Islam is Not the way – for it is a death cult.

 Follow the word of God, and you shall see Heaven..

NC Sez:  It is NOT the place of  Christians to “forgive” lawbreakers.  We have laws for a reason and for a Christian to claim that it is our place to forgive law breakers denies the reason for having LAW!  What place is it for ANY individual or Society to forgive on behalf of the real victim of any crime who was hurt by an illegal?    Only GOD and the victim have the Right to forgive! The American Church HAS lost its soul, its spirit and its sanity!  This is another example of collectivist idolatry where we make the State and Society, GOD,  dispensing “forgiveness” and absolution!

I challenge any Christian to show me in Scripture where Society or the State has any RIGHT to forgive on behalf of a victim hurt by a lawbreaker!  Show me and proof me wrong!  The only thing the state can and should do, is dispense JUSTICE!  Forgiveness can happen  only by an individual. Clemency, which should not be confused with forgiveness, and is a very different thing from forgiveness, is done only on a case by case basis by the governor of a state for the purpose of mitigating the punishment for a crime.

Question:  What does forgiveness have to do with Law and Justice?  Either a Law is righteous and just and should be obeyed and enforced,  or it’s not just,  and needs to be repealed with retroactive amnesty.

Forgiveness has NOTHING to do with determination of the “justness” of any Law.

The Church has lost its mind because it can no longer THINK!! And the lawbreakers are happy for it! Lawlessness prevails in America!

You may also enjoy these articles too:

La Raza rooted in Saul Alinsky & funded by Imperialist, George Soros

Rick Warren: Faux-Pastor gets Dhimmi Award

###

Why We Are Going to Hell – Part 3,995

Conservative Protestants Condone Law-Breaking

Has the Christian Church Gone Crazy???

by

Paul L. Williams, Ph.D.

No Compromise Media

Evangelical Christians this week offered the Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) and members of the U.S. Senate Immigration Reform Committee their ringing endorsement of full amnesty for the 20 to 30 million illegal aliens within the country.

Open borders and high immigration, the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) proclaimed, increases membership in evangelical churches and is good for the economy.

Rev. Leith Anderson, president of the NAE, said there was no dissent among the members of his organization in ratifying a pro-amnesty resolution.

He testified that the Gospel requires that Christians be willing to forgive illegal aliens for breaking existing immigration laws and statutes.

Rev. Anderson added:

“We believe that undocumented immigrants who have otherwise been law abiding members of our communities should be offered the opportunity to pay any taxes or penalties owed, and over time earn the right to become U.S. citizens and permanent residents. The process of redemption and restitution is core to Christian beliefs, as we were all once lost and redeemed through love of Jesus Christ.”

The NAE describes itself as “. . . a network of 40 denominations comprising more than 45,000 local churches located in every congressional district and every state.”

Most of the member denominations uphold a literal interpretation of scripture and intransigent support for traditional values. The list of includes:

• Anglican Mission in America
• Assemblies of God
• Brethren in Christ Church
• Christian Reformed Church in North America
• Church of God
• Church of the Nazarene
• Churches of Christ In Christian Union
• Conservative Lutheran Association
• Evangelical Assembly of Presbyterian Churches
• Evangelical Presbyterian Church
• Evangelical Free Church of America
• Fellowship of Evangelical Churches
• Free Methodist Church of North America
• General Association of General Baptist
• International Church of the Foursquare Gospel
• International Fellowship of Christian Assemblies
• International Pentecostal Church of Christ
• International Pentecostal Holiness Church
• Presbyterian Church in America
• Primitive Methodist Church USA
• Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America
• The Brethren Church
• The Christian & Missionary Alliance
• The Evangelical Church
• The Salvation Army
• The Vineyard, USA
• Transformation Ministries
• United Brethren in Christ
• US Conference of the Mennonite Brethren Churches
• The Wesleyan Church Corporation

The position of the NAE remains incomprehensible to many conservative Christian conservatives, including Rev. Judith Schmitt of Puritan Congregation Church in Scranton, PA.

“It’s outrageous for any Christian or Christian organization to condone law-breaking,” Rev. Schmitt said. “Forgiveness is central to the Christian doctrine but approval and reward of wrong-doing is not.”

Others, including conservative writer Patrick J. Buchanan, wonder why the endorsement of plans to grant full amnesty fails to create national outrage. He points out that while 25 million Americans remain unemployed or underemployed, “8.5 million U.S. jobs are held by illegal aliens who broke into the country or overstayed their visas.”

Senator Schumer and other advocates for amnesty argue that illegals take jobs that Americans are unwilling to accept.

This argument has been laid to rest by a raid on six Swift & Co. meatpacking plants which rounded up 1,200 illegal aliens, 10 percent of the workforce. The raid failed to create any employment problems for Swift. In a matter of weeks, the plants were operating at full force – - manned by hundreds of native-born Americans who were delighted to take the jobs.

Says Vanderbilt University Professor Carol Swain, “Whenever there’s an immigration raid, you find white, black and legal immigrant labor lining up to do these jobs Americans will supposedly not do.”

A NoCompromise Contributor…

…no one comes to the Father but through Me.

by Mr. H

As Christians we believe that the only way to salvation – everlasting life – is through faith in Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior.

There is no other possible way to enter the kingdom of heaven except through Jesus Christ.

John 14:6 NASB Jesus *said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.

The issue at hand is that Mr. Obama who has stated on several occasions that he is a Christian speaks a doctrine that is not taught anywhere in the Christian Bible.

Interview with Cathleen Falsani

There’s the belief, certainly in some quarters, that people haven’t embraced Jesus Christ as their personal savior that they’re going to hell…

I find it hard to believe that my God would consign four-fifths of the world to hell.

I can’t imagine that my God would allow some little Hindu kid in India who never interacts with the Christian faith to somehow burn for all eternity.

That’s just not part of my religious makeup… ^{[ 1 ]}

One thing that Mr. Obama neglects to mention is that God gives each of us a conscience, and that conscience knows right from wrong.
God made Himself known from beginning of time.

Romans 1:18-20 NASB For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, (19) because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. (20) For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.

source Rev. Don Hamer ; Christian Anti-Defamation Commission

As the reverend asks, “who are you going to believe, Obama or Jesus”? If you are a Christian then the answer is Jesus.

I leave you with these words of wisdom.

Proverbs 19:5 NASB A false witness will not go unpunished, And he who tells lies will not escape.

Source

1. Interview with Cathleen Falsani
   http://blog.christianitytoday.com

No Compromise Media agrees with our colleague, Paul Williams!

Islamic incantation is not “prayer”, it is heresy. REPENT!

ThoughtRogue:  Who IS Barack Hussein Obama II?

Big Brotha', This One's For You!

Once again, the genius of the Founding Fathers shines brightly as they required our President to be a Natural Born Citizen – something, to this day, the occupant of our White House refuses to comply with.  Is it any wonder at all that our country is falling apart all around us?

Here’s what we do know by Barack Hussein Obama II’s own recent behavior:

• He’s canceled our nation’s most modern jet fighter the F-22 and several other cutting-edge defense programs
• As the deranged ‘Dear Leader’ of N. Korea commemorated our 4th of July by launching several missiles, BHO II simultaneously announced the discontinuation of our missile defense development programs.
• He’s hobnobbed with every leftist dictator around the world, while he denounces our allies such as Israel
  
• He’s bowed before the Saudi King, and mouthed very ignorant and anti-American speeches in Berlin and Cairo.
• He actually declared recently that the U.S. is NOT a Christian-rooted country, and that we happily host one the largest Muslim populations on Earth (more lies, or a catastrophic ignorance?)
• In a recent speech at Georgetown Univ., his apparatchiks actually covered over several Christian symbols so that they would not be seen while broadcast on television
  
• And the list goes on, and on, and on…

Would all of this (and more to come) have happened had we followed the supreme law of the land, obeyed our U.S. Constitution, and made certain that this Marxist impostor had actually been a Natural Born Citizen?  Will the beacon of Lady Liberty actually survive this virulent, vicious Usurper?

Ontologist sez: This is why debating a postmodern leftist seems like you’re trying to nail jello to a wall.

by Fred Hutchison
Self-deceiving pride leads the sons of Adam into many foolish vanities and conceits. Some people concentrate on the petty vanities, and others indulge in grandiose delusions about themselves.

It has long been clear to me that grandiose delusions of pride are sometimes the motor force behind the personal ambitions of political careers. However, until I read Civilization and its Enemies by Lee Harris, I did not realize that inordinate pride can account for the contents of extreme political ideologies. Harris calls these “fantasy ideologies.”

The first part of this essay is about my futile efforts to debate with leftists and to refute the myths of their fantasy ideologies. Subsequently, I shall introduce Harris’ concept of the fantasy ideology, which will explain why these folks cannot coherently respond to debate arguments, and why they almost always attack the debater instead of challenging his arguments. Then I will offer the “green” movement as an example of a very popular fantasy ideology. Finally, we shall plunge into the dark waters of Muslim extremists who are following an irrational fantasy ideology. We shall end with reflections about mad men with missiles.

The destructive delusions of pride seem to be leading the world to destruction. But there is hope. As we shall see, popular fantasy ideologies often form like a bubble, and after a season, the bubble pops. In every life, the illusions of youth pop like a bubble during the middle of life or perhaps late in life. In like manner, every civilization goes through phases of the delusions of pride, which endure for an historical season, and then pop like a bubble. In this manner, God sweeps each historical age clean of its vanities and illusions to prepare for a new season under His dispensation.

But now there are bubbles that are not yet popped, and some of my misadventures involve the attempt to pop those bubbles. At carnivals, one can win prizes by puncturing balloons by throwing darts. It looks easy, but is surprisingly difficult. The same thing is true of the attempt to pop the bubbles of fantasy ideology.

Tilting with windmills

My various debates with leftists have often came down to a fight over a myth. When I recognize that a leftist believes a myth, I often take upon myself the task of proving to him that one of his cherished beliefs is a myth. In other words, I am a self-appointed bubble-popper.

My quest often has had all the futility of tilting with windmills. I confess that I have often tried to reason with fools, contrary to King Solomon’s advice in Proverbs. Am I unwise to do this? Should I leave the popping of bubbles to God? Perhaps. But if I had not tried to tilt with the windmills, I could not have written this essay.

Insults shouted from a high window

Some leftists call me demeaning names when I challenge their myths. The insulting names are carefully chosen to display their moral and intellectual superiority and my moral and intellectual inferiority. In their inflated pride, they see themselves as existing on a higher plane than I do. They are sincere in their contempt and malice.

The insults have a windy echo as though they have been shouted down from a great height. It is as though a man at a window at the top of a tall windmill is shouting execrations down upon me.

On windmills and straw men

Some leftists respond to my arguments with a “straw man” attack. They build a “straw man” that is purported to represent my views and then attack the straw man. Their attack on the straw man is like burning me in effigy or poking needles into a voodoo doll with my name on it. It is as though they are getting vicarious pleasure in my symbolic destruction. It is a voyeuristic approach to hatred.

In order to build a straw man, my opponent must ignore what I actually said and attribute to me fallacies and follies that he can take pleasure in knocking down.

Metaphorically speaking, when I am tilting with windmills, I can sometimes see the giant arms of the windmill smashing a straw man with my name pinned to it.

Then the man in the windmill will insist that he just demolished me and will point to the smashed straw man as evidence.

Responding to the straw man attack

Sometimes I respond to the straw man attack with words like “The views that you attribute to me are things I never said and never thought.” Sometimes, I say, “I wish I could get a response to something I actually said.”

It is amazingly difficult to get a postmodern leftist to respond to something you actually say to him. The postmodern left has lost the ability to communicate authentically with someone who is not in their clique.

The new tower of babel

When God confused the tongues at the Tower of Babel, construction stopped because the workmen could not understand each other. Is the postmodern left trying to build a new tower of babel? A tower is potentially much higher than a windmill. Such a tower might enable them be able to shout down imprecations upon us from a much greater height than they can do now.

The narcissistic obsessions of the postmodern left not only make conversation with conservatives impossible, but must eventually trip up their conversation with each other. When that happens, their Tower of Babel will collapse.

The century-long progressive era has reached its apogee in the Obama administration. The bubble of progressive fantasy ideology has been at maximum during Obama’s long honeymoon with the press. Is God preparing to pop the progressive bubble, sweep away the rubble of twentieth-century illusions and allow a new kind of culture to be born? Perhaps. I know that postmodernism is unsustainable, but I don’t know what kind of world will follow it.

Nancy’s meltdown

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s communication meltdown is instructive. She is second in power to the president and more liberal than the president. As she stood at the top of her high tower, she tried to shout down her contempt on her enemies. She got tangled in her own words and embarrassed herself at her own press conference. She almost fell from power, but did not fall because just enough of her powerful allies rallied around her to save her. But many in her own party distanced themselves from her.

The day of doom for Pelosi and her ilk will come when the kind of painful communications breakdown we saw on television occurs between Pelosi and her key allies. Such a breakdown must eventually occur because the power brokers of the postmodern left are mostly narcissists trapped in fantasy ideologies. The left-wing tower looks powerful, but it is fragile. One remembers the seemingly impregnable tower of the Soviet empire (1922–1991). Ronald Reagan blew on it, and it collapsed because it was all dry rot within.

The increasing inability of the left-wing media to communicate with the ordinary person is another sign of communication decay. The liberal big city newspapers are dying. The audience for the TV political talk shows that feature liberal opinion has shrunk drastically. Even the liberals don’t like to listen to the inchoate ravings of left-wing narcissists addicted to fantasy ideology.

Interestingly, the same incoherence can be observed in liberal theology. Books and Culture magazine, a project of Christianity Today, quickly moved from conservative theology and conservative politics to liberal theology and liberal politics. The editor, John Wilson, who presided over this great betrayal became rambling and incoherent in his essays as the shift was taking place.

The incoherence of the heretic reaches its thickest fog in New Age poetry and New Age mystical writing. This is no accident, because the New Age Movement is a swamp of many heresies.

Striking down Dirty Dick

Postmodern leftists cannot communicate authentically, but they fancy that they have powers of divination. They think they can divine men’s motives.

Some leftists I debate with insist that they understand my motives and dismiss my arguments, which they attribute to bad faith, malice, dishonesty, unworthy motives, vested interests, or ignorant prejudices. These divinations are similar to the building of straw men. The leftist who has no understanding of me creates an imaginary person and ascribes bad motives to that person. Then he can ignore my arguments and condemn the imaginary bad guy he has created.

When I was a small child, I created an imaginary bad guy. I dubbed a little plastic cowboy with the name “Dirty Dick.” I ascribed to Dirty Dick every quality of villainy that I supposed a cowboy bad guy ought to have. Then I dreamed up cowboy wars in which Dirty Dick would be struck down at the climax of the war. I struck down Dirty Dick with great drama and relish, and Dirty Dick would die screaming and writhing in a histrionic way. Sometimes I would act out his demise with melodramatic overacting that would make Jim Carey look inhibited by comparison.

When a lefty makes me the Dirty Dick of his melodramatic game, he has a lot of stock characters and stereotypes of right wing bad guys to draw from the fantasy world of the leftist imagination. It is much like Hollywood during the era of the studios, when central casting could choose from a number of character actors who specialize in villains.

One must keep one’s sense of humor during these games. It can be amusing to find out which Halloween costume for a right wing villain one is expected to wear. If one can keep firmly in mind that the postmodern leftist is acting out a fantasy, one can laugh instead of taking umbrage.

Presumptions about religion

I had a debate with an academic philosopher emeritus about evolution. He claimed to be an expert in logic. However, he never answered my logic or my facts. The only argument he made in favor of evolution was based upon his tally of how many biologists support evolution and how many were against it. This is called in debate circles “an appeal to authority.” An appeal to authority in debate is creditable only if it is not a substitute for making your own case, or a substitute for responding to your opponent’s arguments. However, Dr. “Expert in Logic” did not seem to know this.

This academic was obsessed with the idea that my opposition to evolution was based upon my religion. He did not know what my religious beliefs or doctrines were, and I had not mentioned religion in my arguments. In a formal debate, if I were to point out that his speculations about my religion were unsupported and irrelevant to the debate, the judge would charge points against the man’s case.

The evolutionists understand that evolution is vulnerable to criticism, but they also know that attacks against religion can divert the attention of the audience away from the issues and win cheap propaganda points. Dr. “Expert in Logic” insisted upon making these cheap propaganda points. I insisted that we talk about evolution using facts and logic. He insisted that we talk about religion. In spite of his claimed expertise in logic, he seemed to be allergic to the use of logic in an actual debate.

After a lifetime of teaching and writing about logic, his rational powers had been eroded away by trendy left-wing thought. Rationality cannot coexist in a mind filled with fantasy ideology. Postmodern liberalism founded upon narcissism cannot tolerate reason. The fantasies of narcissism are at war with reason, and at war with reason and reality.

Ad hominem attacks

In all of the cases cited above, my debate opponents refused to respond to my actual arguments. They made no effort explain to me why my ideas are wrong. They insisted on attacking me, instead of refuting my ideas. This is called in debate circles ad hominem, which means “against the man.” Attacking the man is not a legitimate substitute for responding to his arguments.

Why have postmodernist leftists limited themselves to ad hominem attacks on their opponents? Why do they refuse to logically refute the ideas of their opponents? In formal debate, a debater cannot score points with ad hominem attacks. To win, you must either demolish your opponent’s central arguments or put forward more persuasive arguments than your opponent did. Why do postmodern leftists stubbornly adhere to losing tactics? I did not understand this until I read Lee Harris’ Civilization and its Enemies.

Fantasy Ideologies

Lee Harris and a college friend of his demonstrated against the Vietnam War, but they did so for different reasons. Harris’s friend participated in some obnoxious and subversive activities that Harris considered counterproductive. More people would be turned against the anti-war movement than moved to favor of the movement by these tactics. Harris’ friend did not care. He said he was doing these things “for the good of my soul.” He did not care what the outward effects of his subversive activities were. He cared only for the effects they had upon him.

Lee’s friend cherished a fantasy narrative in which he was on the right side of history and stood tall with the heroes of the revolution. He did not care if the leftist rabble rousers were effective. All he cared about was having a beautiful memory of himself of fighting in the company of giants. He had what Harris calls a “fantasy ideology.” I have no doubt that he wore a Che Guevara T-shirt.

A fantasy ideology requires a narcissist with a vivid imagination. Like a Hollywood director, producer, and story board developer rolled into one, the narcissist formulates a grand scenario, which puts himself in the flood lights and reduces everyone else to supporting characters and enemies. Enemies are pawns in the shadows. They exist only for the sake of the script and wear whatever costume is assigned to them by the script.

A fantasy ideology can be passed down from leftist leaders and adopted by followers. However, one must come to the table as a narcissist or the fantasy ideology will not take. Fortunately for the leftist leaders, the postmodern culture of self-esteem, self-actualization, hyper-individualism, and relativism is multiplying the number of narcissists in our midst.

A pawn steps forward against the star

Imagine that the narcissist has developed his fantasy ideology and has reduced all his opponents to pawns wearing costumes. He is the star of the show, and the story requires him to kick around the pawns dressed up as villains.

Suppose one of these pawns ventures up to the glorious star of the show and tells him that the script does not make sense, or that it contradicts reality, or contains a myth. How shall the great one react?

He might think, “Who is this upstart pawn to challenge the sublime narrative of my greatness? Doesn’t that scoundrel know that his only reason for being is to support the story as I wrote it in the script? He is fighting against his assigned role in the master plan for the greater glory of me. I shall put that varlet in his place.”

He proceeds with an ad hominem attack upon his enemy. He never answers the challenge that his enemy made that the grand narrative is illogical or is based upon a myth or is in conflict with reality. He flies into a temper and throws the dishes at the upstart pawn who doesn’t know his place and dares to question the grand narrative.

There is a reason for this kind of behavior which transcends mere infantilism. If the postmodern leftist condescends to answer the logic of his opponent, it would dignify his challenge. Even if the challenger was unsuccessful in the ensuing debate, the fact that the debate was held and the star and his opponent met head to head on level ground would be an admission that the challenger is not a pawn wearing a costume. The leftist would have to admit that he is not an untouchable great one, and that the assumptions of his grand narrative are open to public examination and criticism. To condescend to having a real debate is to have one’s narcissistic bubble punctured.

This, my friends, is why leftists in positions of power are trying to silence the conservative voice. The very fact that we are speaking and some people are listening is intolerable to them.

The great unmasking

Lee Harris describes the pregnant moment when a conservative challenger meets a leftist with a fantasy ideology in a real debate. At some point in the proceedings, the mask of the conservative challenger will fall off, and an unmasked and unknown person will stand before the leftist. At this point, Lee tells us, the leftist will blink and say, “Who are you? Why are you here? What do you want? Why are you disrupting these proceedings?”

Read the rest of this entry »

Ontologist says: Truth will be your only defense and your only means of survival during these postmodern times, when the postmodernists drop from despairing of Life itself.

by Fred Hutchison

People are searching for the meaning of life as much now as they ever did. However, meaning is harder to find today because of a very tough skepticism in today’s world about whether there is such a thing as truth. I like to call this the “acid bath of skepticism.”

Two earmarks of the present postmodern culture are hostility to truth of any kind, and the acid bath of skepticism. In contrast, the American modernism of the 1950’s and 60’s involved a skepticism towards metaphysics and transcendent theology. However, moderns of that day generally accepted the idea that men must employ reason, must base their reason on presuppositions, and must have a world view. They did not automatically rule out the idea of truth or of a moral law. If the leaders of that era had not believed these things, they could not have been the greatest generation.

The baby boomers brought in a hyper-skeptical postmodernism that is openly hostile to reason, presuppositions, world views, truth, and the moral law. Nothing remotely hinting at truth is tolerated in postmodern culture. The grand hypocrisy of the postmoderns is that they make a great hullabaloo about tolerance, yet are fiercely intolerant of those who speak about truth.

As we shall see, without truth there can be no sustainable meaning in life. Man cannot endure the trials of life if life has no meaning. Therefore, man cannot live without truth. When truth disappears, man despairs. As we shall see, a secret despair lies behind the pathologies of postmodern societies such as exist in Europe.

European barrenness

The birth rates in Europe have fallen so low that some nationalities are in danger of going extinct. What is the cause of this? Is the advanced education and careerism of women the cause? It must be a contributing cause, of course. However, it is not likely that this cause alone could push European birth rates so far below the replacement rates. Academic and careerist women who long for children usually find a way to have them.

The decline of marriage and the increase of cohabitation is another secondary contributing cause of the dearth of babies. Unmarried couples have less motivation to have children than married couples do.

We know that academics, careerism, and cohabitation are not the primary causes of the famine of babies because young married European women who have neither academic nor careerist interests seldom have more than one child.

A hatred of babies?

I wonder if abortion has brought about a hatred of babies and children. We teach ourselves to hate those we have wronged, so that we will feel better about having wronged them. During the era of slavery and Jim Crow, the white community ginned up a lot of hostility toward blacks. It was easier to hate than to face up to a guilty conscience. As the Nazis started to kill the Jews, they systematically trained themselves to hate Jews.

During this age of the abortion holocaust, has there been an increase in anger and hatred against babies and children? I cannot prove it, but my delicate antennae tell me that there is an irrational, free-floating rage against babies and children out there. This rage did not exist in the 60’s or before. After all, it is easier to rage against babies than to face the guilt of murdering them in the womb.

The hatred of babies and children surely must be an important contributing cause of the birth dearth in Europe. However, we have not yet worked our way to the taproot cause of the baby bust, which feeds into all the secondary causes.

Read the rest of this entry »

What is it?

Truth, according to Realism, is not a subjective touchy feely process of dialectical thinking like our progressive friends have convinced themselves that it is. The traditional classical definition of truth is a correspondence between our subjective thoughts, and objective existence or reality. Our thoughts are not identical to reality and shouldn’t be confused with reality itself. However, our progressive counterparts, for the most part, believe that reality is entirely subjective, with all of reality being inside the brain of the perceiving subject with nothing independent of it. This philosophy is also known as Epistemological Subjectivism.

The reason this is so important to understand is because in this worldview, there is no duality between the subjective mind and the objective reality that could either correspond or contradict each other. In the world of the epistemological Subjectivist,  nothing can exist except what can be subjectively experienced. As a result, the above mentioned classical definition of Truth loses all

Today, "truth" is . . .

meaning. The Secular Humanist and Postmodernist must redefine truth to fit into this monistic worldview. The most they can hope for in regard to Truth is that there is a consistency within their own thoughts and perceptions, but common sense and logic dictate that even their own perceptions can’t be trusted to be consistent, because they practice even the redefining of the meaning of consistency.

This has devastating consequences when these “thinkers” are in leadership i.e. governments, education, judiciary, business, and “Church,” etc. because the standard always changes. What is True and Right at one point in History becomes Wrong and Evil at another point in History.

Another devastating consequence is the Individual loses his un-a-lien-able Rights because this Individual and his Rights can simply be redefined to fit the vocal and subjectivistic, self-centered majority.

Yep, his notion of "truth".

A perfect example of this is the so-called hate crimes aka thought crimes against anyone who voices a public opinion against Homosexuality. As a result, homosexuals get “special protection” that is not extended to others outside of their privileged group, and totally destroys the unchanging Principle of “Equal Protection under the Law,” To acknowledge that there is such a thing as Equal Protection under the Law would imply that there is an objective principle independent and transcendent of any one particular group, which would repudiate the Secular Humanist and Postmodern mindset.

This Principle is a necessary corollary of the statement in the Declaration that says, “We hold these Truths to be Self-evident, that all Men are created equal and are endowed by their Creator with certain un-a-lien-able Rights that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” Because such things as hate crimes is so repugnant to this Principle we truly can say that hate crime legislation completely violates and rapes Reason, Logic and Truth and simply is Un-American!

Murdered because of another's so called "truth"

A Judicial Consequence of such Rape of the Truth is that people are denied substantive Due Process, which concerns itself with the correspondence between the Laws and the Facts of a case, and protects our Un-a-lien-able Rights to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of happiness. As a result, a voiceless and handicapped Citizen of Florida was mercilessly tortured and murdered judicially before our very eyes because of the exclusive use of procedural Due Process, which only concerned itself with consistency within the Domain of Law and Court Procedure, completely ignoring the objective reality of a helpless woman’s life. If this can happen to One it can happen to All.

A personal decision makes it the Truth?

Another Judicial Rape of the Truth is seen in the Supreme Court case: “As the postmodernist majority opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court held in Planned Parenthood v.Casey, 505 US 833 (1992), at 851, ‘At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe and of the mystery of human life.’ This legal opinion was promulgated for the purpose of legitimizing the supposed license to kill unborn children.”

Here is a perfect example of those who are trusted with our Constitution and trusted to be honest and have integrity of intellectual thought who are suppose to be the best of American minds in American Jurisprudence setting precedent that the redefining of “one’s own concept of existence”is legitimate legal interpretation of what Life is defined to be in our Declaration.

Intolerance is their "truth."

The media buzz word for today is Tolerance. Let’s look at the word “tolerance” to see how it has been redefined over the decades. In Noah Webster’s 1828 edition dictionary the word tolerance meant, “The power or capacity of enduring; or the act of enduring” (hardship or burden). A. J. Conyer discusses the meaning of tolerance, “By extension toleration applies to enduring a wrong or an injustice.” To the Christian theist tolerance is a virtue associated with wisdom for the purpose of achieving some greater good by exercising tolerance and forbearance of a present wrong. Today in our postmodernist world culture the meaning has been redefined as “Tolerance is respect, acceptance and appreciation of the rich diversity of our world’s culture, our forms of expression and ways of being human . . . . Tolerance is not concession, condescension or indulgence. Tolerance is, above all, an active attitude prompted by recognition of the universal human rights and fundamental freedoms of others” (UNESCO, 1995 p. 76).

UNLESS – -  you are a Believer in fundamental and unchanging Truth and Reality–you knuckle-dragging neanderthal YOU!

Can it contradict itself? Ah, nope!

In conclusion, Truth is not subjective. Truth is not Relative. There is a Reality independent of our perceptions, and the goal of life is to pursue Truth by conforming our thinking to transcendent, unchanging Reality. The goal is not to use the Law to harm others or to create protected classes of people so as to harm others who disagree with them or redefine our Constitution as a living, breathing document that changes with the whims and lusts of Man. When one group is arbitrarily benefited by Special Law,  others are harmed. Currently, America is being inundated by redefining Secular Humanists and Postmodernists and this will lead to the destruction of Western Civilization if Radical Islam doesn’t get us first.

Conyers, A.J. (2001) The long truce: How toleration made the world safe for power and profit. Spence Publishing, Dallas TX.

Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 US 833 (1992), at 851.

Recommended Reading:

Adler, M. (2000). How to think about the Great Ideas. Open Court Publishing. Chicago Il.

Sire J.W., (2004). The universe next door: A basic worldview catalog (4th Ed.) InterVarsity Press, Downer Groves, Ill.

ThoughtRogue:  If anyone harbors any doubt that the farther one goes left on the political scale, the more fascist and totalitarian you will find the environment, take a close look at Faux-bama’s latest in a lineup of “Czars” (not coincidental terminology) who wish to monitor your personal email, and the Internet for its “fairness”, and in this case, to monitor the speech of anyone who wishes to say something derogatory toward homo-fascists, or any number of other specially manufactured, protected “classes” of favored people.  George Orwell is now spinning in his grave like a lathe..   Mr. Orwell warned us of the coming totalitarian transformation of his homeland he dubbed “Airstrip One.”  One wonders whether he foresaw its cousin, the superpower-version of his dystopia burgeoning just over the Atlantic horizon..?

Vote looms on legislation that could outlaw preaching on homosexuality

By Drew Zahn, WorldNetDaily

It's for your own Good!

House Democrats have announced a vote could come as early as tomorrow on a “hate crimes” bill that supporters admit might allow federal officials to prosecute Christians who speak out against homosexual behavior.

The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009, or H.R. 1913, passed through committee last week, and according to the Weekly Leader published by the office of House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., the bill joins 14 others that could be brought to the floor for a vote sometime between noon tomorrow and the end of the week.

Meanwhile, advocates for the bill are engaged in a strong push to see it passed.

The Human Rights Campaign, which calls itself the largest national lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender – or LGBT – civil rights organization, has designated April 27-29 for a national call-in campaign, urging supporters to contact Congress and pressure the bill’s passage.

“We need more calls to Members of Congress, and we need them right away,” said HRC President Joe Solmonese. “It has been ten long years and tens of thousands more victims since the Matthew Shepard Act was first introduced in Congress. We are poised for a presidential signature this year, but lies from the radical right could easily derail our efforts.”

A number of groups – including the American Civil Liberties Union, the National Council on La Raza, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the American Association of People with Disabilities, among others – announced formation of a national coalition to urge Congress to pass H.R. 1913.

One of the coalition members, the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, announced last week that it has sent letters to all 435 members of the House of Representatives in support of the bill.

Tom Strode of the Baptist Press, however, reports that H.R. 1913 “adds ’sexual orientation’ and ‘gender identity’ to the current classes – including race, religion and national origin – protected from hate crimes,” a measure that worries many people of faiths that deem LGBT sexual behavior as immoral.

When a nearly identical plan was developed in the last Congress, Rep. Artur Davis, D-Ala., admitted during a hearing on the bill it could be used to prosecute pastors merely for preaching against homosexuality under the premise that they could be “inducing” violence in someone.

The bill ultimately failed then because President Bush determined it was unnecessary – the crimes banned in the legislation already are addressed by other laws – and it probably was unconstitutional.

“The federal hate crimes bill is bad news for everyone,” said Brad Dacus of Pacific Justice Institute, who testified in Congress against the bill two years ago.

“Instead of treating all crime victims equally, it creates a caste system where select groups, such as gays and lesbians, are given greater priority in the criminal justice system. This is not progress; it is political correctness. In other nations and states, the adoption of hate crimes legislation has been the first step toward widespread suppression of speech and ideas critical of homosexuality,” he said.

Matt Barber of Liberty Counsel has spoken out against H.R. 1913 a number of times.

“As has proved to be true in both Europe and Canada, this Orwellian piece of legislation is the direct precursor to freedom killing and speech chilling ‘hate speech’ laws. It represents a thinly veiled effort to ultimately silence – under penalty of law – morally, medically and biblically based opposition to the homosexual lifestyle,” he said.

Barber said the 14th Amendment already provides that victims of violent crimes are afforded equal protection under the law “regardless of sexual preference or proclivity.”

“If passed, H.R. 1913 will change all that. It overtly and, most likely, unconstitutionally, discriminates against millions of Americans by granting federally preferred status, time and resources to individuals who define their identity based upon aberrant sexual behaviors (i.e.,’gay’ and lesbian ’sexual orientation’ or cross-dressing ‘gender identity’),” he said.

He also said there is “zero evidence” suggesting homosexuals do not get equal protection now.

Read the rest of this entry »

by DiscoverTheNetworks.org

Marxism is Anti-Bible!

Now that he no longer draws spiritual succor from Jeremiah Wright—the America-hating, racist demagogue who served as his pastor and spiritual mentor for twenty years—Barack Obama has turned elsewhere for guidance in the task of carrying out his political duties while remaining true to his religious values.

The most notable of his spiritual advisors today is his friend of many years, Rev. Jim Wallis, founder of the Sojourners organization. Says Wallis, “We’ve [he and Obama] been talking faith and politics for a long time.” 

Who is Jim Wallis? According to The New York Times, Wallis “leans left on some issues” but overall is a “centrist, social justice” kind of guy. But a closer look at Wallis’s background reveals him to be nearly as radical, if better at disguising the fact, as Jeremiah Wright.

As a teenager in the 1960s, Wallis joined the civil rights movement and the anti-Vietnam Warmovement. His participation in peace protests nearly resulted in his expulsion from the Trinity Evangelical Divinity School in Illinois, a Christian seminary where he was then enrolled. While at Trinity, Wallis founded an anti-capitalism magazine called the Post-American, which identified wealth redistribution and government-managed economies as the keys to achieving “social justice”—a term that, as educator/journalist Barry Loberfeld has pointed out, is essentially “code for communism.”

In 1971, the 23-year-old Wallis and his Post-American colleagues changed the name of their publication to Sojourners, and in the mid-1970s they moved their base of operation from Chicago to Washington, DC, where Wallis has served as Sojourners’ editor (and leader of the eponymous organization) ever since. 

Advocating America’s transformation into a socialist nation, Sojourners’ “statement of faith” exhorted people to “refuse to accept [capitalist] structures and assumptions that normalize poverty and segregate the world by class.” According to Sojourners, “gospel faith transforms our economics, gives us the power to share our bread and resources, welcomes all to the table of God’s provision, and provides a vision for social revolution.”

As one of its first acts, Sojourners formed a commune in the Washington, DC neighborhood of Southern Columbia Heights, where members shared their finances and participated in various activist campaigns that centered on attacking U.S. foreign policy, denouncing American “imperialism,” and extolling Marxist revolutionary movements in the Third World. 

Giving voice to Sojourners’ intense anti-Americanism, Jim Wallis called the U.S. “the great power, the great seducer, the great captor and destroyer of human life, the great master of humanity and history in its totalitarian claims and designs.”

Read the rest of this entry »