several faculty members that they have interacted with students who have been very excited about the program.”
These safe zones are designed to mimic similar safe zones created by and for the LGBTQ movement over the years, organizers say.
Although most mainstream public colleges are largely considered bastions of secular thoughts and beliefs – from the sciences to the social sciences – the safe zones are needed, the alliance claims, because atheists don’t have religious symbols they can don, noting: “Sadly, the secular community lacks any truly well-defined symbols that are worn by the masses to identify themselves.”
But there may be an agenda behind these secular safe zones, one scholar suggests.
“The liberal democratic state has already privatized language about God and excluded the very discipline that birthed the university from its own practice of rationality,” John Wright, theology professor at Point Loma Nazarene University and pastor at Mid City Heights Church, said in an email to The College Fix. “This shows the underlying reductionism and political agenda to remove all socially mediating groups such as the church between the individual and the state.”
Wright’s book, Postliberal Theology and the Church Catholic, looks in part at how “religious studies” became a part of the contemporary United States academe in order to secularize theological discourse.
Christian scholar Craig Hazen, a professor at the evangelical Biola University in Los Angeles, told The Washington Times he has a good idea: “(Religious groups) should send over a stack of pizza to secular safe zones with a note on it that says, ‘Let’s talk.’”
As of now, Secular Safe Zones are not widely known, but the movement is expect to grow, Cheadle-Ford said.
“We hope to continue to add allies to our program and to continue developing and updating our training,” he said. “We are also planning on adding a facilitator training so that the Secular Student Alliance can train others allies.”