A Message to Mayor Pete from a Latina Mama: ‘DON’T FORCE YOUR SEXUAL IDEOLOGY ON ME AND MY CHILDREN’

/in , , , , , /by

By Ana Samuel

Yes, be polite to us, and we will be polite to you. But we know that we are in an intense battle over the hearts and minds of our children. Mothers are very good at educating and protecting our children from harm when we believe they are in danger. This time, that danger is the harmful sexual ideology of the Left.

I would like to respond to a tweet by Pete Buttigieg, newly announced Democratic presidential candidate. Last week, he tweeted:

People will often be polite to you in person, while advancing policies that harm you and your family. You will be polite to them in turn, but you need not stand for such harms. Instead, you push back, honestly and emphatically. So it goes, in the public square.

Buttigieg, the mayor of South Bend, Indiana, is a man in a same-sex marriage. The tweet’s sub-text is that anyone who refuses to cheer for same-sex marriage or support the Left’s sexual ideology is a bigot — someone who is out to harm Mayor Pete and his family.

Mayor Pete, it cuts both ways. As a Latina mama in touch with a number of other Latinas with traditional family values, I can tell you we are faced every day with people who are “polite to us in person” but who advance and execute policies that assault our values, harm our families, and hurt our children.

Enough Is Enough

I’m talking about policies that undermine our parental rights and duties by seeking to indoctrinate our children in progressive sexual ideology without our consent and sometimes in spite of our explicit protest. Consider just a few examples:

  • The public schools in my area where reading assignments from the Language Arts curriculum ask: “What is heteronormativity and how is it harmful?” (Mind you: this is a question from the school district’s recommended language arts curriculum for eighth graders, not from a single health teacher or counselor. It is not unusual for the LGBT theme to find its way into history classes, foreign language studies, and even STEM courses. The explicit goal is to normalize LGBT lifestyles throughout curricula).
  • Pediatricians who ask to see our teenagers alone and then push to prescribe them contraceptives or ask them about sexual behaviors that we find offensive. Our teens themselves bring these pediatricians’ inappropriate behavior to our attention. (One OBGYN slipped a prescription for oral contraceptives stealthily to a 14-year-old daughter of a Mexican friend of mine, after she had explicitly stated to his face that she did not wish to see her daughter on oral contraceptives.)
  • Sex education classes in which our kids are taught unproven Freudian-Kinseyan doctrines that “sexual repression” will cause neuroses (“express yourself, don’t suppress yourself”), and which preach about topics like abortion, masturbation, condom use, sex toys, “outercourse,” oral stimulation, and rectal intercourse, with all the humor and scientific grounding of a Saturday Night Live sketch, while refusing to seriously address the short and long-term medical and psychological health risks of those actions.
  • Public library programming where unicorns, rainbows, gingerbread persons, drag-queen story hours, and other symbols of progressive sexual ideology make an appearance, so that we must regularly steer our toddlers clear of the propaganda. With our middle-school children, it’s much harder to opt out. Trendy middle-school books (published after 2014) that appear to have fairly innocuous plots frequently feature an LGBT teen or gay couple, ever-so-gently normalizing the ideas that are so conflicting to our consciences. (Avoiding these storylines isn’t easy, since book-review websites regularly delete or block parents’ reviews that warn of LGBT elements, so we cannot even alert other parents of the real content within these books.)
  • And last but not least, the latest round of violence against children: efforts to entice children to question the reality of their sex through school gender-transitioning ceremonies, pronoun-sensitivity training, and other transgender propaganda. Parents have historically enjoyed the right to direct the education and upbringing of their children, under the correct presumption that parents—rather than school counselors, psychiatrists, teachers, government bureaucrats, or any other persons—are best able to act in their children’s best interests. Now, activists are pushing courts to allow minors to receive puberty-blocking drugs and cross-sex hormones against their parents’ objections.

Mr. Mayor, it is hypocritical for you to cry foul about policies that “harm you and your family” while your side pushes for government intrusions into the parent-child relationship at the most fundamental levels.

At some point, we say “enough is enough.” Basta.

Toleration for You, but Toleration for Me Too

Mothers tend to emphatically care about the welfare of all children, regardless of their family’s origin or current form. We also tend to emphatically care about every LGBT person—recognizing our common humanity even when we do not agree with their lifestyle choices. When we are polite to you, we are coming from a place of deep moral principle and authenticity. It’s not a superficial cover up for our true beliefs about you. You are rights-bearing individuals (like all of us) endowed with human dignity.

Although our home countries have often been viciously anti-gay places, there is a deep understanding among Hispanic mothers that those who identify as LGBT have suffered a lot, and that many have lived a life of hurt, harm and pain. We feel great sympathy for your suffering. But the ideas you have developed from painful experiences are not always sound ones. And we can distinguish between the two: between affectionate concern for you as a person and disagreement with your ideas. So please stop shutting us out of the conversation by the intellectually dishonest rhetorical expedient of implying or saying that we are bigots. We are the opposite of bigots.

We are prepared to co-exist peacefully and tolerate a great deal of what you propose, but not at the expense of losing our own ability to practice and preach our own values and freedoms. We are happy to work side-by-side with you, to have you as our coaches, neighbors and friends, but don’t cross the line and tell us what sexual values to cherish and uphold.

Check Your Financial Privilege

Blacks, the poor, and children have always paid a disproportionately heavy price for the breakdown of marriage and sexual morality in society. Marriage between husband and wife has historically been the institution that best offers women, children and the poor a decent shot at a peaceful, stable, financially secure, socially connected life.

Please note that I’m not blaming the erosion of marriage on the LGBT movement. No, we in the mainstream did that all on our own. However, the LGBT movement has further eroded marriage, and in a more shocking way. It is not a good idea to tell society that you don’t need a member of the opposite sex to have a baby or that kids don’t need a mom and a dad because they will do fine in any kind of arrangement. That’s not true, and there’s plenty of empirical data to prove it.

Respecting the truth about sexuality and marriage is also the least expensive. Friend, it takes a lot of money to circumvent nature. It takes upscale health insurance to pay for those doctor’s visits to the urologist, OBGYN, and additional medical care linked to sex outside of marriage, rectal intercourse, or cross-sex hormones. It takes a lot of money to pay for that surrogate rent-a-womb so that two men can have a baby. Even if she’s from a third world country—and easily exploitable—it’s still expensive (and the ethics don’t look good). It also takes a lot of money to go through IVF, usually requiring dual-income households.

The fact is, permanent, monogamous, exclusive marriage between husband and wife is the cheapest and highest quality deal on the market. It’s the most financially accessible way to have a child and the safest way to experience sexual pleasure. It also provides some built-in sexual complementarity: a family environment that educates in sexual diversity by example and is more likely to offer balanced childcare, with both sexes offering their unique and invested perspectives on how to raise the children.

Amigo, I’m sorry, but these are the truths of nature. Hijacking nature with cutting edge technology may sound attractive to those who can afford the niceties of upper-class life, but not to those working to meet their basic daily needs. (Do you think getting a sex change is cheap? Don’t you think the poor have other things to think about?) Your agenda requires a lot of extra cash—either that, or socialized medicine. And many of us Hispanics have fled from countries like Cuba and Venezuela (and increasingly Argentina and Mexico) precisely because socialist policies in our home countries turned despotic.

Ask yourself: is the lifestyle you are setting up as a pattern for others to follow replicable and sustainable? Or does it further destabilize the family form that has provided the greatest financial and social stability to women, children, and the poor? The evidence consistently points to the latter.

You play the victim card, but it’s well-off same-sex couples who can afford to cushion themselves and their children from the costly effects of the progressive sexual lifestyle. You can redirect your children’s attention away from the gaping absence of a mother or a father towards a good education, nice clothes, memorable experiences, and recreation. However, your lifestyle cannot be sustained by millions of people who make less money than you. The mothers in my circles know this, and we care about those poor children — and their mothers and fathers, too.

The weight of the past fifty years of social science evidence is virtually unanimous in its conclusion: children — and societies — do best when kids are raised by their married, stable, biological parents. Separate a child from his or her biological mother or father, and you’ve made that child much more likely to experience internal conflict, significant pain and suffering, relational struggles, and a host of other issues.

Challenge Accepted

So yes, be polite to us, and we will be polite to you. But we know that we are in an intense battle for the hearts and minds of our children. We mothers may be underground and quiet, we may not be marching in the streets, and we may not be debating you in public. But we are meeting for coffees in our homes, talking privately with our school teachers, spreading thoughts the media refuses to print, and speaking freely while the First Amendment still means something. Yes, so long as we still enjoy the freedom of association in this country, we will continue to meet and organize, to speak and teach.

Mothers are very good at educating and protecting our children from harm when we believe they are in danger. This time, that danger is the sexual ideology of the Left.

Finally, to my Latina sisters, my message is this: ¡Encuentren su voz! ¡No dejen que la ideología de genero de la izquierda borre nuestros valores culturales sobre la familia! ¡No dejen de ejercer sus derechos de madres! ¡Mamas del mundo: únanse!

This essay originally appeared at Public Discourse: The Journal of the Witherspoon Institute and is reprinted with permission.

COLUMN BY

Ana Samuel

Ana Samuel, PhD, is the daughter of Mexican immigrants, the wife of an Argentine immigrant, and the mother of six awesome children. She completed her undergraduate studies at Princeton University and her doctoral degree from the University of Notre Dame before becoming a founding mother and the Academic Director of CanaVox.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Growing Up, She Thought She Was a Man. Now She’s Fighting the Patriarchy.

Thousands of Boy Scout Leaders Face New Child Sex Allegations; Names Expected to Be Released Tuesday | NBC New York

Drag Queen ‘Quiet Revolution’ Exposed by Brave Catholics

Have a news tip? Submit news to our tip line.

EDITORS NOTE: This Church Militant column is republished with permission.

America and the Family Business Rule — Can We Save ‘The American Dream’?

/in , , , , , /by

There is an old saying in family businesses, “The first generation starts a business. The second generation runs it. The third generation ruins it.”

Metaphorically, our American family business is in the third generation.

Our Founding Fathers rejected monarchy, oligarchy, aristocracy, theocracy, and formed the United States of America as a Constitutional Republic – the greatest experiment in individual freedom and upward mobility anywhere in the world. What happened?

To answer that question we must examine the historical context of the three generations.

Our Founding Fathers lived at a time in history when “We the people” had little value. Societies were structured along binary feudal lines and divided between the ruling elite and the enslaved population who served them. Slavery was a matter of degree – from physical chains and ownership of another human being, to caste systems that predetermined social position, to social structures where populations were subjects of ruling monarchs, oligarchs, or subjects of the tyranny of religious theocratic rule.

Our Founding Fathers had a different idea. They decided to build a more perfect union, a representative democracy that valued the people of society and entrusted them with the responsibility of elections to choose their own leaders. It was a radical experiment in social policy that reflected a seismic shift in social attitudes.

A government of the people, by the people, and for the people offered unparalleled opportunities for upward mobility and the freedom to pursue one’s dreams. Capitalism and the free market economy allowed workers to keep the fruits of their labor and created a thriving middle class. Public education that taught competency, literacy, and a patriotic regard for freedom and the American ideal was mandated. What was the catch?

The freedom and opportunity that defined the American ideal required its citizens to become responsible, self-sufficient adults. The early years of the American experiment were particularly harsh and difficult years but living free was worth the effort – individual freedom, religious freedom, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of the press, and freedom to petition the government were rights that required adulthood.

Living free and dying free was something that was not taken for granted in the 18th century. The success of the American ideal depended upon the shared American spirit of commitment to personal freedom by both government and the governed. It was understood that the freedoms guaranteed by our Constitution and Bill of Rights were a promise of equal opportunity not a guarantee of equal outcome.

The 19th century was a period of enormous growth in America and change for our metaphorical American family business. The industrial revolution transformed America from an agrarian society of handmade goods to an industrial society of machine made goods. The agrarian farm economy gave way to an industrial urban economy of wage labor, factories, trade unions, banking with an expanded credit system, the man-made Erie Canal, and a railway system to move manufactured goods from factory to market.

The growth of America during the 19th and early 20th centuries was supported by the American spirit, the American ideal, and the American dream:

“The American Dream is a national ethos of the United States, the set of ideals (democracy, rights, liberty, opportunity, and equality) in which freedom includes the opportunity for prosperity and success, as well as an upward social mobility for the family and children, achieved through hard work in a society with few barriers. . . The American Dream is rooted in the Declaration of Independence, which proclaims that ‘all men are created equal’ with the right to ‘life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.’”

The ethos of freedom and equal opportunity is what ended slavery in the United States with the 13th Amendment in 1865, and what provided women the equal right to vote in the United States with the 19th Amendment in 1920. The early and mid-20th century in America were marked by world wars that threatened American ideals of freedom and strengthened the bonds of the American family in common cause.

There was a decade of calm and rebuilding at the end of WWII that ended with America’s involvement in the disastrous Vietnam War 1955-1975.

The third generation of America’s family business began in the 1960s with the Cultural Revolution that continues to threaten the American ideal and the American dream. The anti-establishment generation began their assault on the vision of the Founding Father’s and rejected its intrinsic requirement to become fully functional emotional adults who accept the responsibilities of life in a free society. These emotional children disguised as chronological adults were determined to enjoy the benefits of freedom without accepting the responsibilities of freedom. They preferred the dependency model of collectivism and its seductive promises of social justice and income equality.

The Declaration of Independence is an ideological document of limited government of the people, by the people, and for the people. The first generation wrote the document and started the American family business based on freedom, equal opportunity, and responsible adulthood. The second generation embraced the ideals of freedom, equal opportunity, and adult responsibility and ran the family business. The third generation demands freedom, demands equal outcome, and rejects the adult responsibility required for success. The third generation is ruining the American family business. This is how it works.

The third generation of our American family identifies themselves as “progressive” by demanding a centralized government that “frees” Americans from the burdensome responsibilities of freedom and guarantees equal outcome. Progressive is truly a misnomer because their demands are entirely regressive. The Regressives’ demand is for eternal childhood where the government (Mommy and Daddy) takes care of its citizens from birth to death. Here is the problem.

Freedom is never free. The cost of freedom is adult responsibility.

The Regressives’ demand for birth to death government control is a return to the binary feudal lines of the ruling elite and the enslaved population who served them. Mommy and Daddy provide for little Johnny but they also control every aspect of little Johnny’s life. The cost of dependence is freedom.

The Regressives and their identity politics form the base of the Democrat party in America today. They are taking aim at capitalism, the free market, the electoral college, the Supreme Court structure, and the Constitution itself by insisting that the Constitution is a “living” mutable document and not the solid infrastructure of a free America.

Children are entitled to expect their parents to care for them until they are adults able to care for themselves – it is the cycle of life that supports an independent, adult, successful society. Chronological adults who demand the government care for them as if they were children have perverted the cycle of life and will eventually collapse the society. The collectivist promise of social justice and income equality promised by socialism and its deceitful leaders and has been proven false in every society it has been tried.

Collectivism, whether it is socialism or communism is a return to the binary feudal system of elite rulers and the population who serve them. Socialism/communism ALWAYS benefits the leaders at the expense of the population. There is no private property, upward mobility, or middle class in socialism/communism because the government owns and controls everything. There is only scarcity and servitude for the masses.

BUYER BEWARE!

The third generation of America’s family business represented by the Democrat party, socialist Bernie Sanders, and the colluding mainstream media has embraced the dependence of collectivism and is ruining America’s family business. The Mueller “investigation” and its ongoing Democrat initiative to impeach President Trump is an attempt at a hostile takeover of America’s independent family business. We the people are all shareholders in America’s family business and the only way to save the business is to vote at the shareholder meeting in November, 2020.

Americans must reassert their commitment to personal freedom, responsible adulthood, and life in a free society by casting their votes for America-first businessman President Donald J. Trump in 2020. We simply cannot allow the third generation to ruin America’s family business. Attendance at the November 2020 shareholder meeting is mandatory.

The Cross Still Stands Amid the Ruins of Destruction

/in , , , , /by

Europe is no longer Europe, it is Eurabia, a colony of Islam, where the Islamic invasion does not proceed only in a physical sense, but also in a mental and cultural sense.  Italian Journalist Oriana Fallaci

Free speech is the soul of our nation and the foundation of all our other freedoms. If we can’t speak out against injustice and evil, those forces will prevail. Freedom of speech is the foundation of a free society. Without it, a tyrant can wreak havoc unopposed, while his opponents are silenced.  Pamela Geller, FATWA: Hunted in America

One of the most marvelous cathedrals in the world, Notre Dame of Paris, an absolute jewel, has been partially destroyed!  Yet the Cross of Christ still stands amid the ruins.

The cathedral was built on a small island called the Île de la Cité, in the middle of the Seine and is consecrated to the Virgin Mary. Construction began in 1163, during the reign of King Louis VII, and was completed in 1345. It is considered a jewel of medieval Gothic architecture. It is the most famous of the Gothic cathedrals of the Middle Ages and is distinguished for its size, antiquity, and architectural interest.

Notre Dame Cathedral is part of the World Heritage site of “Paris, Banks of the Seine” inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1991.  UNESCO is the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. UNESCO’s programs contribute to Sustainable Development Goals defined in UN Agenda 2030, adopted by the UN General Assembly in 2015.  World Heritage sites are land grabs controlled by the United Nations.  Link

The burning of this magnificent structure brought tears, not only to the eyes of all Christians, but to all architectural historians as they watched the destruction of this gothic French cathedral.

Videos posted on social media show a segment of the French population rejoicing over the burning of Notre Dame Cathedral on Monday, including laughing and smiling emojis by users with Arab names.  Thousands of Muslims on Twitter rejoiced.

France’s Churches Vandalized

One wonders how many refugee Muslims were working on the restoration and refurbishing of the 850-year-old cathedral.  Isn’t that a question that should be asked inasmuch as the fire started in two different places according to LCI, a French TV station, and during Christians’ Holy Week?  During nine centuries there was never a single fire in Notre Dame.

While Notre Dame is undoubtedly the most well-known landmark to be affected, Paris’ second largest church, Saint Sulpice, briefly burst into flames on March 17, the fire damaging doors and stained glass windows on the building’s exterior. Police later reported that the incident had not been an accident.  An illegal Muslim immigrant had tried to burn down Saint Sulpice.

In 2016, two veiled Muslim women tried to detonate a car filled with explosives in front of Notre Dame.

In mid-March, an illegal Muslim immigrant tried to burn down the organ of the Saint-Denis basilica, (another jewel) and destroyed stained glass.  Link

European Destruction

Countless churches throughout Western Europe are being vandalized, defecated on, and torched.  In France, two churches are desecrated every day on average. According to PI-News, a German news site, 1,063 attacks on Christian churches or symbols (crucifixes, icons, statues) were registered in France in 2018.

Similar reports are coming out of Germany. Four separate churches were vandalized and/or torched in March alone. “In this country,” PI-News explained, “there is a creeping war against everything that symbolizes Christianity: attacks on mountain-summit crosses, on sacred statues by the wayside, on churches…and recently also on cemeteries.”

Who is primarily behind these ongoing and increasing attacks on churches in Europe? The same German report offers a hint: “Crosses are broken, altars smashed, Bibles set on fire, baptismal fonts overturned, and the church doors smeared with Islamic expressions like ‘Allahu Akbar.’”

For similar examples in other European countries, please see Austria, Rome, Italy, and Spain, and so many others.

Free Speech Terminated by Fox News

Ahh yes, the newsroom narrative never touched on arson of this beautiful Notre Dame cathedral.  Instead, it had to be an accident, probably because of renovation.  Somewhere a spark from some tool ignited the cathedral in two different places, and this beautiful place of worship went up in flames while the world watched.  Yeah, sure!

Not surprisingly, but wholly choreographed, two Fox News anchors actually prevented guests from discussing the recent rash of churches being attacked which included arson. Both Shephard Smith and Neil Cavuto cut off their guests.

Bill Donahue, President of the Catholic League in the United States was speaking with Neal Cavuto.  Donahue commented that we don’t know that it was an accident, “But forgive me for being suspicious. Just last month a seventeenth century church was set on fire in Paris. We’ve seen tabernacles knocked down, crosses have been torn down, statues have been smashed.”  Cavuto cut him off, but Donahue continues saying, “But I’m sorry, I mean, when I find out that the eucharist is being destroyed and excrement is being smeared on crosses.”  Then Cavuto hangs up the phone on Bill.  Watch the video of the three-minute exchange.

Shephard Smith’s guest was French media analyst and former elected official Philippe Karsenty, who said the blaze burning at the Parisian landmark was “like a 9/11.”  Smith interrupts him and states they are not going to speculate. But Karsenty continues, “The church was there for more than 850 years. Even the Nazis didn’t dare to destroy it.”

He said there have been churches “desecrated each and every week in France, all over France” in recent years. “So, of course, you will hear the story of the political correctness which will tell you it’s probably an accident,” Karsenty said before Smith interrupted and cut him off.  Philippe Karsenty took to twitter to share the harsh and censored interview.  Link

Any logical discussion of an anti-Christian or anti-Catholic arson was terminated.  As Diana West stated in her recent article, “Given what we have all been through as veterans of the jihad, lo, these nearly 18 years, it is the pathetic height of absurdity to try to stop a rational being from wondering whether there is an Islamic connection to the burning of Notre Dame — amid all of the other possibilities, including criminal negligence on an epic scale.”

Media are no longer willing or able, to robustly defend their Judeo-Christian roots.

French Catholics Speak Out

Frenchman Maxime Lepante believes Islam represents a mortal danger for all non-Muslims.  “And when our churches, our cathedrals, our cemeteries, our monuments, are destroyed by Muslim immigrants, Macron uses our policemen to protect…the mosques!  Macron is an absolute criminal; he supports the Muslim invaders who are slaughtering us and destroying our country!”

Former French President, Francois Hollande will be infamously remembered for the November, 2015 Muslim terrorist slaughter in the Bataclan Café in Paris.  The Islamic State terrorists who attacked the Bataclan theater in Paris not only killed scores of innocents — they also gouged out the eyes and sliced up the genitals of some of the victims, according to testimony in a disturbing French report.

Some victims’ bodies from the second floor of the theater had been beheaded, eviscerated and otherwise mutilated, according to two secondhand accounts reported to a parliamentary commission set up to investigate the attack.

Now France’s President Macron will also be remembered in history for the very destruction of Notre Dame Cathedral by his beloved Muslim thugs.

Islamic Destruction of Historic Artifacts

Italian journalist Oriana Fallaci is a legend and was one of the bravest souls who wrote the truth of Islam.  The Rage and the Pride and The Force of Reason were books written by a woman who fought fascism in Italy as a kid, as an adult was shot three times and left for dead by police in Mexico City, went to Viet Nam to personally report on the war and was ultimately the recipient of an imam’s “fatwa” – a fatwa designed to permanently silence Fallaci’s criticism of Islam.

The fearless journalist interviewed Ayatollah Khomeini in 1979. Forced into a chador in order to enter the Ayatollah’s presence, she ended up in a row about why women should be forced to wear such a garment, and became so enraged that she stood up and ripped off “this stupid medieval rag,” letting it fall to the floor “in an obscene black puddle.”  The Ayatollah rushed out…afraid of a woman with chutzpah!

Oriana interviewed Henry Kissinger in 1972 and he confessed in his memoirs that this interview was one of the most disastrous decisions of his career. But I digress…

In her 2001 book, The Rage and the Pride, she exposed the destruction throughout the world of historic artifacts demolished by Islam. She took up her pen to write this book after the horrors of 9-11. She told of the ruination of archeological monuments…the Bamiyan’s Buddhas of Afghanistan blown up by the Taliban on order of Mullah Omar.

It was the verdict of the Islamic Supreme Court of Kabul and their pronouncement that every pre-Islamic statue will be destroyed, every pre-Islamic symbol will be wiped out, every idol condemned by the Prophet to be pulverized.

It was pronounced on the 26th of February 2001, the same day in which the Taliban regime authorized the public hangings in the stadiums, and the last women’s rights were withdrawn.  Islamic decimation of historic architecture and documents continues, and is unabated despite being declared UNESCOs Sustainable Development World Heritage sites. Link

Fallaci tells how these people invade a country, how they live in the heart of a society that hosts them without that country questioning their differences and how the country is forced to capitulate to their so-called “religious” demands because of their own laws.

She tells of a synod held by the Vatican in October 1999 to discuss the rapport between Christians and Moslems, and an eminent Islamic scholar addressed the stunned audience declaring with placid effrontery: “By means of your democracy we shall invade you, by means of our religion we shall dominate you.”

The report was given by one of the participants, His Eminence monsignor Giuseppe Bernardini, archbishop in the Turkish Diocese of Smyrna.

Oriana says, “Dealing with them is impossible.  Attempting a dialogue, unthinkable.  Showing indulgence, suicidal.  And, he or she who believes the contrary is a fool.  The moment you give up your principles, and your values, you are dead, your culture is dead, your civilization is dead. Period.”

Heed her words…she is right!

Conclusion

European churches are vandalized, defecated on, and torched every day, historic monuments in the Middle East are destroyed, sharia law is forced on host countries who have allowed Islamic “refugees” to enter into their sovereign nations.

As for our country, the United States has been infiltrated thoroughly.  Robert Spencer in his book, Muslim Brotherhood in America, told that the Muslim Brotherhood’s infiltration of the Washington establishment is remarkable by any standard. Former FBI Special Agent John Guandolo of UnderstandingtheThreat noted in October 2011, “What we’re seeing not just inside the White House, but inside the government entities, the national security entities, the State Department – is a strong push by the Muslim Brotherhood to get their people not just into operational positions, but policy positions – deeper, long term, bureaucratic positions.”

In 2016, hundreds of Islamists were elected to local, state, and federal government, the invasion continues, and with it will come the destruction of our culture and our heritage and our historic monuments.

At the siege of Vienna in 1683, Islam seemed poised to overrun Christian Europe.  We are in a new phase of a very old war.

Is the American Church Dying?

/in , , , , /by

One often hears dire reports in the media about the impending doom of the Christian church. But Glenn Stanton of Focus on the Family recently wrote an article in the Federalist that showed such reports may be premature.

Stanton notes, “Religious faith in America is going the way of the Yellow Pages and travel maps, we keep hearing. It’s just a matter of time until Christianity’s total and happy extinction, chortle our cultural elites. Is this true? Is churchgoing and religious adherence really in ‘widespread decline’ so much so that conservative believers should suffer ‘growing anxiety’? Two words: Absolutely not. New research published late last year by scholars at Harvard University and Indiana University Bloomington is just the latest to reveal the myth.” [emphasis his]

Stanton is summarizing the research of Landon Schnabel of Indiana University and Sean Bock of Harvard University from their article in Sociological Science. They write, “Recent research argues that the United States is secularizing, that this religious change is consistent with the secularization thesis, and that American religion is not exceptional.”

But their own research leads them to deduce otherwise: “We conclude that intense religion in the United States is persistent and exceptional in ways that do not fit the secularization thesis.”

I interviewed Glenn Stanton on my radio show recently on this subject: Is the American church dying?

He told me, “You hear that everywhere, and you even hear it in the church from good Christian speakers, leaders, and pastors. They say that young people are leaving the church in droves, and there may not even be a Christian church in America in the next couple of years. And it’s just simply not true.” [emphasis his]

Stanton is the author of eight books, and he has a new one coming out soon, called, The Myth of the Dying Church, with a Foreword by Baylor’s Byron Johnson.

Stanton said the research shows that, “far from dying, “the best parts of Christianity (biblical Christianity, or what C. S. Lewis called ‘mere Christianity’) are growing in the United States and just blossoming around the world.”

He said the key is to understand the difference between the mainline churches (the older and now generally more liberal churches—and the evangelical, Bible-based churches). The former are in “freefall,” with members leaving en masse. But that’s because these churches have “long abandoned the basics of the Christian faith.”

The Apostle Paul tells us in 1 Corinthians 15 that the essence of Christianity is that Christ died for our sins, according to the Scriptures; He was buried; and on the third day, He rose from the dead, according to the Scriptures.

Paul even says about these basic truths, “By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.” This is a good thing to be reminded of at this Easter time.

Yet, Stanton notes, many of the more liberal Protestant churches and their leaders have long abandoned these basics of the faith. They have also compromised on biblical morality (e.g., sexual issues, including abortion). These are the churches in America that are dying.

Stanton told me, speaking of these liberal churches, “They are bailing on the basics of Christianity, and, guess what? People are bailing on them. People are leaving those churches as if the buildings are on fire, and do you know where they are going? They are not going nowhere. They are going to the biblically faithful churches, and those are the churches that are growing. So basically what we have here is a great, great good news story. Yes, some parts of Christianity are declining, but those are the people that are compromising the faith. They might as well become Unitarians or something like that.”

I remember reading that only 20 percent of modern day Unitarian Universalists even call themselves Christians. Why pretend?

Jesus said to the professing Christians of Laodicea, “I would that you were hot or cold, but because you are lukewarm, I will spew you out of My mouth.”

In his article for the Federalist, Stanton observes, “The percentage of Americans who attend church more than once a week, pray daily, and accept the Bible as wholly reliable and deeply instructive to their lives has remained absolutely, steel-bar constant for the last 50 years or more, right up to today.”

Stanton adds, “The number of church attendees has continued to rise each and every decade over our nation’s history right up until the present day.”

So, as has been said, “The good news is: the bad news is wrong.”

True Christians are taking the time to worship the crucified and risen Christ.

He is risen. He is risen indeed.

Why Even the Nonviolent Own Guns

/in , , , /by

Gun rights are pretty much common knowledge. A lot of Americans have a handgun in their possession and they’re ready to use it if needed. However, there are many people who are against guns, or they are just not violent individuals in particular. In times when mass shootings have become usual occurrences on the news, it only makes sense that more and more people would turn their backs on weapons.

Even so, there are many citizens who don’t give up on executing their right to wield a gun. People who are big opposers of violence are in the same boat. But why is that? Here we take a look at some reasons why even nonviolent people have a handgun in their household.

Guns Boost Confidence

The aftermath of mass shootings and the increase in criminal activities overall are causing people to feel unsafe wherever they go. Usually, people put themselves in a victim’s shoes and try to think about what they’d do if they were there. They begin to worry about their safety, as well as the safety of their loved ones to the point that they become paranoid and obsessive. While nobody should take their safety for granted, too much of these thoughts can be detrimental to one’s mental state.

People are so afraid because they don’t see any way to protect themselves in case they would be involved in such a dangerous situation. This is where guns come into play. Obviously, these are tools that can injure someone just at the pull of a trigger. So, they can make any holder feel significantly safer than they would without a gun.

Therefore, even if they are against violence and don’t want to use guns, they can simply buy one to feel better and safer in a world where danger can happen anytime.

Looking Cool

There are many types of people, and among those who just want to live normally, there are those who love attention and being praised. Even those who are against violence might feel this way at one point. That’s why they could end up spending money on a weapon.

Yes, there are people who love the idea of being cool and intimidating, so flaunting a handgun around is what they settle for. Just like some people love bragging about their money/cars/possessions, there are Americans who take pride in showing off their gun collection. Being against violence doesn’t stop them from having that feeling of empowerment.

Protection Can Be Increased through Guns

A thief coming into your home during the night is a scary scenario that you’ve probably only seen in movies so far. Still, it’s enough to send shivers down anyone’s spine. In such a situation, the right thing to do is calling the police, but what would one do until the police arrive? The time that the authorities take to rush to the scene may be just enough for the perpetrator to finish their act and even end up injuring someone.

With a gun, though, someone who’s in danger can save some time until police arrive. The trigger doesn’t have to be pulled – just threatening the criminal might be enough to make him keep the distance. A woman holding a handgun in her small lady hands, for example, doesn’t automatically make her violent. It just means that she values her safety, as well as the family’s safety too much and wants to protect it.

That’s why the majority of gun owners declare that guns make them feel much safer, and it’s usually the main reason why Americans choose to own a weapon.

Hunting

Hunting is one interesting and unconventional hobby. Although hunting requires the use of a gun to kill an animal, that doesn’t mean the one handling the weapon is a violent person. Despite people’s thoughts, it is an activity that can be done in order to save someone’s farming livelihood. In other words, it might have to be done as a last resort, and the one pulling the trigger could be a very nice and considerate person.

At the same time, hunting can be done for food – either for the hunter himself or his family.

Shooting Can Improve the Mental State

Guns can be used for something else besides protection and hunting. Improving mental health is something that can be done through target shooting, so this might be another reason why a nonviolent person could wield a gun.

Basically, shooting takes a particular amount of concentration in order to help the shooter focus on hitting the target. The one holding the weapon has to be careful at what’s in front of him/her, as well as what’s around so that he/she doesn’t do any wrong move. As a result, the respective person will forget about stress and any other problems and will focus on precision and carefully holding the weapon.

In addition, shooting can help release a lot of stress that’s put on a human’s shoulders. Instead of taking their feelings out through less rational methods, they can simply engage in target shooting and take all of their negative emotions out.

Simply put, shooting can serve as a different form of meditation. It’s a way to cleanse your mind of all the negative thoughts and polish it. The benefit of meditation is that it makes the mind stronger and helps with concentration. In fact, studies have proven how meditation plays a huge role in the performance of sports professionals’. Therefore, meditation doesn’t have to be just about sitting and contemplating life – it can also be done through target shooting.

Final Thoughts

Some individuals might be against violence, but that doesn’t mean that they don’t want to protect themselves or their loved ones against potential dangers. Sometimes, guns are the only things that can save them from a threat, even if they don’t end up pulling the trigger. Being a gun owner might often be misunderstood, but personal safety and mental health are more important than other people’s opinions.

VIDEO: Churchill and the Jews….simply fascinating!

/in , , , , /by

Thanks to my friend Ann Alexander for this riveting historical piece.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Sen. Joseph McCarthy’s Passover Message: Jews as “Champions Of Liberty”

America’s Jewish Left Just Declared War On Israel

RELATED VIDEO: ZOA President Mort Klein Tells Congress: Islamic Jew Hatred Threatens American Jews (April 9, 2019)

Paris Weeps as Notre Dame Burns

/in , , /by

April 15th, President Macron was scheduled to address the nation at 8 PM, to present a sort of executive summary of government policy, revised but not diverted by five months of weekly Gilet Jaune actions. I switched on the television 10 minutes before the hour, expecting to hear the usual quibbling: The Gilets Jaunes expect nothing and won’t be satisfied until the president resigns. What a surprise. Commentators, specialists, journalists and the man in the street don’t think any real problem will be really solved. That’s a safe bet. They will all, who knows why, entertain the confusion between the Gilets Jaunes, boiled down to some thirty thousand seditionists, and French voters that may or may not have joined in the great national debate. President Macron does not have to satisfy the Gilets Jaunes. We live in a democracy, not a tyranny of turbulent minorities.

I turn on the television.

No, it’s not the panel waiting to pounce on the president.

It’s Notre Dame in flames.

You don’t have to be Catholic, Christian, or a lover of cathedral architecture. You don’t have to be Parisian, French, or a citizen of the western world. Raging flames devouring Notre Dame can bring tears to your eyes. It is universally heartbreaking.

Here in Paris, awestruck pedestrians stopped in their tracks. Gasped. Prayed. Exclaimed. Sobbed. Watched in disbelief as the sky-high inferno defied our will and determination. On the doorstep of Holy Week, Notre Dame was going up in flames and it looked like nothing could stop it. Do leaden roof tiles burn and melt, do stones go white hot and lose their grip, will we watch, helpless, as fire consumes the entire edifice, leaving a gaping black hole in the heart of Paris?

Is it terrorism? No one knows. It is absolutely terrifying. What if nothing could stop the blaze? It could spread across the Ile St. Louis, swallowing up mansions and touristy restaurants, leveling expensive hotels and sizzling a dozen Berthillon ice cream parlors.

Time stands still, the 19th century Viollet-le-Duc spire fills to bursting with red hot flames, dense turbulent multi-color smoke billows and roars. It seems like nothing can get on top of the fire. No ladder can reach that high. President Trump slaps us with a scorching tweet: Bring on the water bombardiers! Commentators, originally brought in to haggle over President Macron’s speech, mumble and stutter. Hmmm, maybe the Canadairs are too far south? I can hear my American friends snickering. “Those stupid French don’t even know how to extinguish cathedral fires.” It takes a while before we learn that a cathedral is not a forest, even when the roof beams are made of hoary oak. You can’t bombard Notre Dame with tons of water. The walls would come tumbling down.

The spire bends and collapses like a spent candle.

Later, we join the stream of people coming from all directions, on foot, on scooters, bikes, and motorcycles, converging in hushed tones at vista points on Ile St. Louis. An urban pilgrimage that reminds us, on a very small scale, of the millions that walked through the city after the Charlie Hebdo / Hyper Cacher / Montrouge jihad attack. Leaving the fire behind, we walk along the quai, embraced by a mild spring evening and the enduring beauty of bridges spanning the Seine, lights glittering on the softly flowing river.

Synagogues brûlées République en danger

“Torched Synagogues Troubled République.” We marched behind that banner in April 2002. The synagogue in Trappes had burned to the ground in October 2000. They said it was caused by a short circuit. And today we discover that French churches by the hundreds are desecrated, vandalized, sullied and cursed with Allahu akhbars. Arson is suspected in a March 17th fire at l’Eglise St. Sulpice. A week earlier a suspect was arrested for vandalizing the Basilique St. Denis. Inès Madani, ringleader of a cluster of niqab-clad jihadists was just sentenced to eight years in prison for enlisting and inciting terrorists. She will be tried six months from now for the botched car bomb attack on a side street near Notre Dame in 2016.

Two and two make four but the agonizing repetition of jihad assaults on the Western world does not prove that the spectacular Notre Dame fire is part of the series. While many, of all origins, shed tears over the blaze, others are exulting. Including antifas, left wing ultras, and ranking members of the French Students’ Union. France’s chief rabbi Haim Korsia was one of the first to express solidarity. Muslims can be found on both sides of the divide. Before the Notre Dame fire, Gilets Jaunes and assorted allies solemnly promised to burn and bleed Paris this Saturday. Apocalypse now. It is their prepaid reaction to the president’s — now postponed — speech. The government has been on the defensive since mid-November, allowing Yellow Saturdays to become an abiding feature of the cityscape. Thugs — of the gilet jaune, black blocs or banlieue persuasion — attack the police, torch cars and banks, sack and plunder boutiques, pelt firemen with rocks, and spout trash ideologies. They are the ones that vandalized l’Arc de Triomphe, fellow of the Tour Eiffel – Notre Dame trinity.

What do we know now, what will we know eventually? At this stage, the fire is being investigated by a criminal police unit… as accidental. They cannot go into the cathedral until inspectors have eliminated the danger of structural collapse. We don’t know if concrete evidence of the fire’s origin has gone up in smoke or is lurking in the charred and sodden remains that skulk on the cathedral floor. Officials have access to countless sources of information, while those who suspect a jihad attack rely on shaky “if x then y” logic. They assume that mainstream media, hand in hand with the government, will hide the truth.

Spontaneous combustion

The logic of real life is not so simple. The monumental Notre Dame fire may have been caused by a careless gesture or by an arsonist hell bent on destruction. A moment of inattention, a slight misjudgment, a stupid coincidence can have tragic consequences in a human life. A small spark could be responsible for the inferno that almost destroyed Notre Dame. According to published reports, when the first alarm rang at 6:20 PM the cathedral was evacuated but the source of the fire was not detected. 23 minutes later, the fire alarm rang again, and it was already too late to keep the fire from spreading to the entire roof. From there on, it’s a story of courage and heroism. The crown of thorns, the tunic of St. Louis the Crusader, and other treasures were saved. The belfries did not collapse. No fatalities. One firefighter slightly injured. The stained glass windows and the organ are apparently intact.

And the soul-searching begins. Was the cathedral, like so many national monuments, pauperized, bereft of safety features that would have prevented this colossal damage? Is it the lack of faith and penury of the faithful that reduces the Catholic architectural heritage to one more Disneyland? Has our capitalist, individualist, globalized, consumerist society turned its back on past glory and failed in its duty of transmission? The shame of the Church mired in abject pedophile scandals could, in itself, destroy one cathedral after the other by spontaneous combustion. And the Pope? Too busy compromising with Islam, shielding Jerusalem from Jewish sovereignty, and exhorting us to welcome immigrants to protect the fast-disappearing Christians of the Levant.

Mixed feelings

Holy Week was mortally dangerous for Jews in Christian lands. The main entrance to Notre Dame is flanked on the left by the statue of the blindfolded Sinagoga and on right by the noble Ecclesia. Ramadan is perilous for Jews in Islamic countries… or neighborhoods. The fiery Erdogan wants to turn Hagia Sophia into a mosque. And today, when the great fortunes of France have pledged hundreds of millions of euros to restore Notre Dame… the social justice gang gives them boos and sneers. If they had so much money, why didn’t they give it to us… the people?

Jihad, cheap Facebook unrest, social media gutterish, anti-Semitic anti-Zionism, incendiary balloons from Gaza, seething hatred, vituperation, depravity, raging transgenderism, identity politics, cultural impoverishment, and flames leaping from the age-old rooftops of Notre Dame that bring tears to my eyes. I weep for the fragility of civilization, here in its concrete monumental form, there in the eloquent expression of noble values. For one night, the flames of Notre Dame portrayed those devouring forces that stubbornly defy our humanity.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Embarrassing Gaffes Continue to Show Media’s Ignorance of Religion

Elegy for a Fallen Spire

A Fire in the Heart of Europe

Catholic Bishop: ‘If Europe Disappears, Islam Will Invade the World’

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in The Times of Israel. It is republished with permission.

Colorado Sex Ed Bill Would Force Kids to Learn LGBT Ideology, Ban Talk of Abstinence

/in , , , , , , , /by

Colorado’s wildly controversial, comprehensive sex ed legislation has ignited national discussions about how far Americans want to expose their children to a radical social agenda.

More than a few eyebrows were raised when Colorado passed its mandatory comprehensive sex education law in 2013, which required students undergo “culturally sensitive” lessons.

“Culturally sensitive” meant that sex ed lessons would incorporate minority perspectives on sex that had not previously been represented in sex-ed—including LGBT individuals, but also other groups. (In practice, this meant teaching and affirming more diverse kinds of sex.)

Though many parents were concerned, those concerns were appeased by the fact that students could discuss their moral, ethical, and religious beliefs on sex and sexuality in the classroom. It also allowed some schools to be excused from provisions of the law, if requested.

Yet, just five years later, Colorado’s Democrat-controlled General Assembly thinks the 2013 law is no longer good enough to address the sexual education of teens.

Enter HB 1032.

HB 1032 would do away with all the “concessions” included in the 2013 law and would specifically prohibit religious, moral, and ethical perspectives on sex from being discussed in the classroom.

The bill demands that schools teach about the relational and sexual experiences of LGBT teens. It would forbid any emphasis on abstinence and sexual-risk avoidance as the only foolproof method against pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases, and even declares that saying so in the classroom is against the law.

HB 1032 would strip teachers, administrators, and school boards of the ability to choose the content of their comprehensive sex ed curriculums and would no longer allow schools to be excused from the requirements of the bill.

The bill is almost militant in its stringent requirements and prohibitions, thoroughly censoring the speech of teachers and crushing parental rights and religious freedom in the classroom.

Currently, only two states in the country (California and Louisiana) prohibit schools from speaking about religious beliefs regarding sex. The majority of states—including Colorado currently—allow abstinence to be stressed or emphasized to teens as the only foolproof method against sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancy.

Yet, HB 1032 would flat-out ban speech that suggests abstinence is the best and healthiest choice. That’s despite the fact that the majority of American teens are choosing abstinence, and Colorado teens have a lower rate of sexually transmitted diseases and unwanted teen pregnancies than the national average.

HB 1032 would flat-out ban speech that suggests abstinence is the best and healthiest choice.

Prohibiting emphasis on abstinence isn’t the only instance of the Colorado Legislature attempting to place words into the mouths of teachers and ideology into the hearts of our children. HB 1032 would also require that teachers who discuss pregnancy outcomes, like adoption and parenting, also discuss abortion.

If passed, Colorado would become only the third state in the country to have that, after Vermont and California.

Clearly, the vast majority of American parents, teachers, and schools believe adoption and abortion are not morally or ethically equivalent options. The bill brazenly refers to teaching abortion as an example of “objective, unbiased” instruction, despite abortion being one of the most contentious issues of our time.

It probably comes as no surprise that Planned Parenthood lobbies across the nation for comprehensive sex education bills to be enacted, and Colorado was no exception.

It certainly isn’t coincidence that Planned Parenthood is one of the world’s largest providers of comprehensive sex education materials in the world, peddling radical content that even the most liberal among us might find too shocking for our taste.

Planned Parenthood’s ready-made sex education curriculum just happens to fit the exact requirements HB 1032 would impose on local school districts. Its materials often promote virtually any type of sexual exploration and experimentation as a “safe and healthy” part of any relationship, no matter the child’s age or biological sex, just as long as you “say yes.”

Planned Parenthood’s ready-made sex-education curriculum just happens to fit the exact requirements HB 1032 would impose on local school districts.

That last point is certainly the provision of Colorado’s sex education bill that garnered the most heartfelt protests from parents during the 20-odd hours of public testimony. Parents tend to take issue with the government mandating teaching elementary school students the definition of “consent.” They already know the answer.

In Colorado, as in most other states, the definition of consent for elementary students is: Illegal. Criminal. Unsafe.

Parents have been rightfully confused on how teaching young children about consent could possibly protect them from predators. How did decades of “No Means No!” education become upended to be “Yes Means Yes”?

Young children are certainly capable of voluntarily saying the word “yes” to acts that might feel good but are nonetheless deeply harmful and traumatic. It is a parent’s job to protect their children from an agenda that has shifted sex education dialogue from being one of protection to one of pleasure, from prevention to gratification.

Unfortunately, HB 1032’s sponsors and supporters have downplayed the tens of thousands of parents clamoring for the bill to die as well as the national dialogue the bill has ignited on how parents can guard their children’s hearts and minds in today’s schools.

HB 1032 has already been passed through a state House committee, the House floor, and its first state Senate committee, despite the overwhelming outcry. The bill is currently being considered in a Senate fiscal committee, which will soon vote on whether $1 million will be allocated from the general fund to schools to help them pay for implementing the burdensome legislative requirements.

If passed out of committee, the full Senate will vote on the bill, and then it will be off to the desk of Colorado’s openly gay governor, Jared Polis, for signature.

It is a parent’s job to protect their children from an agenda that has shifted sex-education dialogue from being one of protection to one of pleasure, from prevention to gratification.

Families in states such as Arizona, Massachusetts, and Texas are fighting controversial provisions similar to Colorado’s. Tennessee, Alaska, Idaho, and other states are taking proactive measures to ensure family values are respected in the classroom.

Washington state parents recently took a page from Colorado parents’ book and successfully stopped their own appalling comprehensive sex education bill, as did parents in New Mexico.

But the threat isn’t limited to state legislatures. The U.S. House of Representatives will be voting soon on the deceptively named “Equality Act,” which could lead to federal courts ordering schools to implement curriculums on sexual orientation and gender identity.

We hope the outcry in Colorado continues to encourage parents in other states around the country to stay informed about what’s being taught in their children’s classrooms—and to do everything they can to protect their children from harmful ideology.

COMMENTARY BY

Stephanie Curry

Stephanie Curry is the policy manager for Family Policy Alliance.

RELATED ARTICLE: Bans on ‘Conversion Therapy’ Are Really About Locking Kids Into Transgenderism

Dear Readers:

Just two short years after the end of the Obama administration’s disastrous policies, America is once again thriving due to conservative solutions that have produced a historic surge in economic growth.

The Trump administration has embraced over 60 percent of The Heritage Foundation’s policy recommendations since his inauguration. But with the House now firmly within the grips of the progressive left, the victories may come to a screeching halt.

Why? Because they are determined more than ever to give the government more control over your lives. Restoring your liberty and embracing freedom is the best thing for you and the country.

President Donald Trump needs all of the allies he can find to push through the stone wall he now faces within this divided government. And the best way you can partner with him is by becoming a member of his greatest ally in Washington: The Heritage Foundation.

Will you activate your membership with a tax-deductible gift today?

ACTIVATE YOUR MEMBERSHIP TODAY

RELATED ARTICLE: California Parents Object to New Sex Ed Program in Public Schools

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission.

VIDEO: CNN has Hissy Fit! Trump Considered Releasing Illegal Aliens into Sanctuary Cities

/in , , , , /by

Well, if they must be released where else should he release them?  Wouldn’t Dems want them sent to ‘welcoming’ cities? 

In probably the most blatant NIMBY move ever by the Open Borders pushers, CNN was aghast this morning at the idea that Trump would consider such an “inhumane” idea—using children and families as pawns in a political game is an outrage (they sniffed!).

(NIMBY you may recall stands for Not in My Backyard and is frequently used when some project citizens object to is proposed for their neighborhood.)

Below is CNN’s news, but it doesn’t do justice to the outrage expressed by the morning anchors.  (Yes, I watch CNN every morning for a little while to see what ticks off the Libs on any given day!).

Trump pressured Nielsen to release detained immigrants into sanctuary cities at the behest of Stephen Miller they say.

The (now!) saintly Ms. Nielsen refused.

CNN this morning,

Trump pressured Nielsen to release detained immigrants into so-called sanctuary cities

The Trump administration pressured the Department of Homeland Security to release immigrants detained at the southern border into so-called sanctuary cities in part to retaliate against Democrats who oppose President Donald Trump’s plans for a border wall, a source familiar with the discussions told CNN on Thursday.

[What do they mean by “retaliate,” I thought the sanctuary city political leaders loved the “new Americans” arriving daily from Mexico!—ed]

Fox has prepared an interactive map of sanctuary cities and counties. 

Trump personally pushed Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen to follow through on the plan, the source said. Nielsen resisted and the DHS legal team eventually produced an analysis that killed the plan, which was first reported by The Washington Post.  [Sounds like the Nielsen acolytes are squealing.—ed]

The proposal is another example of Trump’s willingness to enact hardline immigration policies to deliver on border security, a key issue for his political base.

Thursday’s reports come as the President has amplified his rhetoric on illegal immigration in recent weeks, even threatening to close the southern border if Congress and Mexico don’t take action.

White House senior adviser Stephen Miller urged senior DHS officials to make the plan a reality, the source said. The plan finally died after Miller and other White House officials pushed it in February, according to the source.

[….]

“Sanctuary city” is a broad term applied to jurisdictions that have policies in place designed to limit cooperation with or involvement in federal immigration enforcement actions.Cities, counties and some states have a range of informal policies as well as laws that qualify as “sanctuary” positions.

Most of the policies center on not cooperating with federal law enforcement on immigration policies. Many of the largest cities in the country have forms of such policies.

Click here to read it all.

What should you do?

Tell the President don’t release any of them, but if they must, sanctuary cities should be the administration’s first choice.

Heck, I would make a formal request to each of them and ask how many border-crossers would they commit to caring for? (And commit to making sure they appear at the asylum court hearing!).  Call them out by name! Call out every mayor! Get them all on record!

And, then to be sure that local media reports how many are coming, send out White House press releases to media outlets in each city with the number the city leaders have committed to welcome (house and feed on the local taxpayer’s dime!).

RELATED ARTICLE: Noncitizen Sentenced for Illegally Voting in Presidential Election

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission.

VIDEO: The Vortex — Attacking the Good Guys

/in , , , , , /by

TRANSCRIPT

I’m Michael Voris coming to you from the St. Benedict Center in Richmond, New Hampshire, where the small community here of faithful, committed Catholics is coming under attack from their home the diocese of Manchester.

These are the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart established by Jesuit Fr. Leonard Feeney, S.J., in 1949, and this particular community was born in 1989.

The attack is centered around the group’s adherence to the Catholic dogma “outside the Church there is no salvation” —  in Latin known as Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus or, in shorthand, EENS.

And yes, you heard correctly, a group of faithful Catholics is being attacked by the local diocese for believing and teaching a magisterially defined dogma of the Faith, reiterated even as recently as last year by Pope Francis and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

Br. Andre Marie: What effect has that had on the community? The effect has been utterly devastating. Not only on the brothers and sisters but on our school children, our school teachers, all of the community members, because we have lots of people who would go to daily Mass and (which isn’t allowed to be offered anymore) — no, we have an empty tabernacle that we have left opened just to remind us that Our Lord is not there.

In recent years, the climate in the Church has made a definitive turn away from tradition, and those concerned about this have serious misgivings about what’s going on here at St. Benedict Center.

CJ Doyle: There certainly does seem to be an attempt to inflict all sorts of petty humiliations on them over the years. There seems to be an animus against their traditional beliefs and practices. And by the way, this is one of the few Catholic communities and few Catholic religious orders that have been completely untainted by any charge of sexual abuse or that kind of misconduct. So why are they going after a group of innocent, unoffending, traditional Catholics while they tolerate so much dissent, so much scandal and, frankly, so much corruption elsewhere.

CJ Doyle has no official connection to the center or the community, but he is a member of a group that supports their evangelization efforts and traditional expressions of the Faith: “Why would you go after a group of Catholics who are both faithful and who are effective in promoting the Faith when you have so much scandal and so much corruption elsewhere?”

The individual responsible for the attacks from the diocese is Fr. Georges de Laire, who shortly after being promoted to judicial vicar of the diocese about two years ago, began launching the broadsides against the center.

Diocesan insiders tell Church Militant the attacks are designed in part by de Laire to improve his image in Rome so he can climb the ladder and be promoted. So he whipped up some spurious claims of heresy against the community and began hurling weighty canonical measures against its members in an effort to gain attention.

That process became complicated by a misunderstanding of one of Br. Andre Marie’s replies, and de Laire jumped on the opportunity, issuing a letter this past January stripping the community of its ability to have a diocesan-approved priest offer daily Mass, which had been the case for close to a decade.

Church Militant contacted Fr. de Laire, as well as other diocesan officials, asking for an interview about this whole situation, but that request unsurprisingly was rejected.

It’s clear that de Laire wants the community to simply give up and move on, and he’s making life very difficult for them in the meanwhile.

To be clear, the group does not preach heresy — not in the slightest — and in fact, de Laire could find himself in hot water for insinuating such a false and defamatory claim because he, in effect, is positioning the group as heretics for propounding a defined dogma of the Faith.

The diocese of Manchester launching these kinds of attacks is bringing an unwelcome spotlight on the diocese and its unpleasant history, something which likely doesn’t sit well with the bishop, Peter Libasci.

CJ Doyle: The diocese of Manchester is a relatively small diocese, but it is one of the more troubled Catholic jurisdictions in the United States. More than 60 priests and religious order brothers have been credibly accused of sexual abuse. A former bishop and a former auxiliary bishop have been rather notorious for moving molesters around and protecting them. We had the chancellor of the diocese and the public face of the diocese Monsignor Edward Arsenault who went to prison for a few years ago for embezzling hundreds of thousands of dollars in church funds to maintain a lavish lifestyle and to support the lifestyle of his same-sex paramour. And another priest who was a friend of Father Arsenault, Father Lower, committed suicide a few years ago after being accused of sexual abuse. This is one of the more really problematic diocese in the United States.

Brother Andre Marie is insistent that what is being charged is completely fallacious and that they are 100% faithful to the teaching of the Church.

Br. Andre Marie: We believe that we’re faithful to the teachings of the Church. We wouldn’t be so confident about taching the necessity of the Church for salvation if we didn’t have that on a divine assurance from the one institution on earth that is competent to teach man how it is we are saved. I believe we hold the Church’s teaching on no salvation outside the Church as the Church has always taught it.

Church Militant has learned that in response to the canonical precepts imposed by Fr. de Laire in January, the members of St. Benedict Center have filed hierarchical recourse against the measures before the Holy See and prayerfully await a decision. They have also retained civil counsel should any litigation in the civil courts become necessary.

In the meantime, they continue their remarkable work through the suffering.

Br. Andre Marie: It’s very tragic. It is utterly devastating to go into a place where you used to go to and kneel and pray to Our Lord in quiet prayer and now he’s not there. I mean, he’s everywhere by his omnipresence, but he’s not there sacramentally in the tabernacle. So it’s been devastating. It’s been a real moral blow to the community.

Anyone who would like to support the exemplary brothers and sisters of the St. Benedict Center, please just click on the link provided to help them out. Fighting off the attacks is not only costly spiritually, it also can bring a hefty financial bill as well.

Coming to you from the St. Benedict Center in Richmond, New Hampshire, this is Michael Voris for Church Militant.

EDITORS NOTE: This Church Militant video is republished with permission.

Pro-Abortion Snobbery

/in , , , , , , , /by

David Carlin: What factors divide pro-life from pro-choice Americans? Mostly, it’s the difference between humility and arrogance.

This column is about abortion, but it will take a moment or two to get to the point.  Please bear with me.

If ever there was an obvious example of fallacious reasoning, it’s this: “I am rich, and you are not.  Therefore I’m right, and you’re wrong.”

What could be more stupid than an argument along these lines?  And yet this is precisely the reasoning that has been used, century after century, by those in the higher classes to dismiss complaints made by persons from the lower classes.  This is the reasoning that permitted lords of the manor to dismiss complaints by serfs, slaveholders to dismiss complaints by slaves, mill-owners to dismiss complaints by factory hands, etc.

In a society that places great value on wealth (and what society does not place great value on wealth?), rich people cannot help but feel that they are superior people: not just superior in wealth, but superior in almost every way.  And if you are superior in almost every way, then you must be superior in judgment.

If it happens, then, that a person from the lower classes disagrees with you, it becomes obvious – does it not? – that you must be right and the other must be wrong.

Your rightness and his wrongness are so obvious, in fact, that there really is no need for you (the rich person) to examine the other fellow’s case.  Save yourself time and trouble by dismissing it from the get-go as unworthy of consideration.

And don’t waste a lot of time trying to explain to the other fellow why he’s wrong. Out of a noblesse oblige kind of courtesy, you might offer him a brief explanation; but when you see (as you soon will) that he doesn’t buy it, move on to something else.

And now to abortion.  Considered on purely intellectual merits, the anti-abortion argument is vastly superior to the pro-abortion argument.  The anti-abortion or pro-life side argues that the entity that gets killed in an abortion is a human being, a tiny human being that grows less tiny every day.

And what else could it be if not a human being?  It is not a dog or a monkey or a fish or an elm tree.  The pro-abortion side has no counter-argument that comes even close to refuting the anti-abortion case.  The best the pro-abortion side can come up with are mindless slogans like “a woman’s right to choose” or “a woman’s right to control her own body” or “if you don’t like abortion, don’t have one.”

*

This last is my favorite stupid argument.  It is strictly parallel to, “If you don’t like slavery, don’t own a slave.”

And yet, despite the obvious superiority of the anti-abortion argument, hardly ever is a pro-abortion person persuaded.  Why is this?

The answer, I think, can be found in the social class differences between pro-life and pro-abortion people.  The heart of the pro-abortion movement is found among men and women of the upper-middle classes: people who have (or soon will have when they finish college and get a few years older) good educations, good jobs, good cars, good houses, good food, good wine, high incomes, millions in assets, many important social and political connections, a cosmopolitan outlook, etc.

Given contemporary American standards, they are superior people.  They may not be superior according to the standards that prevailed in Plato’s Academy, or in ancient Sparta, or in the monasteries of St. Benedict, or in the Shaker communities. But they are without question “superior” according to present-day American standards.

By contrast, the heart of the pro-life movement is found among women from the lower-middle classes: persons with educations and incomes that are barely adequate in today’s high-price society; persons who lack the millions, the high culture, the good connections, etc.

These women tend to be religious; they tend to have more children than does the average American woman (and certainly more than does the typical pro-abortion activist); they tend to be sexually un-liberated – so much so that many of them (and this is truly shocking from a contemporary point of view) have had sexual relations with only one man, their husband.  According to present-day standards, these women are definitely inferior.

It will be pointed out that my ideas of the typical pro-life and pro-abortion person are stereotypes.  Of course. But stereotypes are often enough more or less accurate.

In any case, the typical pro-abortion activist, instead of taking seriously the arguments presented by the pro-life movement, says to herself or himself: “I am rich and well-educated, I own a handsome house or condo and a fine automobile, I am thin and athletic, and I am blessed with excellent taste when it comes to coffee, wine, food, furniture, music, movies, works of art, etc.  In short, I am a superior person.  The world is fortunate to have people like me in it.”

“And so, that anti-choice woman standing over there – whose education is limited, whose income is modest, whose house is small and unattractive and in the wrong neighborhood, whose body is unshapely and somewhat overweight, whose taste is appallingly vulgar – when she tells me that I am wrong about abortion, I would laugh at her if I didn’t pity her.  What could be more preposterous than to think that an inferior person like her might be right and a superior person like myself might be wrong?”

These “superior” people, let us remember, are the people who control the “command posts” of American culture. Which is to say that they are dominant in a number of our leading institutions: the mainstream journalistic media, the entertainment industry, our best colleges and universities, and one of our two great political parties.

They shape the public mind, especially the mind of younger generations.  If they won’t listen to reason (which they won’t), do we have any grounds to be hopeful for the long-run success of the pro-life movement?

Yes.  But I’ve run out of time (and space) today. More to come next time.

COLUMN BY

David Carlin

David Carlin is a professor of sociology and philosophy at the Community College of Rhode Island, and the author of The Decline and Fall of the Catholic Church in America.

RELATED ARTICLE: How State ‘Birthday Abortions’ Bills Stack Up to Federal Restrictions

EDITORS NOTE: This Catholic Thing column is republished with permission. © 2019 The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: info@frinstitute.org. The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.

ICE Field Operation Liberated Hundreds of Jobs — Interior enforcement of immigration laws helps American workers.

/in , , , , , , , /by

On April 3, 2019, ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) posted a news release: ICE executes federal criminal search warrant in North Texas which announced the administrative arrest of more than 280 aliens who were found to be working illegally at CVE Technology Group Inc. and four of CVE’s staffing companies.

Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) is the division of ICE that conducted this highly effective field investigation which constitutes an element of the interior enforcement mission of our immigration laws.

The news release included this excerpt:

HSI is the federal law enforcement agency responsible for upholding the laws established by the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), which requires employers to verify the identity and work eligibility of individuals they hire.

These laws help protect jobs for U.S. citizens and lawful U.S. residents, eliminate unfair competitive advantages for companies that unlawfully hire an illegal workforce, and strengthen public safety and national security.

Unauthorized workers often use stolen identities of legal U.S. workers, which can profoundly damage for years the identity-theft victim’s credit, medical records and other aspects of their everyday life.

HSI’s worksite enforcement investigators help combat worker exploitation, illegal wages, child labor and other illegal practices. Work site enforcement investigations often involve additional criminal activity, such as alien smuggling, human trafficking, money laundering, document fraud, worker exploitation and/or substandard wage and working conditions.

Immigration anarchists frequently justify their opposition to the enforcement of our immigration laws by making emotional appeals about how illegal immigration is all about desperate people who simply want to be able to live better lives. They often even raise the oxymoronic notion of enabling illegal aliens to achieve “the American dream.”

Indeed, the DREAM Act was actually an acronym for “Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act.”

Compassion, however, is never a consideration for hapless American and lawful immigrant workers who lose their jobs to illegal aliens or suffer wage suppression because of the massive influx of illegal alien workers.

The rhetoric about how immigrants (actually illegal aliens) do the work Americans won’t do leaves out the second half of that sentence, that Americans won’t do those jobs for substandard wages under dangerous substandard conditions.

It is infuriating that the “American Dream” has become ever more elusive for Americans and lawful immigrants, particularly among America’s minority communities, while political con artists have the chutzpah to invoke the imagery of the “American Dream” to create the DREAM Act.

When the DREAM Act scam was properly voted down by Congress, President Obama created the sequel to the DREAM Act, DACA: Deferred Action Childhood Arrival, by Obama’s capricious executive caveat.

Employers who intentionally hire illegal aliens do so not out of compassion but a desire to exploit vulnerable workers, paying them substandard wages under conditions that are often so substandard as to be illegally dangerous.

There is nothing compassionate about exploitation!

Furthermore, as the ICE news release reported, many aliens who work illegally not only violate our immigration laws and take the jobs Americans need, but frequently engage in identity theft and commit other crimes.

Anyone who has ever fallen victim to identity theft can attest to how profoundly this crime has deleteriously impacted their lives.

Illegal immigration is anything but a “victimless crime.”

Economists are always concerned about unemployment rates and with the number of jobs that are created or lost by the American economy but omit the critical issues of whether American workers are gaining or losing jobs and how their wages are increasing or stagnating.

Political candidates on all levels of government frequently claim that if elected they would help new companies to create more jobs. Creating new jobs can be a risky and time-consuming proposition.

However, just as it is said that “A penny saved is a penny earned,” I would argue that a job that is liberated is no different from a job that is created. Effective enforcement of our immigration laws can result in jobs being liberated — that is to say, freed up by removing aliens who are working illegally thereby immediately providing Americans and lawful immigrants with those jobs.

Investigations into the willful employment of illegal aliens is known as “Worksite Investigations” and can help to put Americans to work and enable them to support themselves and their families.

To put this specific case into proper perspective, the HSI agents who participated in this field investigation liberated at least 280 jobs, making them immediately available for American and lawful immigrant workers.

Radical Democrats who have created “Sanctuary Cities” and demonize immigration law enforcement officers are now calling for the removal of any criminal penalties provided in the Immigration and Nationality Act for aliens who enter the United States without inspection, even though Senator Schumer has proposed legislation that would have made trespassing on critical infrastructure and national landmarks a federal crime with a five-year prison sentence to deter trespassing.

Cheap labor is anything but cheap, as I noted in my recent article, “Open Borders Facilitate America’s Race To The Bottom.”

Not only is there no compassion in exploitation of foreign workers, there is certainly no compassion in acting against the interests of American workers and their families.

Today more foreign workers enter the United States each year than the number of new jobs that are created. America’s generous immigration policies permit more than one million lawful immigrants to enter the United States each year. Additionally a human tsunami of illegal aliens enter the United States, as exemplified by the crisis on our southern border. Finally, hundreds of thousands of aliens who are lawfully admitted into the United States as non-immigrants violate the terms of the admission, not only by remaining in the United States after their authorized period of admission has expired, but by otherwise violating their terms of admission, frequently involving their illegal employment in the United States.

The Immigration and Nationality Act, as it now exists, would provide strong tools to combat illegal employment of aliens in the United States. However, what is lacking is an adequate number of ICE agents to actually enforce these important laws, resulting in Immigration Failures By Design.

Sanctuary Cities further encourage illegal immigration and hobble efforts to enforce our nation’s immigration laws.

Today there are roughly 6,000 ICE agents for the entire United States of America and more than half of their time is not dedicated to the enforcement of our immigration laws but customs laws and other non-immigration laws.

So, while mandatory E-Verify would be helpful to end the employment of illegal aliens, without an adequate number of ICE agents to conduct field investigations, unscrupulous employers will easily game the system by hiring illegal aliens “off the books” or otherwise defraud the immigration system.

Advocates for “Immigration Reform” are determined to undermine any efforts or resources to enforce our immigration laws and/or secure our borders.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in FrontPage Magazine and is republished with permission.

I Take This Woman . . .

/in , , , , , , /by

The internet provides everything you’d want to know about courtships, weddings, married life, but few of them include the instructions on wife-beating.  There is a brief but enlightening film, produced by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) and posted on Jihad Watch, of a Muslim sociologist who demonstrates the “proper” wife-beating technique.  Of course, the sociologist assures his audience that Islam is merciful, and that the man, the head of the household, should not have to beat his wife every day, and to do so lightly, never to hit her face or head, bruise, break bones or cause blood to flow (m10:12, Reliance of the Traveller, A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law – ROTT).  But the cautionary statement rings hollow when the wife’s bruises will never be seen because she must be covered from head to toe.  And, should she become inured to the discipline’s sameness, there are other means of control and punishment available to him, all sanctioned by The Religion of Peace.

When is it necessary to beat one’s wife?  The sociologist did posit that there are women who prefer domineering, authoritative, and even violent husbands.  For the most part, however, beatings are needed when the wife has disobeyed him and the strict Islamic rules of marriage.  She may have refused to wear a hijab (m:2:7-8, ROTT) or the finery he chose for her; or fancied attending school with the hope of one day having a career and earning a wage.  She may have wanted to leave the house unaccompanied or without her husband’s permission; she is literally under house arrest.

The Shari’a marriage contract contains her virginity status, the dowry amount, and grants sexual intercourse rights to the male, giving him total control over his wife or wives.  Should she refuse his advances, be too ill or too young to have sex, or if she engaged in sex with another man or was raped,  he could stop her daily (financial) maintenance.  The woman is considered a she-devil, equal to a domestic animal, harmful and with crooked character.  Therefore, he may disallow her to sleep in his bed; or lock her in a room, naked, and without food.  Should he choose to enact a simple divorce by repeating “I divorce you” three times – she may receive no more than three months’ maintenance and could lose her children older than age seven.

The Muslim husband has the right to accuse her of adultery, in which case he might gather his friends and neighbors together to bury her almost up to her shoulders and stone her to death.  The film, The Stoning of Soraya M, portrays the true story of Soraya, in Iran, whose husband Ali convinced their two sons and the townsfolk that she was committing adultery so that he could marry a 14-year-old girl.  The Internet has an actual film of a Syrian woman being stoned to death by ISIS.  About four women per day are murdered in “stove bursts” in Pakistan, by husbands or in-laws who claim the wives’ scarves caught fire while they were cooking.

We are assured, however, that the discipline of beating, although necessary, is done out of love and once that’s done, life can move on.  But from where does this sociologist get the concept of love?  Surely, not from the Qur’an, which clearly stipulates that women are inferior and may be taken by force or bought from her parents.  There is no Western-style courtship – no dating, no music or dancing under the stars, and no dining in a candlelit café.  In fact, there is no courtship whatsoever. Rather, a shari’a marriage is a document, usually signed at the home of the future bride, that grants sexual intercourse rights to the male with complete control over his wife or wives.  Revered Muslim theologian, Imam Ghazali (1058-1111) defined, “Marriage is a form of slavery.  The woman is the man’s slave, and her duty therefore is absolute obedience to the husband in all that he asks of her person.”

Interestingly, the marriage contract provides four blank spaces to be completed over time.  Below the signature of wife number one, there are three more signature lines for future wives, numbers two, three, and four.  The  realization that there could be three more wives with whom she would share her husband and home immediately negates love and devotion; the religious sanction of polygamy destroys the possibility of fidelity between one man and one woman, while also increasing rivalry, conflict and stress.  The message is unambiguous: “You can be replaced.”  Not only does the man have the divine right to four wives, but also to “pleasure marriages.” Only he, not she, has the right to such dalliances, and only he, not she, has the right to divorce.  He may even rid himself of the four he has and begin anew, with four wives plus “slave wives.”

The Islamic woman is among the poorest and most oppressed in the world, and regardless of her financial station, she is caged for life.  She cannot be rescued when beaten and her husband has the right to not provide an explanation to anyone for beating her, for the Prophet has said, “A man will not be asked as to why he beat his wife.”  Sunan Abu Dawad 11:2142.  This must be reassuring.

Muslim societies are based on enslavement – the enslavement of society to the state/ideology and women to men.  The Saudi woman is always guilty, even if he breaks her ribs during a beating, and she is so victimized that denial of her situation is her only comfort.  Muslim women are imprisoned for sexual crimes done by men, yet Islam insists it honors women.  The indemnity for the death or injury of a woman is one-half the indemnity paid for a man. (o4.9, ROTT).

In a Muslim society, the woman’s virginity is the basis of the family’s honor, and honor killings  are acts of vengeance executed by likeminded family members against the female family member, for reasons such as becoming “too westernized,” refusing an arranged marriage, being the victim of a sexual assault, seeking a divorce, or (allegedly) committing adultery.  The mere perception that a woman has behaved in a “dishonorable” way is sufficient reason for murder; methods include stoning, stabbing, beating,  mutilation, burning, beheading, hanging, throat slashing, lethal acid attacks, shooting and strangulation.  Women’s advocacy groups suspect that more than 20,000 women are killed worldwide each year. The UK recorded 2,823 such crimes in 2010.

Sex for the male in Islam is a plenteous buffet of alternatives, and he need never be indicted for adultery, pederasty, infant or youth pedophilia, rape, or honor killings. He even has permission to engage in sex with his wife’s cadaver within seven hours of her death.  During a televised show in Egypt,  Professor Sheikh Sabri Abdul Raeuf, of the Islamic world’s most prestigious madrasa, was asked if it is permissible for a husband to penetrate his wife after death (necrophilia).  He replied, “It is not favorable in Islam; however Islamic law considers it as halal,” it is permissible, not a crime or sin deserving of punishment in the here or hereafter.

Men, particularly “courageous” jihadis, are rewarded with sex with perpetually exquisite virgin women, so that women are not just in competition and threatened by other women (wives) on earth, but also by supermodels in the afterlife.  The Religion of Peace offers no peace to women at any time – not in infancy, not when they are genitally mutilated in childhood or married off against their will, not in their adulthood, and not even after their death.    We must never allow Shari’a laws to overtake our American laws.

Acknowledgment: Cruel and Usual Punishment, The terrifying global implications of Islamic Law, by Nonie Darwish

Reigniting the American Revolution slogan ‘No King but King Jesus’

/in , , , /by

The American Revolution had many slogans that ignited the passions of the colonists to fight for independence from George III, the King of England. Slogans such as: Captain Nathan Hale’s “I regret I have but one life to lose for my country”, Patrick Henry’s “Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death”, General Christopher Gadsden’s “Don’t Tread On Me” flag and “No taxation without representation.”

One slogan that many have debated is “No King but King Jesus.”

Both those who defend and those who wish to debunk the “No King but King Jesus” slogan point to one historical fact. On April 18, 1775, a when British soldier ordered John Adams, John Hancock, and others to “disperse in the name of George the Sovereign King of England”, Adams responded with:

“We recognize no sovereign but God, and no king but Jesus!”

Many have written about this American Revolution slogan. Those who support it argue that John Adams and John Hancock, as well at the other Founding Fathers were orthodox Christians. Those who wish to portray this slogan as a myth point out that many of the Founding Fathers were Deists (see Molinism). Merriam-Webster defines deism as:

[A] movement or system of thought advocating natural religion, emphasizing morality, and in the 18th century denying the interference of the Creator with the laws of the universe.

In a January 18, 2001 Slate article titled “Was “No King but Jesus” a Revolutionary War Slogan?” reported:

At a 1999 commencement speech at Bob Jones University, Attorney General-designate John Ashcroft said this phrase was a slogan of the founding fathers. He also said this sentiment is found in the Declaration of Independence in the phrase, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, and are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights.”

Slate asks: Was this the motivating cry of the Revolution, and was Thomas Jefferson alluding to it in the Declaration? Their answer is that “No King but King Jesus” was used but the slogan was “not central to the American Revolution.”

The Founding Fathers wrote the Bill of Rights. The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads:

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.

Many misinterpret the Establishment Clause. The Establishment Clause was not intended to separate the Christian Church from government, rather it was intended to protect the Christian Church from the government.

In 1948, the Supreme Court ruled 8 -1 in McCollum v Board of Education that the practice of inviting religious instructors into public schools to give optional religious instruction violates the Establishment Clause. Justice Black, writing for the Court, said that the practice was “unquestionably” a violation of the Establishment Clause, which created “a high and impregnable wall” between church and state. In 1962 in Engel v Vitale, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the ruled that New York’s practice of beginning school days with a prayer drafted by school officials violated the Establishment Clause.

Perhaps it is time to reignite “No King but King Jesus”? The Founding Fathers would be taken aback by what has happened since to morality in America since religion has been taken out of our public schools and the public square.

Selwyn Duke in a column titled “Restoring Civilization: We Can’t MAGA Unless We MAMA” wrote:

Echoing many Founders, George Washington noted that “morality is a necessary spring of popular government.” The famous apocryphal saying goes, “America is great because America is good, and if she ever ceases to be good, she will cease to be great.” For sure, we can’t MAGA unless we MAMA — Make America Moral Again.

To Make America Moral Again our culture must return to its Judeo/Christian roots. Every American must embrace the ideals in our Constitution or we are lost as a nation and as a culture.

MAMA and NKBKJ are simpatico. You can’t have one without the other.

RELATED ARTICLE: Thomas Paine Argues, “No King But God”

RELATED VIDEO: Democrats Delete God – OAN.

Are Democrats Pushing Islamic Sharia Law?

/in , , , , , , /by

A fan thought I exaggerated when I wrote Sharia Law will spread like wildfire across America if Democrats win the White House. She feared my over-the-top statement about the spread of Islam will damage my credibility.

My statement is not an exaggeration. For crying out loud, the federal government illegally funded a national curriculum titled, “Access Islam”. This indoctrination program outrageously teaches students how to become a Muslim – how to pray as a Muslim – how to perform Islamic “daily worship” and how to perform the “core duties” of being a Muslim. 

A California school banned all Christian-based books from its library, including books by Christian authors. Superintendent Dr. Kathleen Hermsmeyer says they do not allow “sectarian materials” on their state-authorized lending shelves. Public schools are celebrating Islam while banning Christmas.

Public education is the battlefield of the culture war. Democrats use public schools to normalize the LGBTQ agenda in the hearts and minds of our kids. Upon infiltrating public schools, LGBTQ activists began molding and shaping students into their image beginning in pre-k. Democrats continue to up the ante, expanding deviancy. Students are being indoctrinated to embrace numerous dangerous sexual perversions under the umbrella of “healthy sex education”; BDSM, rimming, anal sex, asphyxiation, gender-bending and more.

Beginning with portraying pedophiles as victims of our closed-minded society, Democrats are pushing to legalize pedophilia along with 11 other perversions. Civil unions granted homosexuals the same benefits as marriage. And yet, Democrats chose to use activist judges to destroy God’s sacred union of marriage. This is a long way down the road from LGBTQ activists claiming they simply wanted tolerance. Today, many Americans quake in fear opposing any demand of LGBTQ activists. Democrats want government to mandate that Christians throw away their Bibles to fully embrace Democrats’ anything-goes-sexually society.

Now Democrats are using government mandates to instill Islam in public schools while rooting-out Christianity. Remember Democrat AG Loretta Lynch threat to jail anyone caught speaking badly of Islam? Lynch’s boss, Obama, was the most pro-Islam and anti-Christian president in U.S. history. 

Democrats use blacks, women, homosexuals and Muslims as useful idiots to further their extreme radical leftist agenda. For example. Democrats and fake news said that opposing Obama’s punish-America policies was racist. Had Hillary won, opposing her leftist agenda would be branded sexist. If homosexual Democrat presidential candidate Mayor Pete wins the White House, opposing his extreme radical leftist ideas will be branded homophobia. If one of the antisemitic Democrats win the presidency, opposing their hate-Israel rants will be branded Islamophobic. This tactic is called “Shaming”. Democrats and fake news routinely use shaming to silence all opposition, while forcing their anti-American and anti-Christian agendas down our throats.

Judge Jeanine Pirro’s TV show was taken off the air for two weeks for daring to tell the truth about Muslim Democrat Congresswoman Ilhan Omar’s rabid bold antisemitism. Rather than strongly rebuking Omar’s hatred for our ally, Israel, every Democrat presidential candidate decided to give Israel their middle finger by refusing to attend AIPAC. 

Can you believe there are “Muslim Community Patrol” cars in Brooklyn New York which look exactly like police cars? Disturbed residents are questioning why this is necessary because the NYPD is extremely diverse. These Muslim patrols are allowed to stealthily enforce Sharia Law in their neighborhoods; no homosexuals, no women wearing short skirts and so on. 

Respecting Islam, a California public school caved to Sharia Law by forbidding students to draw images of Mohammed. And yet, Democrats defended the NEA funding “Piss Christ” which featured a crucifix submerged in urine.

My late dad was a Methodist pastor. Dad said every year for decades LGBTQ activists brought ordaining homosexuals to the table at their annual conference. Due to the Bible’s clear rebuke, ordaining homosexuals was voted down. Then one year, it passed. We are seeing this same persistence tactic used to further Sharia Law.

Thank God Texas turned back the establishment of the first official Sharia court in America. Do not become complacent folks. These people will never give up and will keep coming back at us.

Traditions, principles and values everyday Americans and Christians hold dear are under relentless attack by Democrat enemies-within. As a Christian, I view Democrats’ aggression as the Spirit of Anti-Christ. Jesus proclaiming himself our savior and Lord is as repulsive to leftists as is showing Dracula the cross. This is why even though Islam clearly hates homosexuals and suppresses women, Democrats overwhelmingly prefer Islam over Christianity. Democrats are banning Christianity in public school while quietly replacing it with Islam.

No, I do not believe Sharia Law will overtake America. But if Democrats take the White House, Sharia Law will swiftly gain government-protected dramatic strongholds across America.