Tag Archives: Free speech

Mathew 24 – I keep hearing Jesus whispering in my ear!

This came in my email today – Had to share…

More falling away from the Bible

—————————————————-

Episcopal Church Changes Marriage Law to Include Same-Sex Marriage

Carrie Dedrick | Editor, ChristianHeadlines.com | Tuesday, June 30, 2015
Episcopal Church Changes Marriage Law to Include Same-Sex Marriage

Episcopal Church Changes Marriage Law to Include Same-Sex Marriage

The Episcopal Church of the US has voted to change its definition of marriage to include same-sex marriage. The decision comes after the Supreme Court’s ruling last week that legalized gay marriage across the country.

Christian Today reports church bishops met at the church’s General Convention in Salt Lake City where they voted to change the language used in marriage ceremonies to include homosexual couples.
The Episcopal Church will now define “Holy Matrimony” as a “physical and spiritual union between the couple.” Previously, the definition was a “physical and spiritual union of a man and a woman.”
The change was made to accommodate “the pastoral need for priests to officiate at a civil marriage of a same-sex couple,” according to a report for the convention.
However, the Episcopal Church’s Book of Common Prayer will keep the original language for straight couples who wish to use the traditional wording.
Additionally, couples will no longer be required to sign a statement saying that they “solemnly declare that we hold marriage to be a lifelong union of husband and wife as it is set forth in the Book of Common Prayer.”
Episcopal ministers will not be required to officiate same-sex marriages.

DEMAND Impeachment of the Supreme Court Legislators on the Bench

The US Supreme Court, acting more like our Supreme Rulers committed two unconstitutional and unlawful acts of legislative activism this week. Ruling for Gay Marriage, they basically turned the United States into the modern day equivalent of Sodom & Gomorrah. On Obamacare, or the “Affordable Care Act” the Court simply determined to physically re-write the law. The court does not have the power to make law, and so we are asking people to begin screaming LOUDER THAN A HOMOSEXUAL for their immediate impeachment. Please!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwGu5-ALFf4
http://www.regularguy.com/?p=127

America Looking More Like Iran Every day – Queer Nation Rising

Our Supreme leaders, rulers and Ayatollah Obama have decided that any Religion in conflict with theirs must be terminated by force.
Their Ecology-ism, Pervert-ism Anti-Christian Secular Humanism is the only “Religion” allowed now. Just wait until they force Churches to marry Queers!
I blame the Christian Church for the fact that they have become Micro-Ponzi schemes – More interested in Mammon than they are in Salvation.
God save the USA!
queer nation 222
 

SUPREME COURT (THOMAS!) KICKS THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE CURB

By Cheryl Chumley
June 25, 2015
NewsWithViews.com

The U.S. Supreme Court has pretty much kicked the First Amendment’s freedom of speech clause to the curb – and you can blame one of the most conservative voices for that, Justice Clarence Thomas.

In a ruling just handed down Monday, the court found in Texas Department of Motor Vehicles Board v. Texas Division of the Sons of Confederate Veterans the government does indeed have the authority to regulate political speech.

Yes, that’s the ruling: The government can now legally regulate private citizens’ political speech.

The justices should have glanced at the statements of one of their colleagues, Justice Thurgood Marshall, who in 1972 made it clear: “Above all else, the First Amendment means that government has no power to restrict expression because of its message, its ideas, its subject matter, or its content. To permit the continued building of our politics and culture, and to assure self-fulfillment for each individual, our people are guaranteed the right to express any thought, free from government censorship. The essence of this forbidden censorship is content control.”

Content control, indeed. And content control on the part of the government toward the free American citizen is what we now have.

The court case began as a spat over what constituted a proper license plate in Texas. The Sons of Confederate Veterans thought a little emblem of the rebel flag to the left of the tag number would be OK – especially since the state’s Department of Motor Vehicles Board regularly and with seeming abandon pretty much approved all the other requests for specialty plates – roughly 350 of them.

But the Texas DMV Board, to paraphrase, said, “No, Sons of Confederate Veterans, your confederate flag is offensive.” So the two sides went to court. And the Sons of Confederate Veterans argued what would seem to be the obvious: that the government board was breaking First Amendment free speech provisions. One court found in favor of the DMV Board; another, for the vet group. Enter the U.S. Supreme Court.

In an opinion written by Justice Stephen Breyer, the court’s conclusion was the government just “would not work” without having the right to determine what constitutes rightful and proper free speech. He then posed from left field: “How could a state government effectively develop programs designed to encourage and provide vaccinations, if officials also had to voice the perspective of those who oppose this type of immunization?”

Can you say, whaaat?

But he clarifies: Allowing the Confederate flag on the license plates could give the impression the Texas government endorses the rebel emblem, Breyer said.

Sanity seems to have made a brief appearance, on the wings of Justice Samuel Alito who wrote in his dissenting opinion: Dude, that’s just stupid. Referencing the license plates in Texas that carry Dr. Pepper and NASCAR emblems, Alito asked, “Would you really think that the sentiments reflected in these specialty plates are the view of the State of Texas and not those of the owners of the cars?”

But it was too late. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan had already cast their constitutional caution to the wind and joined with Breyer – and, in a shocker to a conservative’s core, so didd Thomas. One can only guess he had personal reasons and a personal vendetta against the rebel flag, because constitutionally speaking – the ruling just bites.

Think this is a license plate matter confined to Texas? Or maybe a cause for silently applauding the court’s boldness in booting that much-hated Confederate flag?

Well, it’s not. It’s a massive First Amendment ding. And now we’re already feeling tremors elsewhere. Right after the Supreme Court released its horrific Texas ruling, a federal judge in Manhattan issued one of his own, putting the halt on Pamela Geller’s American Freedom Defense Initiative to post ads on city buses and subway cars of a menacing man with a masked face alongside warnings about radical Islamists. The case of Geller versus the Metropolitan Transportation Authority had traversed a similar path as the Sons of Confederate Veterans – it led to a court fight about so-called offensive speech, which led to a First Amendment win for Geller, which led to the MTA’s sulky decision to quit posting any and all political ads.

Now curiously, right after the Supreme Court decided government can in fact control political speech, the same judge who previously found in Geller’s favor then ruled that the MTA ban on all ads moots his earlier support of her cause based on the First Amendment. That means she can’t put up her political ads after all. As Geller’s attorney rightly raged: So the government gets to break the First Amendment and then simply change its rules to “avoid the consequences of its unlawful behavior?”

They’re vowing to pursue the matter all the way to the Supreme Court. Let’s hope Thomas has recovered his senses when they arrive.

© 2015 Cheryl Chumley – All Rights Reserved

St. Cloud, MN: Reader asks ‘where is the transparency’ from federal refugee resettlement contractor

2Posted by Ann Corcoran on June 19, 2015 for THE REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT WATCH
In a bunch of states in America, citizens concerned about the secrecy and the expense of the Refugee Admissions Program of the UN/US State Department are asking questions and demanding answers about how their tax dollars are being spent.
One of those states is Minnesota arguably one of the most densely refugee-populated states between those being placed there by several resettlement contractors including Lutheran Social Service of MN (see here for background) and those moving there from other resettlement cities (to be with their fellow Somalis).

Obama: ” Transparency promotes accountability and provides information for citizens about what their Government is doing.”

When I read this letter from Minnesota resident Bob Enos in the St. Cloud Times, one of the things I wondered about was whether the US State Department and its contractor LSS got the memo from the White House to ALL FEDERAL AGENCIES (that would include the US State Department and the Dept. of Health and Human Services (ORR) right?) and their contractors!
Here is President Barack Obama:
Transparency and Open Government
Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies
SUBJECT: Transparency and Open Government
My Administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in Government. We will work together to ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration. Openness will strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency and effectiveness in Government.
There is more here.
Enos at the St. Cloud Times (emphasis added is mine):
Lutheran Social Service recently had a meeting at the Stearns County Service Center in Waite Park.
This was a meeting of “stakeholders” involved with Lutheran Social Service’s contract with the federal government for relocating political refugees to the St. Cloud area. The meeting has not been publicized. Evidently, it is closed to the public.
Even though refugee resettlement in St. Cloud is fueled with federal tax receipts, Lutheran Social Service, as a private contractor, appears to be under no legal or moral obligation to provide transparency to the public. This is deceptive and underhanded, and it must end.
Furthermore, the public must demand a long-overdue accounting of the program, an independent audit of both the use of our tax dollars and the financial impact upon Stearns County taxpayers in areas such as social services, schools, subsidized housing, transportation and public safety.
If Lutheran Social Service ran this program with proceeds from the Sunday collection plate, that would be voluntary charity, and the public might have little say in the matter. Paying taxes, however, is not voluntary.
Lutheran Social Service must be held to the same standard of transparency as any government organization.
Doesn’t it make you wonder if Senators Ted Kennedy and Joe Biden, in crafting the Refugee Act of 1980, set up the present contracting system for the purpose of keeping the public in the dark? I would argue that these contractors, which receive the vast majority of their funding from taxpayers, are required to follow the President’s orders!

To citizen activists:

Note to the growing groups of grassroots activists looking to bring this secretive program out of the shadows, go here to the list of resettlement subcontractors working near you, ask them for the FY2015 R & P Abstract (see two posts on abstracts before today) for the city and ask them when the next “consultation” or “stakeholders” meeting will be held.
By the way, we have learned that the Refugee Council USA (the lobbying arm for the resettlement contractors) has instructed its members to NOT give citizens any information, so don’t be surprised if you are treated disrespectfully (or they pretend they don’t know what you are talking about!) when you call. But, do it anyway!
Demand transparency!
Demand that Obama’s executive order be respected!

 

Image

The Right To Free Speech

kitty

Cartoonists are Controversial and Murderers are Moderate

Posted by Daniel Greenfield @ the Sultan Knish blog

Controversial, intolerant and provocative. Mainstream media outlets broke out these three words to describe the “Draw the Prophet” contest, the American Freedom Defense Initiative and Pamela Geller.

While the police were still checking cars for explosives and attendees waited to be released, CNN called AFDI, rather than the terrorists who attacked a cartoon contest, “intolerant.” Time dubbed the group “controversial”. The Washington Post called the contest, “provocative.”

Many media outlets relied on the expert opinion of the Southern Poverty Law Center, a multi-million dollar mail order scam disguised as a civil rights group, which had listed AFDI as a hate group. Also listed as hate groups were a number of single author blogs, including mine, a brand of gun oil and a bar sign.

The bar sign, which hangs outside a bar seven miles outside Pittsburgh, appears to be made out of metal and plastic. It is reportedly unaware that it is a hate group and has made no plans to take over America.

The SPLC’s inability to conduct even the most elementary fact checking did not stop news networks from inviting its talking head on to suggest that AFDI got “the response that they — in a sense — they are seeking.” Neither CNN nor MSNBC were impolitic enough to mention that no AFDI supporter had used its materials to plan a killing spree, while at least one of SPLC’s supporters had done just that.

But being “controversial” and “provocative” has nothing to do with who is doing the shooting. It’s a media signal that the target shouldn’t be sympathized with. The Family Research Council, which was shot up by a killer using the SPLC’s hate map, is invariably dubbed “intolerant”. The SPLC, which targeted it, is however a “respected civil rights group” which provides maps to respected civil rights gunmen.

A contest in which Bosch Fawstin, an ex-Muslim, drew a cartoon of a genocidal warlord is “controversial” and “provocative”, while the MSA, which has invited Sheikh Khalid Yasin, who has inspired a number of terrorists, including apparently one of the Mohammed contest attackers, is a legitimate organization that is only criticized by controversial, intolerant and provocative Islamophobes.

Khalid Yasin has held such controversial and provocative views as claiming that the US created AIDS, that gays should be stoned to death and that women should be beaten. But the mosques and MSAs that he has appeared at have not been described as controversial, intolerant and provocative for inviting him.

Elton Simpson, the first gunman, attended the Islamic Community Center of Phoenix. The mosque was listed as being controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood’s North American Islamic Trust front group.

The Muslim Brotherhood holds such controversial and provocative views as “waging Jihad” against American infidels, “raising a Jihadi generation that pursues death” and “destroying the Western civilization from within”. Despite these extremely provocative and intolerant views, the Muslim Brotherhood is usually described by the media as a “moderate” group.

The Brotherhood’s American arm believes in launching a “Grand Jihad” to Islamize America. Its final phase calls for “Seizing power to establish their Islamic Nation” in the United State.

Some might say this is a slightly more controversial activity than drawing cartoons of a dead warlord.

The Islamic Community Center of Phoenix featured an appearance by Lauren Booth, a convert to Islam employed by Iran, who has been photographed with the leader of Hamas, and holds such controversial and provocative views, as the Boston Marathon bombing being faked and attacks on Jews being justified as “a frustrated backlash.”

Some might say Booth’s views are controversial, provocative and intolerant. And that the gunman’s mosque was intolerant for inviting her. But don’t expect the media to call out terrorist intolerance.

Booth came as part of a fundraising effort for the Muslim Legal Fund of America, which funded the defense for Islamic Jihad boss Sami al-Arian and aided some of the terrorists involved in the provocative and controversial Fort Dix terror plot to “kill as many soldiers as possible”. If the two Mohammed cartoon gunmen had survived, the Muslim Legal Fund of America might be having Lauren Booth spout Jewish conspiracies to fundraise on their behalf.

But if you believe the media, cartoonists are more controversial than killers. A former Muslim sketching a cartoon of Mohammed is bigoted, but justifying attacks on Jews is moderate. Plotting to overthrow the United States and replace it with an Islamic theocracy is right up the alley of your local civil rights group, but a cartoon contest threatens the nation and all of creation by bringing down the wrath of men who spent their time at moderate and Muslim organizations which only occasionally support terrorism.

Cartoons can be provocative, but the only people inspired to kill over them, are killers. No one took a shot at Gary “Punching Up” Trudeau, despite decades of mocking conservatives. None of the assorted arts projects that involve defiling and mocking the sacred symbols of Christianity and Judaism resulted in gunmen in body armor trying to storm a cartoon competition. And yet it keeps happening with Islam.

Satire exposes sociopaths and sociopathic ideologies. And it’s the very attack on the “controversial” and “provocative” contest that shows why exposing them is so important.

Elton Simpson had already been on the radar of the FBI. He should have been in jail, but Judge Mary H. Murguia, a Clinton appointee who has been bandied about as a possible Obama Supreme Court nominee, chose to believe a claim by his public defender that when he was taped talking about Jihad, it might have meant “an internal struggle to maintain faith”, instead of killing non-Muslims.

Simpson had said that Allah loves those who fight non-Muslims, that Jihadists go to paradise and stated, “I’m tellin’ you man. We gonna make it to the battlefield… it’s time to roll.”

But that was just too ambiguous for Judge Murguia, who wrote, “It is true that the Defendant had expressed sympathy and admiration for individuals who “fight” non-Muslims as well as his belief in the establishment of Shariah law, all over the world including in Somalia. What precisely was meant by “fighting” whenever he discussed it, however, was not clear.”

“Neither was what the Defendant meant when he stated he wanted to get to the ‘battlefield’ in Somalia,” she added.

If nothing else, events like these help clarify the question of just what “fighting” non-Muslims involves, and whether it’s an internal struggle to maintain faith or an external struggle waged with assault rifles.

Satire helps expose the idiocy and absurdity of our betters, whether it’s Gary Trudeau or Judge Murguia. Every act of Islamic terror discredits them and their dishonest worldview even further. And they know it.

We cannot fight Islamic terrorism until we deal with it and we cannot deal with it as long as we are burdened by a political establishment that frantically censors any mention of its existence or its agenda.

The two gunmen did not attack the cartoon event simply because they were offended, but because they believed that their religion gave them a mandate to impose Islamic law on Americans. Until we deal with this supremacist reality, any effort to fight Islamic terrorists will be futile and will ultimately fail.

The Mohammed cartoons are so vital because they expose the theocracy at the heart of Islamic terrorism. When Muslim terrorists attack cartoonists, they’re not fighting our foreign policy; they are killing and dying to impose the foreign policy of the Muslim Brotherhood and its numerous daughter groups, such as Al Qaeda, Hamas and ISIS, on us.

The controversial and provocative cartoonists go into battle with pencils in their hands. The terrorists come with body armor and assault rifles. This clash is what real political dissent looks like.

The cartoonists believe in the controversial, intolerant and provocative idea that America should not be a theocracy. But the only people who should be provoked by that provocative idea are the Jihadists who want to impose a theocracy on America and the useful idiots lying and denying on their behalf.

Franklin Graham: 'Draw Muhammad' event went too far

My comments in Red: I am not a fan of Franklin Graham, nor have I ever been a fan of his father, Billy Graham (See Dr. Cathy Burn’s book, BILLY GRAHAM AND HIS FRIENDS: A HIDDEN AGENDA?) As for Franklin, he very much sounds like an appeaser in this article, although he does state on his Facebook page that Islam does not worship the same God Christians worship.  Graham’s close alliance and promotion of Rick Warren’s books, also gives great reason to wonder about Graham’s knowledge of the Bible.
By Cheryl Chumley, Reposted from WND
franklin
Franklin Graham, one of the world’s best-known Christian evangelists and the head of the nonprofit Samaritan’s Purse, said in a Wednesday morning Fox & Friends interview the “folks in Garland were wrong” to hold their “Draw Muhammad” event. ”
As a Christian, I don’t like it when people mock my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ,” he said. “What this event was doing in Texas was mocking Islam. I disagree with [them].” Graham said today’s society is lacking in civility and the “folks in Garland were wrong” to further that tone. “I think we need to show respect and civility,” he said.
We need to respect one another … and those that believe differently [from my faith], I’m not going to mock them.”
Graham then condemned the radicalized element of Islam for attacking those outside their faith, and doubled down on remarks made earlier – reported by WND – that the United States should put a hold on allowing anyone into this country who’s coming from a nation with known terrorist cells.
“It’s wrong to prefer violence, period,” he said. “The Muslims have no right to go around shooting people because someone mocks them. … We should not be allowing immigration into this country from any countries that have active terrorist cells.”
Just Tuesday, Graham weighed in on the Texas shootings with a Facebook post saying the god of Islam is not the “God of the Bible,” or of Christianity.
“One of the Muslim gunmen in Garland, Texas, said he had come there to die, believing that this pleases his god and he would go to heaven,” Graham wrote. “The god of Islam and the God of the Bible are not the same.” One key difference? “The god of Islam wants you to die for him,” he said.
“The God of the Bible sent His Son to die for us.” Graham then wrote: “Jesus said, ‘I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.’ Only if we put our faith and trust in Him, can we spend eternity in Heaven. I wish all Muslims could know the truth. They can find what their hearts are searching for only through Jesus Christ.” Graham has said in previous interviews he wanted Muslims to hear the new that “God loves them and he will accept them through faith and through his son, Jesus Christ,” Christianity Today reported.
On Wednesday on Fox & Friends, Graham called for more prayer for the nation, and for the nation’s leaders. “We need to pray for this country,” he said, “that it turns back to the God of our fathers. We need God today in this country and we need His help. And we need to love one another … love them and respect them.”
 
 
 
 

Franklin Graham: ‘Draw Muhammad’ event went too far

My comments in Red: I am not a fan of Franklin Graham, nor have I ever been a fan of his father, Billy Graham (See Dr. Cathy Burn’s book, BILLY GRAHAM AND HIS FRIENDS: A HIDDEN AGENDA?) As for Franklin, he very much sounds like an appeaser in this article, although he does state on his Facebook page that Islam does not worship the same God Christians worship.  Graham’s close alliance and promotion of Rick Warren’s books, also gives great reason to wonder about Graham’s knowledge of the Bible.

By Cheryl Chumley, Reposted from WND

franklin

Franklin Graham, one of the world’s best-known Christian evangelists and the head of the nonprofit Samaritan’s Purse, said in a Wednesday morning Fox & Friends interview the “folks in Garland were wrong” to hold their “Draw Muhammad” event. ”

As a Christian, I don’t like it when people mock my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ,” he said. “What this event was doing in Texas was mocking Islam. I disagree with [them].” Graham said today’s society is lacking in civility and the “folks in Garland were wrong” to further that tone. “I think we need to show respect and civility,” he said.

We need to respect one another … and those that believe differently [from my faith], I’m not going to mock them.”

Graham then condemned the radicalized element of Islam for attacking those outside their faith, and doubled down on remarks made earlier – reported by WND – that the United States should put a hold on allowing anyone into this country who’s coming from a nation with known terrorist cells.

“It’s wrong to prefer violence, period,” he said. “The Muslims have no right to go around shooting people because someone mocks them. … We should not be allowing immigration into this country from any countries that have active terrorist cells.”

Just Tuesday, Graham weighed in on the Texas shootings with a Facebook post saying the god of Islam is not the “God of the Bible,” or of Christianity.

“One of the Muslim gunmen in Garland, Texas, said he had come there to die, believing that this pleases his god and he would go to heaven,” Graham wrote. “The god of Islam and the God of the Bible are not the same.” One key difference? “The god of Islam wants you to die for him,” he said.

“The God of the Bible sent His Son to die for us.” Graham then wrote: “Jesus said, ‘I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.’ Only if we put our faith and trust in Him, can we spend eternity in Heaven. I wish all Muslims could know the truth. They can find what their hearts are searching for only through Jesus Christ.” Graham has said in previous interviews he wanted Muslims to hear the new that “God loves them and he will accept them through faith and through his son, Jesus Christ,” Christianity Today reported.

On Wednesday on Fox & Friends, Graham called for more prayer for the nation, and for the nation’s leaders. “We need to pray for this country,” he said, “that it turns back to the God of our fathers. We need God today in this country and we need His help. And we need to love one another … love them and respect them.”

 

 

 

 

Michael Savage Attacks Bill O'Reilly and Greta Van Criticizing Pamela Geller on Mohammed Contest

I am not, nor have I ever been, a fan of savage, but he is absolutely right on this subject.  what will it be next?  I’ll stand with pamela’s free speech, that is the America way! (13 minutes)

http://https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=-_4phA9GnGY