Remembering 1776: A Declaration

Halfway across the globe
And we’re standing on new ground
Screaming ‘cross the waves
You can’t hear a sound
There’s no fair trials, no trade, no liberties
No tea
We’ve colonized America; we won’t stand for tyranny,
Oh king

And it’s too late to apologize
It’s too late
I said it’s too late to apologize
It’s too late

We’ve paid your foolish tax, read the acts
And they just won’t do
We want to make it clear, we believe this much is true
All men were created with certain

Unalienable rights
Among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit
Of happiness

And it’s too late to apologize
It’s too late
I said It’s too late to apologize
It’s too late

It’s too late to apologize
It’s too late
I said it’s too late apologize
It’s too late

I said it’s too late to apologize, yeah
It’s too late
I said it’s too late to apologize, yeah

Halfway across the globe
And we’re standing on new ground

 

Lyrics and video from http://webtexts.com/declaration/

So “Merry Christmas” is Offensive?

Now this one takes the cake, as it is an example of how “Christ” and “God” are being stomped out of America. Yesterday a news article was published stating that the Federal Reserve has ordered a bank in Perkins, Oklahoma to take down all Bible verses published on their website, to take down all crosses on the bank premises, and to get rid of any “Merry Christmas” buttons.

The Federal Reserve has a regulation, called Regulation B, that has what is known as the discouragement clause, stating, “…the use of words, symbols, models and other forms of communication … express, imply or suggest a discriminatory preference or policy of exclusion.” The feds interpret this to mean that non-Christians just might be offended at the display of such religious symbols.

Of course, Perkins, Oklahoma locals find the actions of the Federal Reserve to be absolutely ridiculous. In fact, there is a Greek word for it: it’s called bullcrap.

Firstly the regulation refers to a discriminatory preference or policy of exclusion. One with brains would interpret this to mean, you can’t post signs or symbols that would discriminate against a certain demographic group. An example is posting on your door “Martian’s are gay,” or “People from Mars not allowed.” These two examples are discriminatory preference and policy of exclusion respectively. Posting a cross on the banks door does not discriminate against any particular demographic group.

And then there’s the age-old regulation laid down by the First Amendment, that Congress shall not prohibit the free exercise of religion. Since the Federal Reserve is a Federal institution, one would assume that the Federal Reserve cannot dictate which religious symbols a bank, or any other institution, chooses to display.

Here’s the news article:

http://www.koco.com/r/26162860/detail.html

Judge for Yourself…

 

A Marine shocks a crowd…

 

 

Judge for Yourself

Three Things About Islam

Judge for yourself…

To Prohibit the Free Exercise…

Take a look at the link below. It is an article on a recent controversy concerning a 24 foot cross on a hilltop near Lyndonville, Vermont.

Burlington Free Press – Lyndon Cross at Center of Rights Dispute

According to a 2009 magazine article, the village of Lyndonville, Vermont is one of 15 “Best Small Towns” in New England. Every year since 1932 the village hosts a local community fair, and just very recently the village has become center point in a new First Amendment Court case. Enter the Downing family, a foster family of seven children and 35 foster children. The foster parents, in their 70’s, have built the Chapel of the Holy Family in order to serve their family. In about 2007, the Downings erected a 24 foot cross in front of the chapel, of which the Downings are fighting to keep.

Despite the land being private property, local zoning officials have called for the removal of the cross, due to complaints of neighbors. The local authorities state that the cross does not fit in with Vermont’s environment, that a 24 foot cross on 800 acres of private property is out of place.

Thomas Jefferson wrote a letter about his at particular time. For citizens who have actually bothered to study the history of their nation, this should b familiar. It is the response that Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptist Association, of which the clause “Separation of Church and State” is badly misquoted.

To messers. Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut.

Gentlemen

The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem.

Th Jefferson
Jan. 1. 1802.

The ex-President makes the point that religion should remain between “Man & his God,” and then quotes the First Amendment of the Constitution. His famous statement of “Separation of Church and State” simply reinforces the idea that the government cannot restrict the practice of religion. In the court case, the Downings state that the cross is essential to their beliefs. If it really is essential, then the government cannot force the Downings to remove the cross, and that local zoning laws are not exempt to the First Amendment.

Judge for yourself:

Burlington Free Press – Lyndon Cross at Center of Rights Dispute

Library of Congress – Thomas Jefferson’s Letter to the Danbury Baptist Association

Chapel of the Holy Family

To sell Jesus for $5.99

A lot of yall folks have probably noticed the recent article under WordPress’s “Freshly Pressed” by blogger Sean Michael Lewis, who raises a very serious, and excellent point, that Jesus has been made into an industry in todays society rather than as the Son of God. The author is absolutely correct in saying that Jesus has been made a commercial product. And he asks appropriate questions, such as “are all products that are created right in God’s eyes?” and “where do Christians need to draw the line?”

The very first biblical example of this that came to mind was John 2:13-23, which is a case where Jesus clears out the Temple, which was at that time more of a marketplace than a place of worship; people had industrialized worship and God, and it rubbed Jesus the wrong way. Simply put, the passage is trying to get the point across that people should not have to pay to hear God’s Word or the Gospel, as it is taking advantage of them for one’s own greed. And that, is just plain wrong.

John 2:13-23 (NKJV):
Now the Passover of the Jews was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. And He found in the temple those who sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the money changers doing business. When He had made a whip of cords, He drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and the oxen, and poured out the changers’ money and overturned the tables. And He said to those who sold doves, “Take these things away! Do not make My Father’s house a house of merchandise!” Then His disciples remembered that it was written, “Zeal for Your house has eaten Me up.” So the Jews answered and said to Him, “What sign do You show to us, since You do these things?” Jesus answered and said to them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” Then the Jews said, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will You raise it up in three days?” But He was speaking of the temple of His body. Therefore, when He had risen from the dead, His disciples remembered that He had said this to them; and they believed the Scripture and the word which Jesus had said.

Link to Sean Michael Lewis’s blog article: The Jesus Industry

Thou Shall not Offend thy Neighbor…

The United States Supreme Court ruled back in 2005 that two rural Kentucky courthouses could not publicly display the Ten Commandments, while approving a monument of the Ten Commandments in Austin, TX. The court claimed the Kentucky courthouses erected the monuments unconstitutionally with the intention of favoring monotheistic religion, but the Texas monument was allowed to stay because it was “a less blatantly religious statement tinged with secular historical and educational meaning,” according to an article the Washington Post published concerning the issue. This is a decision that has some scratching their heads, especially with the use of the word “unconstitutional.” Separation of Church and State they call it, and this viewpoint is becoming more and more prevalent.

Also becoming more and more prevalent is something called “Political Correctness;” this idea that we regulate the things we say, the things we do and the way we carry ourselves so we don’t offend anyone, because God forbid if you upset even the smallest minority group. We no longer call people gay, lesbian, or homosexual, instead we say they are living a perfectly acceptable alternative lifestyle. We no longer pray in the name of Jesus Christ during public prayers in case we offend someone who may not be Christian. And there is a Greek word that very adequately describes all of this, it’s called hogwash.

The fundamental flaw of political correctness is that it damns those who do not buy into the concept; those who are found politically incorrect are for the most part, condemned. As such it hammers the nail into its own coffin, and makes itself into hypocrisy. Never-mind the person who is offended by political correctness. Never-mind the who-knows-how-many Christians and Jews alike the Supreme Court offended with their 2005 decision regarding the display of the Ten Commandments. Simply put, political correctness, while originally having good intentions, has turned into a war machine which is destroying America’s Christian heritage, along with its morality.

Political correctness and Christianity cannot coexist with each other, as one condemns the other. Political correctness condemns Christianity for its beliefs, and also condemns anyone who quotes scripture. Why? Because the Bible itself is politically incorrect. It outright condemns homosexuality in Leviticus 18, it puts the pro-choice belief under serious moral and Biblical question with Jeremiah 1:5,  it states that God hates divorce in Malachi 2:16, and it acknowledges the existence of an eternal hell in several places, one of which is Luke 16:23 when Jesus himself acknowledged its existence with His parable of Lazarus and the rich man.

And thus is the biggest issue in America today, the decline of Christianity and knowledge of the Bible, and the use of political correctness as a weapon against Christianity.