Faith and Freedom Network Blog

What Happens Next On R-74?

2012-05-25T06:56:00.001-07:00

The following is a communication from the Secretary of State's office outlining in detail how R-74 will proceed over the next couple of weeks.

To all "Friends of Faith and Freedom" who are gathering signatures, please continue to do so through this weekend, then either mail them to the sponsor's address on the petition or contact the Faith and Freedom coordinator in your area. Or email me if you have further questions.

Thank you for the more than 60,000 signatures gathered by "Friends of Faith and Freedom."

Initiative 1192 signatures are due into the Secretary's office by July 6. We are encouraging everyone to continue gathering signatures for I-1192 through the weekend of June 24, then turn in all signatures for I-1192.

Thank you for your continuing support of Faith and Freedom.

From the Secretary's office:

Here’s how signature check for R-74 works …

by David Ammons | May 22nd, 2012

How does the signature check for a referendum work, and what is the impact of a referendum challenge on the effective date of the recently enacted legislation (SB6239) authorizing civil marriage for same-sex couples?

The deadline for turning in Referendum 74 petitions to the State Elections Division is Wednesday, June 6. Ordinarily, the marriage bill would be taking effect Thursday, June 7, but if opponents bring in signatures, the law doesn’t go into effect on schedule. If a signature check shows the sponsors didn’t bring in enough valid signatures, the marriage law would go into effect. However, if the R-74 challenge is certified for a public vote in November, the law stays on hold until the voters have their say. If R-74 is approved by voters, it will take effect 30 days after Election Day, Dec. 6. If rejected, the law will not take effect, of course.

Katie Blinn, state co-director of elections, gives this helpful rundown on how it all works:

•   If the sponsors believe that they do not have enough signatures, they will likely not submit the petitions at all because once the petitions are submitted to our office, they are public record and we will receive public records requests for them.

•   For a referendum, the sponsors need to submit at least 120,577 valid signatures of Washington registered voters. Since many signatures will be invalid, because the signer is not registered to vote, the signer signed more than once, or the signature on the petition does not match the signature in the person’s voter registration record, we recommend that sponsors submit about 150,000 signatures. The most common reason a signature is rejected is because the signer is not registered to vote.

•   On June 6, we will count the number of petition pages that the sponsors have submitted. For a referendum, this will be in the ballpark of 10,000 pages. We will likely finish the process of accepting the petitions and counting the petition pages in the late afternoon or early evening of Wednesday, June 6.
•   On Thursday, June 7, we will send the petitions to be imaged. This is for safekeeping, in case something happens to the petitions during the signature check.

•   When the petitions return from imaging a few days later, we will go through the petitions page by page to count the gross number of signatures submitted. This is actually more than just counting them because we eliminate signature lines that are clearly not real people, such as Santa Claus and Mickey Mouse, so those lines are not included in the gross signature count.

•   If the gross signature count indicates that the sponsors have submitted less than 120,577 signatures, then our office could determine at that point that the measure does not qualify for the ballot and the suspension is lifted. But this is highly unlikely since the sponsors themselves will also be counting the number of signatures submitted.

•   Assuming that the sponsors submit at least 120,577 signatures, we will then decide whether we can check a random sample of the signatures submitted, or must check all of the signatures submitted. This decision is fairly critical because, for a referendum, it is the difference between checking 3,600 – 4,500 signatures in a random sample versus checking perhaps 130,000 signatures in a full check. A random sample check could likely be finished in a few days. A full check would likely take a few weeks.
The Secretary of State’s Office will not accept the R-74 petitions if it appears that there are not enough signatures. If the sponsors appear to have filed the minimum number of signatures on June 6, the legislation is suspended until our office makes a final, official determination whether the measure qualifies for the ballot. If our office determines that the referendum does qualify for the 2012 General Election ballot, the legislation remains suspended until after the General Election.

•   It is difficult at this point to give a date on when that official determination on whether the measure qualifies for the ballot will occur. It will depend on whether there are enough signatures to do a random sample check, or we must proceed with a full check. If the sponsors do not bring in a large quantity of signatures over the minimum, then we will proceed with a full check.

•   If the voters “approve” the legislation at the General Election, then the legislation can go into effect 30 days after the day of the General Election, December 6, 2012.

JC Pennys Posts Huge First Quarter Loss

2012-05-24T07:48:00.001-07:00

The Associated Press reported yesterday, "J.C. Penney on Tuesday reported a larger-than-expected first-quarter loss largely because customers were turned off by the retailer's new plan to get rid of heavy discounting periodically throughout the year in favor of everyday low pricing."

I'm thinking there may be another reason in play.

Onenewsnow reported the following:

Monica Cole, director of OneMillionMoms.com, feels the secular media is ignoring what she calls the "big elephant in the room."

"Sales have plummeted since J.C. Penney showed their new, bold marketing strategy, including pushing a lesbian spokesperson and same-sex couples in their advertising," Cole says, referring to the retailer's announcement earlier this year that openly homosexual entertainer Ellen DeGeneres will be their advertising spokesperson.

"If they would stop pushing a deviant and unhealthy lifestyle and focus on product quality and value along with excellent customer service, their bottom line would not be suffering," Cole advises.

OneMillionMoms has been urging its members to contact their local J.C. Penney stores and the corporate offices to voice their disapproval of the new, "gay"-friendly marketing strategy.

Take a moment today and contact your local JCP store and voice your personal disapproval of their "gay friendly marketing strategy."

One voice makes a difference. Many voices make a big difference.

Thank you for your continuing financial support of Faith and Freedom.

Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Prayerful. Be Active. Be Blessed.

Gregoire: "Thank You, Sen. Pflug--Here's $550,000"

2012-05-23T09:33:00.000-07:00

Earlier this year, Republican Senator Cheryl Pflug (5th District), broke with her Party and many of the 43,178 good people who voted for her in 2008 and joined Gov. Gregoire, Sen. Ed Murray and other homosexual activists in the legislature, voting to re-define marriage.

She stood before the Senate the first of February, asking them to vote for homosexual "marriage" saying, "And so I commend this bill to you today."

The homosexual community celebrated her---both her speech and her vote.

Seattle's "The Stranger" newspaper reported her speech was "absolutely the best speech of the night."

Eli Sanders wrote in the paper, "There is almost a Biblical cadence to the way Pflug delivers her remarks."

The video of her speech is linked here.

Senator Pflug was the first of several Republicans to stand against marriage.

On her 2008 election website, she referred readers to a story in the Everett Herald as a "good article" that "defined the differences in the upcoming [2008] election."

In the story, Richard Davis wrote, "In November Washington voters will again face the classic choice: change versus more of the same."

Gregoire was re-elected and nothing changed, the state simply became more debt ridden.

Davis wrote, "Rarely have the contrasts been so sharply defined or the consequences so great."

I agree. Dino would have done far better and Pflug should not have been reelected.

And speaking of consequences.

We were excoriated, including by some within the faith community, for speaking against Pflug when she voted for domestic partnerships.

Indeed the consequences were great.

A few days ago Sen. Pflug registered for re-election as an "Independent Republican". She will now withdraw her candidacy.

Governor Gregoire (D) leader of the pack to re-define marriage, has said "Thank you" to Ms. Pflug, and appointed her to the Washington Growth Management Hearings Board---at $93,500 per year---for 6 years.

That's a $550,000 thank you.

There will now be no need to deal with upset Republicans in the 5th District next election.

Please look me in the eye with a straight face and tell me Pflug was the most qualified person available for the job.

I wonder what kind of thank you Rep. Maureen Walsh will get? How about Litzow? There are several Republicans who stood against marriage and their Party. Will they receive an "exit" reward or will the voters be required to dis-invite them to serve during the next term.

There is an election coming, and it will have "consequences."

Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Prayerful. Be Blessed.

Obama: "Christian Slaughter A Misunderstanding"

2012-05-22T08:22:00.003-07:00

The increase of the slaughter of Christians worldwide during this past Easter observance is being explained by the Obama Administration as a "misunderstanding."

And he has launched a new $600 million program--- Project PEACE ---an acronym for "Programming Effectively Against Conflict and Extremism," to bring clarity to the misunderstanding.

His new initiative that funds the program is called, "Knowledge generation, dissemination and management."

It should be called, "Moral relativism creating a false moral equivalency and a new 'truth' regarding the killing of Christians."

The new program is being implemented first in Nigeria. Bids are now being received from "conflict resolution contractors." They are supposedly tasked with finding the truth and resolving the conflict.

The problem is one we have become accustomed to. Things are never as they seem with this administration.

USAID, to whom contractors will submit their bids and proposals, has already defined a good part of the outcome.

"If you want the money, here's what you should discover."

USAID says, "Those who perceive the conflict as a religious war have been unable to gain traction in resolving the conflict, because at its root, it is about the governance of contested resources."

"Contested resources" means the Christians and the Muslims are fighting over land.

That is not at the root of the conflict, and the President, who has Muslim family members in Kenya, knows that. I have spent a good amount of time in the Kisumu area of Kenya, where the Obama tribe lives and practices Islam. We have built churches and Christian schools in the area. The heart of the conflict is not property rights. I have also been actively involved in other countries in Africa, and while there are occasional property disputes, that is not at the heart of the slaughtering of Christians.

But the President has decided the documented slaughter of Christians by Muslims has nothing to do with theological beliefs.

Forget the facts. Create a "Forward," secular progressive picture.

Senator Marco Rubio, (R-Fla.) said last week that President Obama is the most "divisive figure in modern American history."

Indeed.

There is an egregious attack on Christians not only in Africa, but worldwide. And it is not about conflicts over property. It is the systematic carrying out of Islamic teaching regarding the killing of infidels. Which translated means Christians and Jews.

Front Page published an article yesterday that highlights the increased attacks on Christians by Muslims worldwide---especially during this past Easter season.

Glance at the documented incidents and believe it is a "misunderstanding" over "contested resources."

As Christians, we should be aware of the great sacrifice many pay to follow Jesus Christ. To be called a Christian. And we should remember them in prayer.

This also speaks to a bigger picture in how the narrative in America is shaping up.

The President, his Administration, and a complicit media have defined this "holy war of terrorism" as a matter of "sectarian strife" between Muslims and Christians, a phrase that conjures up images of two equally matched---equally abused and abusive adversaries fighting over property.

This is not reality. Muslim majorities worldwide are persecuting largely passive Christian minorities.

Our President, with the help of the progressive left media, is not only spending $600 million to obtain a false outcome, but more frighteningly is advancing a template of "False Moral Equivalency."

He is claiming what is true to be false and what is false to be true. Right is wrong and wrong is right.

While Rubio was focused on the economy in his remarks about the President, there is a greater danger at play.

The progressive left, of which the President is champion, is creating a world in which false moral equivalencies are established by sustaining an aura of moral relativism, which elevates the wrong and devalues the right.

And they call it "Equality." "Fairness." "Political Correctness." "Choice." It invades every part of our culture.

We in Washington State are working to defeat the redefinition of marriage---and we must. We absolutely must do so.

However, the marriage issue is a symptom of a much greater problem.

St. Paul described it this way, "Because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were they thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened, professing to be wise, they became fools--- and exchanged the truth of God for the lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator." Romans, Ch. 1.

Because of the path we are presently walking, the public reading or proclamation of this very Scripture is at risk of becoming, as President Obama described it, "obscure," not because of its lack of importance or validity, but because of its "insensitivity" to current politically correct cultural "truths".

Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Prayerful. Be Active. Be Blessed.

US Military--Diversity Over Readiness

2012-05-21T07:15:00.001-07:00

"This is a progressive way forward," Chief of Staff of the Army, Gen. Raymond Odierno told reporters last week as the military explained their latest social experiment.

What is the new "progressive way" our military has embraced?

MARRIAGE UPDATE: As of this past weekend, R-74 is reporting 105,780 signatures in so far. Thank you to all those associated with Faith and Freedom in this unified effort. Please gather as many signatures as possible over the next few days and get all petition forms turned in by May 31.

We have 30 more days to collect signatures for I-1192. More on that in a few days.

The US military is now inviting women "to train for infantry battalions that engage in lethal ground combat."

The purpose?

To advance "diversity" and "equal opportunity for women to excel"--- not to improve military readiness.

I realize that for me to raise this issue invites NARAL to publicly declare, yet another time, that I am "anti-woman," as they have done in fund raising letters over the past 3 years, and for homosexual activists to point out that we are anti-equality and out of touch.

However, it is a woman who is speaking out on this issue.

Elaine Donnelly, Director of the Center for Military Readiness (CRM), has released a statement explaining the situation like this:

“The National Football League does not pursue ‘diversity’ by training female players for non-lethal combat on the gridiron. Even the best female athletes would not survive the grueling training and punishing clashes against aggressive male opponents. Social experiments that override recognition of individual merit are not acceptable in pro football. Every team wants to win the Super Bowl.”

"But in the case of the U.S. military, women now are being invited to train for infantry battalions that engage in lethal ground combat – violent conflicts in which lives and missions are at risk. The stated motive is not to improve combat readiness, it is ‘diversity’ and ‘equal opportunities for women to excel'."

Donelly references a report from the National Health Institute that cites that women are "approximately 52% and 66% as strong as men in the upper and lower body respectively." Men are also found to be stronger relative to lean body mass.

Why are we doing this?

“Instead of putting the needs of the military first, the Defense Department is taking incremental steps to implement the deeply flawed recommendations of the Military Diversity Leadership Commission,” CMR said.

Its report, “From Representation to Inclusion: Diversity Leadership for the 21st Century,” comes not from battle-scarred veterans but from “civilian military ‘equal opportunity’ professionals who assign priority to ‘diversity,’ not military effectiveness,” CMR said.

The recommendations concede “diversity” is not about “treating everyone the same,” but instead its focus is on “inclusion.”

We have lost our way.

Congress already has been warned of the problem. In a Congressional Research Service Report on women in combat, CMR reported, the authors point out: “Notably absent in this language is any mention of the effects of military readiness such changes may produce.”

CMR has said the Pentagon’s policy “is doing the wrong thing for the wrong reasons.”

We are doing many wrong things for the wrong reasons. Experimenting with so-called gender diversity within the only military we have could be deadly. It not only compromises our homeland security, but reveals a broader cultural decline and disorientation.

On the present secular progressive path our culture is pursuing, not only are we attempting to redefine marriage, but the most fundamental social principles of gender roles in society. Men are calling other men their wife and women are calling other women their husband---and legislatures, such as the one in Washington State, are cheering them on and voting yes. And those who violate their own conscience to do so are called courageous.

America is on the wrong moral path. There is a way that seems right, but in the end it leads to destruction.

Mike Hatfield wrote an article a few years ago titled, "21 Reasons Why Gender Matters." The study examines Gender Disorientation Pathology and Social Policy.

The study is based upon four foundational principles: 1. Gender differences exist; 2. Acknowledging gender differences is the only intellectually honest response to this reality; 3. Gender differences are complementary; 4. Gender disorientation exists in a small minority of individuals. It is not normative and should not drive social policies.

Take a few minutes and read the study.

It is time to take an honest look at the flawed morality that is causing our foundations to crumble and realize that the solution is primarily moral, not political.

Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Prayerful. Be Active. Be Blessed.

White House Is Counting Unborn Babies As Visitors

2012-05-18T08:27:00.002-07:00

In an unusual affirmation that unborn children are in fact people, rather than "fetal mass," the White House put out an email on May 8 explaining that unborn babies must now be included in their official guest list. (Continue below).

Petition Update: Over 93,000 signatures have been turned in for R-74. Please make an extra push this weekend and over the next 2 weeks to gather as many signatures as possible and turn them in by May 31.

I'm not sure how many signatures have been gathered for Initiative 1192, however I do know that up to 40 thousand have been gathered by friends of Faith and Freedom. Please continue to make every effort to gather signatures for I-1192. They must be turned in by June 29. They are due in the Sec. of State's office by July 6.

Posting Comments on Faith and Freedom web site: We have asked that no links be included in your post. If so, they will not be posted, regardless of the content of your post. Some have been using their name as a link when posting comments. That is considered a link and we will not publish the post. We are continuing to receive a growing number of posts in languages other than English. While some of those posts provide interesting perspectives, we cannot publish them if they are not in English--regardless of content. You are reading us in English, please respond in English.

We provide this opportunity for people to express their views as a ministry. These blogs and your comments are widely read, in the Northwest, across the country, and on average in about 40 different countries each week. I received personal comments this past week from Moscow Russia to Asia to Africa to England. And points in between.

Thank you for working with us to maintain a vibrant information site where people---regardless of belief--can express their views.

In an unusual twist of "truth" at the White House, they are now acknowledging that unborn babies are persons and must be registered on the official guest list.

Ellie Schafer, Director of the White House Visitors Office, issued an email on May 8 that read:

Note: The word "must" was bolded in the original email for emphasis.

"We have received a number of calls regarding how to enter security information for a baby that has not yet been born. Crazy as it may sound, you MUST include the baby in the overall count of guests in the tour. It's an easy process."

If the White House considers an unborn baby valuable enough to include on its guest list, why can't the President back off his efforts to advance the pro-abortion movement in favor of honoring life and letting his little guests live?

They too, Mr. President, seek equality---a right to life. Please stop enabling those who seek to take that right away through abortion on demand.

Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Prayerful. Be Active. Be Blessed.

Should We Obey All Laws?

2012-05-17T07:12:00.005-07:00

What if Congress enacted a law and the Supreme Court ruled that law constitutional---requiring all people to attend a minimum of 3 church services per month?

Would you obey that law?

What if Congress enacted a law and the Supreme Court ruled it constitutional under the Constitution's Commerce Clause, requiring all motorists to get 8 hours sleep before operating a vehicle on public highways, claiming that was in the best interest of the public?

Would you obey it?

Different people would respond differently, depending on their beliefs. And the personal demands on their life.

Christians would say the Bible teaches us to obey the laws of the land.

What if you were a jury member during the 1850's and a free person was on trial for assisting a runaway slave in clear violation of the Fugitive Slave Act?

Would you vote to convict and punish?

Slavery is immoral, therefore any laws that support it would also be immoral, right? No?

Thomas Jefferson said, "To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions is a dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy."

Some things to think about.

In a few weeks the Supreme Court will rule on the constitutionality of Obamacare. Clearly the Court is politically divided. Michelle Obama said at a fundraiser recently that she was certain about the position of the judges her husband appointed. I would agree. One of them helped birth Obamacare.

What if the Supreme Court rules that Obamacare is constitutional?

Should that happen, and I personally believe the Court will find the "mandate," which is a central component, is not constitutional----but what if, should Catholics and other people of faith whose consciences are violated by some of the demands of Obamacare, obey a law that is immoral?

You will recall the events in the book of Acts (5: 26-32) in the New Testament. Peter and others were out on the streets preaching the gospel in the name of Jesus Christ. They were arrested, jailed and told not to preach in the name of Christ.

An angel appeared (v. 19) at the prison, opened the doors and released them and told them to go back to the public square and resume preaching, which they did.

Again Peter and his colleagues were brought before the council and the high priest (judge). The judge said, "Didn't we command you not to teach this message in Christ's name?"

Peter's answer was simple. "We ought to obey God rather than men." ( v. 29)

I am not advocating or even suggesting civil disobedience or lawlessness. I am asking you to think.

And I am suggesting that Christian people of faith will likely be tested in these areas of their faith and their conscience in the days ahead, should America not choose a different direction for the country. Paul referred to them as "perilous times."

Should the Court rule in favor of Obamacare, it will not only likely destroy America as we have known it, but will for certain cause biblical Christians to make some difficult decisions.

Walter Williams, an African American columnist, raised this question in a recent column. He caused me to think more specifically about how I should respond to the moral implications of Obamacare, should it be allowed to stand as law.

William's emphasis is a little different, but the consequences are similar. He makes the case that Congress has already gone beyond the powers delegated to it in passing Obamacare. He quotes Federalist 45 and Madison, "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the state governments are numerous and indefinite," claiming that vision has been inverted---stood on its head---reversed.

I agree.

He cites Jefferson and Madison in regard to the legality of the Alien and Sedition Acts and reviews the 10th Amendment to the Constitution.

Williams point is this: Obamacare is forcing us to buy a product--health care.

I strongly recommend you read his article.

My point is that Obamacare is forcing us to accept government imposed mandates that violates the essence of many biblical Christian's beliefs about the sanctity of life.

If this law stands, how should we respond?

Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Prayerful. Be Informed. Be Active. Be Blessed.

NEWSWEEK: "The First Gay President"

2012-05-16T10:56:00.000-07:00

The latest issue of Newsweek magazine is on the stands, featuring a picture of President Obama with a rainbow halo suspended over his head. The cover text simply says, "The First Gay President."

The feature article is written by Andrew Sullivan, an openly gay writer who describes himself as a "conservative political pundit." He is no conservative, most people see him as a very troubled individual who has been able to leverage his personal challenges into a career.

This past Sunday, Sullivan was featured on Chris Matthew's show on MSNBC, where he tearfully said among other things, “I am his equal,” and Obama's announcement was "a transformative moment." And, “To hear the president, who is in some ways a father figure, speak to that – the tears came down like with many people in our families.”

In a statement about the article Sullivan says, "When you step back a little and assess the record of Obama on gay rights, you see, in fact, that this is not an aberration. It was an inevitable culmination of three years of work."

Sullivan says, "He had to discover his black identity and then reconcile it with his white family, just as gays discover their homosexual identity and then reconcile it with their heterosexual family." A striking parallel in Sullivan's mind, that makes him the First Gay President.

Others see it differently.

The Atlantic said he may be our first, "Gay-Female-Hispanic-Asian-Jewish President."

They may be on to something, however, I think a lot of us wish he could have simply been an "American " President with the best interest of our country as a priority. That clearly did not happen. Instead, he has become a symbol of progressivism's poster president, a symbol of what diversity, in its most evolved state, can actually become. A hollow man.

The Newsweek article also says with certainty that his evolution on the matter of homosexual "marriage" was a calculation, not an evolution. A well staged and planned calculation. Others are confirming that, saying it was decided some months ago.

Rand Paul probably had the most interesting observation to the President's recent epiphany. While speaking at a convention in Iowa he said,

"The president recently weighed in on marriage. And, you know, he said his views were evolving on marriage. Call me cynical but I wasn’t sure that his views on marriage could get any gayer. Now it did kind of bother me, though, that he used the justification for it in a biblical reference. He said the biblical Golden Rule caused him to be for gay marriage."

"And I'm like: What version of the Bible is he reading? It’s not the King James version. It’s not the New American Standard. It’s not the New Revised version. I don’t know what version he is getting it from."

"Now that doesn’t mean we have to be harsh and mean and hate people," said Paul. "We understand sin and if we believe it’s sin we still understand that people sin. And we understand that we are not out there preaching some sort of hateful dogma against people. But that doesn’t mean that we have to go ahead and give up our traditions. We’ve got 6,000 years of tradition. There’s a lot of stability, even beyond religion, there’s stability in the family unit. Just from an anthropological point of view, the family is a really important thing. We shouldn’t just give up on it."

Indeed! And we will not give up on it, nor will we give up on the defense of marriage.

Thank you for standing with us in these historically challenging times. Your support is needed.

Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Prayerful. Be Active. Be Blessed.

Who Is The Real Bully?

2012-05-15T07:09:00.001-07:00

You have heard about the hit piece The Washington Post published last week "reporting" that Mitt Romney had bullied someone nearly 50 years ago in prep school.

You have also likely heard that the family of John Lauber, who supposedly was bullied by Romney, has come out with a statement saying the Post's article is "factually incorrect."

The family of Lauber, who passed away from liver cancer in 2004, said this:

"The family of John Lauber is releasing a statement saying the portrayal of John is factually incorrect and we are aggrieved that he would be used to further a political agenda. There will be no more comments from the family."

John's sister also said, if John "were alive today, he would be furious."

It seems there is no end to which the press will go to advance the far left, secular agenda.

But have you heard about Newt Gringrich's former campaign adviser on MSNBC this past Sunday?

Rick Tyler, formerly with Newt, was on MSNBC's Martin Bashir show Sunday. Of course, Bashir was obsessed with advancing the "bullying" story and evidently felt he could lead Tyler along and in some way use him to re-affirm the hit piece on Romney.

Whoops.

Tyler didn't take the bait.

Instead he said, with cameras rolling, "I would consider things like Barack Obama bullying the Supreme Court, bullying EPA, bullying hundreds of property owners and business owners, bullying donors to the Romney campaign. That's what bullying is."

I have linked the story above, along with the video.

I would add that the President is also bullying Christian people of faith in regard to matters of conscience, and our most deeply held beliefs on the sanctity of life, marriage and the family.

The matter with the Supreme Court is particularly troubling, in that he is trying to fiddle with, and manipulate the highest court in the land---without restraint.

Remember this? Here's how it played out.

After a stunningly bad performance before the Court by Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, Jr., defending ObamaCare, the President tried to intimidate the Justices with public statements about how ”unprecedented” it would be for an “unelected group of people” to overturn a law passed by a “strong majority” in Congress. A month later, the White House claimed Medicare’s payment system would “freeze up” if the Court overturned the law. ”Medicare cannot turn on a dime,” claimed former administrator Don Berwick, Obama’s first Medicare chief. “I would not be surprised if there are delays and problems with payment flow.”

That is bullying in its highest form.

God help us.

Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Prayerful. Be Active. Be Very Active. Be Blessed.

Pres. Obama: Troops "Fighting On My Behalf"

2012-05-14T09:32:00.000-07:00

President Obama's newly found, evolved conviction that marriage should be redefined, has dominated the news and will continue to do so for weeks to come.

However, buried in the ABC interview last week that revealed his new belief, was an equally troubling revelation about how he views his relationship to the United States military.

Explaining how his belief on marriage has evolved, and congratulating himself for all he has done to advance the homosexual agenda including abolishing the "Don't ask, Don't tell" policy, he tipped his hand on how he really sees his relationship to the military of the United States of America.

In his self congratulatory outing, he made the astonishing characterization of the troops, whom he referred to as, "Those Soldiers or Airmen or Marines or Sailors who are out there fighting on my behalf."

On my behalf?

For sure the President is the Commander in Chief, but do our troops fight on his behalf? Most of them I know think they are fighting for their country and for freedom.

I caught the phrase, buried in the words. ABC either didn't hear it or chose not to disturb the King with a question about it during his proclamation.

Elliot Abrams didn't miss it and didn't ignore the words. He wrote an excellent article about it.

When the Navy Seals killed Osama bin Laden, the President----any President, should have gotten some credit.

George Landrith at the "Daily Caller" observed, at the time, that the President's speech following the killing of bin Laden, "Was self absorbed, misleading and marks the beginning of his effort to rehabilitate his leadership image for the 2012 campaign."

He points out that the President used the words, "I", "me", and "my", a combined 13 times in a 1300 word speech.

Self absorbed.

Narcissism.

Elliot Abrams, agrees and concludes:

"Most Americans thought they were fighting for the country, not on Barack Obama’s behalf. Slip of the tongue, to be sure, but can one think of another president who’d have made it? They are fighting under his command, under his orders, to be sure, but this particular locution is offensive and solipsistic. Mr. Obama has switched his position on the sanctity of marriage back and forth and has a new one, again, today, revealed when politics made that advisable to him and to his campaign. Whether this is the end or he will 'evolve' some more is anyone’s guess."

"But let’s leave our soldiers out of this. They aren’t fighting for Mr. Obama and his campaign, and no one sent them out to risk their lives to win same sex “marriage.”

Well said.

These are perilous times. Faith is being challenged. Freedom is being challenged. Thank you for standing with us as we stand together for Judeo- Christian values.

Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Prayerful. Be Active. Be Blessed.

Obama Drama: Deception, Not Evolution

2012-05-11T07:39:00.003-07:00

Much of the press spent yesterday talking about the Prince of Progressivism and his sincere, brave, politically courageous, open minded, evolutionary path to enlightenment---and the realization that homosexuals should be able to marry just like those other people.

The problem with all that is, it wasn't an "evolution," it was more of a calculated deception.

Bruce Thorton wrote a piece that points out the hypocrisy of the drama.

He writes that in 1996, Barack Obama, while running for the Illinois state senate, told a Chicago newspaper, "I favor legalizing same-sex marriage."

In 2008, a few days before the election, he said, "I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I am not in favor of gay marriage."

Earlier that election year he told Pastor Rick Warren that marriage is a "union between a man and a woman," adding that it is a "sacred union" with "God in the mix."

That is hardly an "evolution." He was for it in 1996, against it in 2008, and for it in 2012.

Even MSNBC, one of his most ardent cheerleaders, smiled and moved past the "evolution" part and wrote on their "First Read Blog" that it was political calculus that made the decision.

They wrote, "Obama's shift not only speaks to a broad swath of the electorate, which has exhibited increasing acceptance of same-sex marriage in opinion polls, but also gay and lesbian voters who compose a core part of the Obama base, and have been major fund raisers for his re-election."

This whole exercise of so-called "evolution" is really a homily from the Prince of Progressivism on how to manipulate the public for political gain.

This should not surprise people of faith and conservatives, but hopefully it will re-affirm the nature of our moral crises in America.

Thorton, in his article, gives a thoughtful overview of why we should not be surprised given where this man is actually coming from.

He writes:

"But consideration of the world from which Obama emerged points us to what he really thinks. It beggars belief to think someone who has spent his whole adult life in the progressive purlieus of academe and community activism, where gay marriage, like abortion, is a sacrament, could sincerely be opposed to it. Like taxing the greedy rich, America’s foreign policy sins, endemic white racism, redistributionist economics, global warming, the evils of carbon-based energy, deficit spending, conservative misogynism, and all the other scriptures in the progressive psalter, the rightness and justness of gay marriage are revealed truths that require obedience, not justification."

"Indeed, gay marriage is particularly expressive of the progressive gospel, for this issue concentrates all that sect’s fundamentalist doctrines. First, it exemplifies the progressive idea that the traditional wisdom and beliefs of the masses are benighted remnants of their ignorant, superstitious past from which we should be evolving. The collective wisdom of the human race developed over centuries is automatically suspect and to be rejected as irrational justifications for oppression, exclusion, and the defense of unfair privilege. Progressive moderns, supposedly armed with advances in knowledge discovered by the “human sciences,” are better able to arrange society and human relations so that they reflect the reality hidden to our religion-addled ancestors, and thus can ensure justice and equality. So the belief based on faith, tradition, and natural law that marriage is an institution joining a man and woman is to be rejected, and society to be reshaped according to the truths possessed by enlightened progressives."

There's more. I recommend you read the entire article.

An ancient Truth speaks to us on this issue, teaching that a double minded man is unstable in all his ways.

Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Prayerful. Be Active. Be Blessed.

Obama Comes Out And Marriage Lessons From NC

2012-05-10T08:16:00.002-07:00

The President of the United States has come out and declared that marriage should be redefined. He now officially advocates for so-called homosexual "marriage."

And the resounding defeat of those who would seek to redefine marriage in North Carolina has provided some lessons for all of us who stand for marriage, and seek to defend it. Even against the President.

A few observations:

1. North Carolina is not Washington State. However, there is an inherent sense about marriage among most people, even left wing progressives such as Gov. Gregoire and other state legislators who admitted they were personally conflicted when it came to supporting the redefinition of marriage. President Obama has told the world his view on marriage has been "evolving." Until today.

Most people know in their heart that redefining marriage is not "equality," it is not natural, nor is it morally right. And those who practice homosexual behavior were not "born that way."

2. Money is not the final word on the marriage issue. In North Carolina, those who seek to redefine marriage raised twice as much as those who defended marriage. The defenders of marriage raised and spent about $1.1 million. The homosexual group raised and spent about $2.2 million.

3. Celebrity power is not the final word on the marriage issue. President Obama has been giving the same "nod and wink" to the homosexual community as he gave to Russia when he whispered into a live mic, "Cut me some slack--give me some space, wait until after the election." The homosexual activists have known the little secret and the press has been giving the President a pass while he was "evolving." Everyone in North Carolina knew where the President stood on the homosexual agenda when they voted Tuesday.

However, this morning President Obama has come out and is telling ABC's Robin Roberts, in an interview taped yesterday afternoon, he has fully evolved and now supports so-called homosexual "marriage".

Vice President Biden made his position very clear last Sunday on NBC, two days before the North Carolina election, and former President Bill Clinton sent out thousands of robo calls asking people in North Carolina to reject the marriage amendment. The people said "No" to all of them and their attempt to redefine marriage. And "Yes" to marriage.

The President's newly discovered "truth" in publicly supporting homosexual "marriage" will not change many minds. Everyone already knew where he stood. It will be a moment to celebrate for homosexual activists in that he is the first sitting President of the United States, in our history, to publicly support the redefinition of marriage.

Hopefully it will be a moment to reflect on the reality of our times and the need for action, by conservative people of faith.

4. The New York Times did their best to put a smiley face on the major set back, but the best they could do was to quote the homosexual campaign director saying, "We know we pushed the needle forward. This is just a skirmish, a battle in the war that we will win. We gave it everything we had." When President Obama's remarks became known, the press quickly replaced reporting on the defeat in NC in favor of applauding the courage of the President.

But did the needle move? Probably not.

5. Tamie Fitzgerald, who led the "Vote FOR Marriage NC," said, "The whole point is simply that you don't rewrite the nature of God's design based on the demands of a group of adults."

Which leads to this:

6. The marriage issue can only be won on the basis of biblical morality and nature. The NC effort was successful because it was based on the Truth that the concept of marriage was instituted by God at Creation and the institution of marriage predates all other civil institutions, organized government and world religions. Anything other than one man and one woman is not marriage. Nor can it be.

There are those, some in the referendum leadership in Washington State, who tend to prefer to make a secular case for defending marriage and avoid using a biblical position, probably because of the ridicule from the likes of Dan Savage, the press and others.

I want to personally be on record. NOM and the sponsor of R-74 have said they will need to raise several millions of dollars---up to $6 million, for the public campaign, after R-74 is on the ballot. I'm not sure why so much in that NOM invested $425,000 in North Carolina. I am certain, however, if the campaign is run to be "cool" and not necessarily biblically based, it will lose. Money alone cannot win this issue. Secular arguments alone cannot win this issue. Celebrities alone cannot win this issue.

If people are not biblically based in their morality, whether practicing Christian or not, progressive relativism will lead them to vote for so-called "equality" and "fairness" to prove to themselves and others they are not bigoted.

The argument for a secular case goes something like this: "Washington is a very liberal state."

And it is, particularly in the population center of the Puget Sound.

"We can't simply quote Bible verses and win the marriage contest. We have to make a more secular case for marriage," they say, "about family, the value of biological parents, etc." That's important, but not the most important to winning a vote of the public.

I believe the only chance we have to win against the formidable homosexual lobby and the very biased, complicit press in Washington State, is to make a case for biblically based, time proven morality. A biblical marriage model that every successful civil government and every major world religion has affirmed for more than 5000 years, but did not create. And cannot redefine.

Biblical marriage---one man and one woman, is the only model that can sustain the human race.

Thank you for your continued efforts in signature gathering for both R-74 and I-1192. And your support of Faith and Freedom.

Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Prayerful. Be Active. Be Blessed.

United Methodists Reject Homosexual "Marriage" and Ordination

2012-05-09T09:08:00.000-07:00

Two amendments were put forward at the International General Conference of the United Methodist Church last week, both intended to redefine the church's belief on homosexuality. Both were rejected.

North Carolina says "yes" to biblical marriage and "no" to homosexual "marriage."

Even with the Obama Administration voicing support for redefining marriage and former President Bill Clinton launching a robo call campaign in an attempt to redefine marriage, the people of N. Carolina yesterday said a resounding "no" to homosexual "marriage" and "yes" to biblical marriage. The vote wasn't even close.

You will note in the linked story, the Washington Post published a picture of a United Methodist Church with their monument sign supporting biblical marriage.

The one amendment, which was most divisive, was intended to be an incremental approach to redefining the United Methodist's biblical position which considers homosexual behavior sin. It sought to add this sentence to the official church doctrine: "As a denomination, we are conflicted regarding homosexual expressions of human sexuality."

One pastor said, "No, we have to say what the Gospel says even though we love our brothers and sisters."

Those trying to redefine the beliefs of the church said, "We all sin, we all fall short of the Grace of God. There are places for multiple perspectives."

This makes relativism the central component of Scriptural exegesis. A position that allows cultural norms to shape Scripture, rather than Scripture shaping the culture.

One pastor stood and defined the convictions of the majority of those in attendance:

"We allow homosexuals to change the church rather than the church to change homosexuals. It is not true that God created gays and lesbians the way they are. I refuse to accept that. Because God is a loving God and He cannot have created something that will make that person suffer. If we say no (to the amendment) it doesn't me we don't love that person. I stand to say that the grace of God is for all people but the grace of God does not allow us to sin."

He did not stand alone as 61% agreed with him and the Methodists staked out a biblical belief on the matter of homosexual "marriage" and ordination.

Following the vote, a minority, according to someone whom I spoke to who was in attendance, threw a tantrum.

Whether it is the religious left trying to redefine Scripture or an atheist profaning and blaspheming it to 3000 kids, they all end up on the same page. The wrong page.

The United Methodist Church will convene again in 4 years. God bless them and give them strength to stand for Truth and righteousness.

It is difficult to stand for marriage---for life, for the inerrancy and authority of Scripture, for absolute Truth, in our present culture. There are many adversaries.

May God bless those Methodists who have taken a stand. And all those in North Carolina who voted for marriage yesterday.

And may God bless and strengthen us all as we take that stand in Washington State, sometimes in churches that do not share our deepest beliefs and convictions, but always in the face of ridicule from those who stand in rebellion against God and His Truth.

Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Prayerful. Be Faithful. Be Active. Be Blessed.

Marriage Petition Signatures Going Well

2012-05-08T08:59:00.002-07:00

Thank you to the Friends of Faith and Freedom who are working with us in gathering signatures for both R-74 and I-1192.

Your hours of signature gathering is profoundly appreciated by everyone who believes in marriage.

I personally thank you. It's an honor to be working with you in the defense of marriage.

Over the past couple of weeks, we have been surveying our Faith and Freedom area coordinators and individuals directly involved with Faith and Freedom, to create a best estimate of how many signatures we have gathered, and how many we feel we can gather over the next few weeks for R-74 and the next month and a half for I-1192.

There are many organizations and individuals gathering signatures, including the sponsors of R-74 and I-1192.

Reports from those specifically working with Faith and Freedom indicate there are, through yesterday, right at 27,000 signatures that have been sent in so far. There are approximately 8,000 signatures on petitions they are still circulating. That does not include signatures gathered in churches this past Sunday.

The collective "best guess" estimate of those collecting for R-74, is that they will be able, with God's help, to collect another 30,000 before the end of May.

This would be about 65,000 signatures at minimum. The referendum needs a little over 120,000 valid signatures to make the ballot. The sponsor is asking for 150,000.

I cannot conceive of any reason why R-74 will not be on the ballot, given the national support of NOM and other organizations around the state, the effort of "Friends of Faith and Freedom," and the absence of anyone in the Christian community trying to undermine the efforts toward R-74.

The numbers for I-1192 are less in those sent in so far, but it appears we have sent in about 21,000 and have about 12,000 signatures on petitions being circulated at the end of this past week.

These same people believe they will collect about another 20,000 to 30,000 by the end of June. However, there is some resistance to I-1192, mostly from pastors who have been instructed not to allow them to be made available in their church by people directly involved in the leadership of R-74.

That's unfortunate, but true.

I-1192 needs over 200,000 signatures to make the ballot. The sponsor is asking for 300,000. They are due in the Secretary of State's offices by July 6, so there is an additional month to gather I-1192 signatures.

Both measures are very important to the protection and preservation of marriage.

I'm asking everyone involved with Faith and Freedom to either mail in your completed petitions or contact your area coordinator for assistance in getting all petitions for R-74 in to the sponsor by May 25.

All signatures for I-1192 should be in by June 22.

Thank you for making your best effort over the remaining weeks.

R-74 "is to qualify a referendum to the November 2012 ballot giving voters the right to approve or reject SB 6239 which seeks to redefine marriage. The coalition advocates that voters reject redefining marriage, because marriage is a unique institution that is profoundly in the common good. Marriage not only unites a couple to each other, it unites the couple to any children that may be born of their union. While death and divorce too often prevent it, children have a right to know and be cared for by their own mother and father, the people responsible for bringing them into the world.”

R-74 is vitally important to the current attempt to redefine marriage. It must succeed. We strongly encourage you and your friends to sign this petition so we can bring this issue to a vote of the people.

However, Senator Ed Murray, the champion of the effort to redefine marriage, could re-introduce another bill to redefine marriage as soon as January, 2013.

Initiative 1192 has been filed for the purpose of reclaiming the historic and biblical definition of marriage. We strongly encourage you and your friends to sign this petition so that we can bring the issue to the citizens for a vote!

Initiative I-1192 is an affirmative statement – your chance to say YES to marriage as being between one man and one woman;

Initiative I-1192 reverses the same-sex marriage law that was recently passed by the Legislature, as it would prohibit marriages by persons other than one man and one woman;

Initiative I-1192 is an initiative that makes new law– it clarifies the definition of marriage as being between one man and one woman.”

It would require a super majority in the Legislature, to repeal it during the next 2 years, with only a majority needed after the 2 years.

If you have ever considered taking a stand for what is right, this is that time.

It's an honor to be standing with you as we, together, stand for marriage.

Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Prayerful. Be Active. Be Blessed.

VP Biden Commends NBC For Advancing Homosexual "Marriage" Agenda

2012-05-07T07:44:00.002-07:00

Vice President Joe Biden commended NBC yesterday for "educating the American public" and "moving us toward same-sex marriage."

He also explained what marriage is really all about.

The Vice President told "Meet The Press" host David Gregory, "My measure David, and I take a look at when things really begin to change, is when the social culture changes. I think 'Will and Grace' probably did more to educate the American public than almost anything anybody's ever done so far. And I think people fear that which is different. Now they're beginning to understand. They're beginning to understand."

"Will and Grace" was a sitcom that aired on NBC from 1998 through 2006. It featured a main character who was homosexual.

So Vice President Biden believes that pop culture decides what is right and wrong. Biden, who was once pro-life and true to the teaching of his church, admitted that after coming to Congress he changed his mind. He became "for" abortion and "against" abortion simultaneously. You can read about his conversion in his book, "Promises To Keep" pages 104-105.

While running for President in 2007, he had this Q and A on CBS on April 29, 2007:

Q: You have changed your position on abortion. When you came to the Senate, you believed that Roe v. Wade was not correctly decided and that you also believed the right of abortion was not secured by the Constitution. Why did you change your mind?

A: Well, I was 29 years old when I came to the US Senate, and I have learned a lot. Look, I’m a practicing Catholic, and it is the biggest dilemma for me in terms of comporting my religious and cultural views with my political responsibility.

Translated: "I like my job and I want to keep it. It doesn't matter what my religious beliefs may be, I'm going to be politically correct."

Biden continued with Gregory: "Look, I just think that the good news is that as more and more Americans come to understand what this [homosexual marriage] is all about is a simple proposition. Who do you love? Who do you love? And will you be loyal to the person you love? And that's what people are finding out is what all marriages at their root are about. Whether they're marriages of lesbians or gay men or heterosexuals."

He described the belief in redefining marriage as "evolving."

This, ladies and gentlemen, is the Vice President of the United States.

So, Mr. Vice President, how do you really feel about redefining marriage? "I am absolutely comfortable with the fact that men marrying men, women marrying women, and heterosexual men and women marrying each other are entitled to the same exact rights...and quite frankly I don't see much of a distinction beyond that."

Gregory asked Biden if Obama would support homosexual "marriage" if elected to a second term.

Biden said he couldn't speak to that, but this is "evolving."

Whether pop culture is being led by the entertainment industry, or the entertainment industry, as they claim, merely reflects what is happening in the culture, one thing is certain, they represent an unholy, secular progressive alliance with a minority group of homosexual activists and advocates. In this case the advocates seem to be cloistered in the White House.

One other certainty is that the present administration is commending the media for leading, as we continue to stumble toward Gomorrah.

God help us.

Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Prayerful. Be Active. Be Blessed.

New Obama Slogan, "Forward": A Karl Marx Cue?

2012-05-04T07:11:00.001-07:00

Paid for by Faith and Freedom PAC

While President Obama plans to introduce his new re-election slogan "Forward" tomorrow in rallies in Ohio and Virginia, Mrs Obama told the folks in Tucson last Monday "We are blessed to have him" as President.

Forward.

And Blessed.

Both the slogan and the statement were intended to cause people to think about the future, although the 7-minute video that introduces his new slogan spends a good deal of time "looking back" at the crises he inherited coming into the White House. He simply can't seem to mentally get past George W. Bush, whether he looks forward or backward.

What is really concerning is when you realize that all the President's men (and women) didn't take a moment to look back beyond President Bush at the recent history of the slogan, "Forward."

It should be terrorizing to conservative Americans if you think he did actually look back and knows full well what he is symbolizing with his new slogan.

When I read about his new slogan, my mind went back to another time when, as a school kid in the Yakima Valley, we practiced air raid drills and the like and talked about how communism, Marxism and socialism was the enemy of our way of life.

The word "Forward" was a hallmark term for socialist Marx, his son-in-law Paul LaFaque, Lenin, Engels and other European socialists. Socialism activists frequently used "Forward" to advance their socialist agenda. Campaigns, pamphlets and newspapers were called "Forward." It was the banner carried to the formation of the Soviet Union.

I'm not the only one who thought of that. Victor Morton also thought about it and wrote a column for the Washington Times about it. This is part of what he wrote:

New Obama slogan has long ties to Marxism, socialism
Published on April 30, 2012

The Obama campaign apparently didn't look backwards into history when selecting its new campaign slogan, "Forward" — a word with a long and rich association with European Marxism.

Many Communist and radical publications and entities throughout the 19th and 20th centuries had the name "Forward!" or its foreign cognates. Wikipedia has an entire section called "Forward (generic name of socialist publications).

The name Forward carries a special meaning in socialist political terminology. It has been frequently used as a name for socialist, communist and other left-wing newspapers and publications," the online encyclopedia explains.

The slogan "Forward!" reflected the conviction of European Marxists and radicals that their movements reflected the march of history, which would move forward past capitalism and into socialism and communism.

The Obama campaign released its new campaign slogan Monday in a 7-minute video. The title card has simply the word "Forward" with the "O" having the familiar Obama logo from 2008. It will be played at rallies this weekend that mark the Obama re-election campaign's official beginning.

There's more historical information in the article.. I have linked it above. You should read it.

We cannot count all the ways in which Obamacare will "bless" us, however, we do know that if it stands, it will fund sterilization for women and all FDA- approved contraceptives, including abortifacients, or abortion pills.

By most financial proformas it will also bankrupt our country.

Many believe, myself included, that the health care plan is one of the greatest attacks on religious liberty in American history.

It is also a giant leap into European socialism.

And thinking about Moving Forward, reminds me of President Obama's defined destination. And perhaps sheds more light on the choice of his slogan "Forward," and the ideology of many of the people the President was associated with prior to becoming President and some of his appointments since becoming President.

When the President had completed his first 100 days in office, he returned to Missouri, where he had concluded his successful campaign for the Presidency, and spoke to the kids at Fox High School in Arnold Missouri.

His words:

"So today on my 100th day in office, I've come to report to you, the American people, that we have begun to pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and we've begun the work of re-making America. ( applause) We're working to re-make America."

Indeed he is.

So "Forward" is an abandonment of the dynamic principles of free enterprise and an unprecedented rush toward socialism where the "Blessing" will be provided by the State. Not the "God who gave us liberty"

Re-making America.

President Dwight D. Eisenhower once said, "Every step we take towards making the State the Caretaker of our lives, by that much more we move toward making the State our Master."

In the "work of re-making of America," we have learned that "Forward" and "Blessed" also means an abandonment of the biblical moral principles upon which this country was founded and has thrived.

Marriage and family, in this new "re-made" State is to be redefined, with the President himself declaring the Defense of Marriage Act, (DOMA) which was passed by passed by Congress, null and void.

Abortion on demand is a right and the "re-made" State will figure out ways to pay for it, while advancing a complete disregard for the sanctity of life and it's Creator. Forgetting God, we will call tolerance 'truth", biblical beliefs "bigotry" and perversion "normal."

In our rush "Forward," we will forget that Founder Patrick Henry warned us, "When we forget God, tyrants forge our chains."

We will forget, until the discomfort and weight of the chains become unbearable and the bondage of them intolerable.

Thank you, Mr. and Mrs. President, for reminding us of the path we are walking as we move "Forward". And the "Blessings" it will bring.

It is time to once again "Let Freedom Ring".

Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Prayerful. Be Active. Be Blessed.

National Day Of Prayer--It's Significance

2012-05-03T06:55:00.000-07:00

Today is the National Day of Prayer.

The significance of this day cannot be over stated. The National Day of Prayer web site says this about prayer:

"The National Day of Prayer is a vital part of our heritage. Since the first call to prayer in 1775, when the Continental Congress asked the colonies to pray for wisdom in forming a nation, the call to prayer has continued through our history, including President Lincoln’s proclamation of a day of “humiliation, fasting, and prayer” in 1863. In 1952, a joint resolution by Congress, signed by President Truman, declared an annual, national day of prayer. In 1988, the law was amended and signed by President Reagan, permanently setting the day as the first Thursday of every May. Each year, the president signs a proclamation, encouraging all Americans to pray on this day. Last year, all 50 state governors plus the governors of several U.S. territories signed similar proclamations."

America, as we have known it and I believe as God would have it to be, truly hangs in the balance at this time in history.

I encourage you, if possible, to find a place to join others of like mind and spirit for prayer today. If this is not possible, take a private moment and pray for our nation and for one another.

I have linked the official National Day of Prayer web site above. There is a great deal of information about both prayer and prayer events today.

I tried to find a comprehensive list of prayer events in Washington State but was unable to find one. I'm certain you can find information in your local area regardless of what state you live in.

In my search, I found an article from Yakima, the place of my birth, that after outlining all the prayer activities, concluded by quoting one of the leaders as saying, "I think our city may be the most prayed over city in the State of Washington."

I hope that can be said of every town and city across America. May God bless America as we acknowledge Him as Lord of all.

Be Prayerful. Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Active. Be Blessed.

May Day Mayhem in Seattle and Redeeming Dan Savage

2012-05-02T08:01:00.002-07:00

While the 99% smashed windows in businesses, destroyed cars and generally disrupted Seattle and cities across the country yesterday, the Seattle Times appeared to be busy trying to redeem Dan Savage.

I had planned to write about how a few are breaking laws, claiming entitlements, advocating redistribution of wealth and presuming that everyone else has no rights on their "occupy" days.

I really didn't plan to say much more about Dan Savage and his bully attack on 3000 high school kids at the journalism convention in Seattle in that we wrote about it twice this week and our blogs have been widely circulated and quoted by some in the media, but yesterday, the Seattle Times rose above the smoke in the streets in an attempt at some kind of redemption---or at least explanation, for a man who clearly stepped over the line and blew it. And is now trying to, as I said yesterday, walk back the whole episode.

I have linked the Times article, but the evolving version of what happened and what was said---and why it was said, is important.

A few more things you should know about this event.

Dan Savage still stands with the idea that his tirade was not directed at the students, but at the Bible saying, "I have a right to defend myself and to point out the hypocrisy" of biblical commandments.

This is not unlike what many homosexuals say they believe and often express--even on this web site. It is, however, usually not so forceful.

It was difficult to see any empathy toward the Christian kids who walked out on his speech. And had Mr. Savage not verbally assaulted the kids, bullied them and blasphemed the Bible, there would be no need to "defend" himself. The kids did not attack his beliefs. He attacked theirs.

He says he regrets his vulgar terms, but stands by his description of the Bible.

Savage says he asked the organizers of the National Scholastic Press Association and Journalism Education Association if he should "moderate" his speech. He says they said, "No, be yourself; do what you do."

Now that this story has become a major national story, the organizers have issued a statement saying Savage "veered from the topic" of bullying. They are saying student journalism "should not shy away from controversial topics and viewpoints. But it should promote and engage in civil discourse. Mr Savage's speech fell short of that standard, and for this our organizations apologize."

It's very difficult to understand how an organization that lives off their relationship with public education, and the paying students it provides for their events, could tell a man who has defined himself by giving the very speech he gave at the convention to, "Be yourself, do what you do" and expect some other result.

It is also odd their apology is for lack of civil dialog and engagement, when the organization themselves created the uncivil environment by inviting Savage to be a keynote speaker and telling him to "do what he does."

Savage thinks the Bible is filled with hypocrisy. I think the National Scholastic Press Association and Journalism Education Association is hypocritical. Based on all I've read and comments sent to me from people who were actually in attendance, I also believe they generally knew what Savage would say.

What was unexpected, was the public response and push back.

These beliefs regarding the Bible and Christianity are not foreign in the public school classroom. The difference is that it is spoon fed over 12 years, rather than force fed in a few hours.

And finally, I doubt that I would send my kid to anything these folks were sponsoring in the future, knowing what we know now.

Thanks for helping us keep the light on.

Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Prayerful. Be Active. Be Blessed.

Homosexual Activist To Dan Savage: "Apologize"

2012-05-01T07:07:00.003-07:00

Yesterday, I wrote about how Seattle columnist Dan Savage, in his keynote address to several thousand high school students at the national journalism convention in Seattle, slammed the Bible, Christianity and mocked those students who are biblical Christians, as they walked out of the convention.

Now the leader of a homosexual activist organization is calling for Savage to apologize.

And Dan Savage is trying to walk back and revise his profane comments.

Todd Starnes, at Fox News, reported, "Savage, the founder of the “It Gets Better” anti-bullying project is facing criticism for delivering a Bible-bashing, profanity-laced speech to high school students attending a journalism conference sponsored by the National Scholastic Press Association and the Journalism Education Association."

At one point Savage called Christian teenagers who walked out of the speech “pansy-assed.”

“We can learn to ignore the bullshit in the Bible about gay people — the same way we have learned to ignore the bullshit in the Bible about shellfish, about slavery, about dinner, about farming, about menstruation about virginity about masturbation,” he told the young students. “We ignore bullshit in the Bible about all sorts of things.” Savage said.

Starnes wrote, "Jimmy LaSalvia, executive director of GOProud, called those statements 'outrageous' and demanded an apology.

“Dan Savage should apologize for his comments and should apologize to the high school students in attendance whom he called ‘pansy-asses,’” continued LaSalvia. “It is ironic that someone whose claim to fame is fighting bullying would resort to bullying tactics in attacking high school students who were offended by his outrageous remarks.”

LaSalvia said people of faith should be treated with respect. “Dan Savage’s outrageous anti-Christian tirade hurts – not helps – the fight for gay rights in this country,” LaSalvia said in a statement.

After creating a national backlash, Savage is revising what he said and what he meant. And sort of apologizing.

The far left Huffington Post has, along with the Convention sponsors, sprung to Savage's defense.

Huff Post published this:

Dan Savage is speaking out after his obscenity-laced speech at the National High School Journalist Conference in Seattle sparked a national controversy.

The outspoken lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) rights advocate addressed the backlash on his blog late Sunday. "I would like to apologize for describing that walk out as a pansy-assed move," he writes. "I wasn't calling the handful of students who left pansies (2,800+ students, most of them Christian, stayed and listened), just the walk-out itself. But that's a distinction without a difference -- kinda like when religious conservatives tells their gay friends that they 'love the sinner, hate the sin.'"

Savage continued:

"I didn't call anyone's religion bullshit. I did say that there is bullshit -- 'untrue words or ideas' -- in the Bible. That is being spun as an attack on Christianity.

I was not attacking the faith in which I was raised. I was attacking the argument that gay people must be discriminated against -- and anti-bullying programs that address anti-gay bullying should be blocked (or exceptions should be made for bullying 'motivated by faith') -- because it says right there in the Bible that being gay is wrong. Yet the same people who make that claim choose to ignore what the Bible has to say about a great deal else. I did not attack Christianity. I attacked hypocrisy."

No, Mr. Savage, you demonstrated hypocrisy. And dishonesty.

He does not know the faith of "most kids at the convention" who "stayed and listened."

No one is "spinning" this fiasco except him and his accomplices. This was one of the most blatant, blasphemous public attacks on Christianity I have seen in my years in the ministry.

The Huff Post and the convention sponsors, in their defense of Savage, seem to be labeling the children who walked out as weaker than those who stayed.

We need a spiritual renewal in this country.

We truly are "Stumbling Toward Gomorrah." God help us.

Your support allows Faith and Freedom to shine Light into the darkness.

Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Prayerful. Be Active. Be Blessed.

D. Savage To High School Convention: "Ignore Bull Sh_ _ In The Bible"

2012-04-30T07:58:00.000-07:00

Two weeks ago, Dan Savage, a columnist for Seattle's "The Stranger" newspaper, was the keynote speaker for the National High School Journalism Convention in Seattle. Several thousand high school students and their teachers and advisers from around the country were in attendance.

Savage's first comment was, "I hope you're all using birth control." It went downhill from there.

Following his opening comments, he began an attack on the Bible and those kids who believe in biblical values in ways you have likely never heard. All under the umbrella of public education.

He said, "There are people using the Bible as an excuse for gay bullying, because it says in Leviticus and Romans that being gay is wrong."

He told the kids the Bible is wrong.

He continued, "We can learn to ignore the bull sh_ _ in the Bible about gay people."

He continued to blaspheme the Bible and Scripture in ways that will shock the most nominal Christian and grieve the heart and spirit of any biblical believer in Jesus Christ.

He mocked the Christian kids who began to walk out of the convention and called them "panty-assed."

Some educators were questioning why this man would have been invited as the keynote speaker.

One of our regular readers, a former journalist, contacted the leadership directly. He has been keeping me informed of their responses.

I also have a video copy of Savage's attack on the Bible, Christianity and the Christian kids in attendance. Notice how the Christian kids are mocked and jeered as they walk out of the convention. The only thing missing is the lions.

I want every Christian, every parent and every grandparent to read the response from those who chose Savage to speak. And to see the video of him attacking our kids and our Christian beliefs.

We have been following this for the past two weeks. We are looking at what options we may have in any substantive response.

Our reader, I'll refer to him as "Faith and Freedom Reader" first contacted the Journalism Education Association and began to ask questions.

First this:

Dear JEA Administration,

I would like to know if Dan Savage was vetted prior to being chosen as a keynote speaker for the Seattle conference. If so, by whom?

Thank you,
XXXXX

A Kelly Furnas responded with this:

Hi, XXXX, Thanks for reaching out. Our keynotes are selected by a committee, but I'd be happy to be your point of contact to answer any specific questions you might have.

/ krf

Faith and Freedom Reader responded with this:

Thank you Kelly,

Can you please describe the vetting process used to decide who would be an appropriate candidate as a keynote speaker and if their dialog is reviewed prior to engaging groups of adolescents?

Thank you,
XXXX

Kelly Furnas responded with this:

The committee looks for a local individual involved in media or a newsmaker our students can report on, preferably with some level of name recognition. When we reach out to them, we explain the audience that the keynote is for and agree on a topic.

/ krf

Clearly it was an intentional choice. The several thousand attendees and their teachers and advisors had been told the subject would be on "Bullying."

Please take 3 minutes to watch the video.

Rick Tuttle, the journalism adviser for Sutter Union High School in California, was among the several thousand people in the audience. He said they thought the speech was one thing – but it turned into something else.

“I thought this would be about anti-bullying,” Tuttle told Fox news. “It turned into a pointed attack on Christian beliefs."

Indeed it did.

But it was, in fact, about bullying.

There is not a more clear example of where public education stands in regard to Christians, biblical beliefs and those who hold them than this episode. Dialog in the classroom is generally more restrained, but given the chance, homosexual activists will choose a Dan Savage to tell your kids how they really feel.

The Christian kids were bullied, mocked and scorned because of their beliefs. The next time a teacher stands at a PTSA meeting and explains that public education is morality neutral and they only want to give the kids information on all sides of certain moral issues, replay this video and think about who is educating your child.

May God help us.

Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Informed. Be Prayerful. Be Active Be Blessed.

Happy 64th Birthday, Israel

2012-04-27T08:01:00.004-07:00

While the 64th birthday of a nation may not be a big deal in many cases, in terms of the modern nation of Israel, it is a very big deal.

The Jerusalem Post wrote yesterday:

"Israel has the dubious distinction of being the only UN member state whose right to exist is regularly challenged, whose elimination from the world map is the aim of at least one other UN member state, Iran, and whose population centers are deemed fair game by Hamas-controlled Gaza and Hezbollah-dominated Lebanon. Thus, Israel’s sheer act of survival from year to year is itself noteworthy."

The Post said, "None of the countries that are serial human-rights violators – not Iran, North Korea, Belarus, Zimbabwe, Sudan, or any of the others – gets anything near the relentless, obsessive, guilty-till-proven-innocent scrutiny that democratic Israel receives from UN bodies, with their built-in, anti-Israel majorities, in New York and Geneva."

Former Communications Advisor to Prime Ministers Peres and Rabin told Fox News, "Throughout the difficult times of conflict, Israel has stayed strong and firm. The Tel Aviv Stock Market stayed strong and stable during the Second Lebanon War. It is because Israelis have confidence in itself. This confidence comes from always looking forward to the future, but always remembering the past."

Remembering the past reminds us that God has made significant promises in regard to Israel.

God's first promise was to Abraham, "I will make you into a great nation and I will bless you; I will make your name great, and you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse; and all people on earth will be blessed through you (Gen. 12: 2,3)."

Then God spoke this to Abraham, "As for me, this is my covenant with you: You will be the father of many nations ... I will establish my covenant as an everlasting covenant between me and you and your descendants after you for the generations to come, to be your God and the God of your descendants after you. The whole land of Canaan, where you are now an alien, I will give as an everlasting possession to you and your descendants after you; and I will be their God." (Gen. 14: 4,7,8).

It was the Prophet Ezekiel speaking for God many years later who said, "Thus says the Lord God: Behold, I will take the people of Israel from the nations among which they have gone, and will gather them from all sides, and bring them to their own land; and I will make them one nation in the land, upon the mountains of Israel...And the desolate land shall be tilled... And they shall say, This land that was desolate is become like the Garden of Eden." (Ezekiel 37:21).

I agree, Israel has much to "remember".

So do all of us of the Christian faith. "I will bless those who bless you, and who ever curses you, I will curse." That's a Promise.

May God bless Israel on this special day and always. We pray for the peace of Jerusalem.

Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Faithful. Be Prayerful. Be Active. Be Blessed.

Redistribution: The Hollow Value

2012-04-26T07:53:00.001-07:00

Each year, for the past 4 years, Young America's Foundation has held a student video contest. Students are asked to produce a video that makes a point about public policy.

This year the focus of the project was on "fairness" through taxing the wealthy and redistributing it to those who are not wealthy.

Many have already begun sending me reports as to how you are doing in gathering signatures for both R-74 and I-1192. Thank you. This is very helpful. If you have not yet responded please do. You can give the information to your Faith and Freedom area coordinator or send it directly to me by email.

I, as you, have been watching the Occupy movement over the past year as they have illegally occupied public parks, streets, etc. and generally disrupted business in cities across the country, sometimes inflicting considerable property damage at taxpayer expense and always demanding that the 1% give them---the 99%, their fair share.

Redistribution.

I recall one anxiety ridden student last fall in Seattle, looking into the camera and saying, "Do you realize I have almost a hundred thousand dollars in student loans? Who is going to pay for them?"

Many youth support the concept of redistribution of wealth, because it seems fair.

Well they support it in theory, but maybe not so much in practice.

Young Americans at Carthage College asked students if they were willing to redistribute their grades---their GPA, helping to raise the GPA of other students who for various reasons, had lower grades.

Webster defines the word hollow as, "Having an empty space or only air within it." In this case it seems to be hot air.

Most kids said no. Some said, "I worked hard for my grades," or, "I don't want my GPA taken away from me if I have a A". But those with low grades said, "Why not, I'm down." Or "Sure, why not."

I have linked the winning video here. Hopefully, some kids will have a different view of redistribution.

No one has the "right" to take from someone what he has worked hard to attain in the name of fairness or social justice.

Biblical Christianity teaches a better way. Jesus called it charity. To whom much is given, much is required.

Those who have much are taught to give much. The government is not the escrow account. Nor is it a power base for those seeking to exploit the poor and disadvantaged. People are to give to people through religious and humanitarian charities or directly. The government has a limited role, but that isn't it.

Let's hope a bit of enlightenment and moral understanding happened around this project.

Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Prayerful. Be Active. Be Blessed.

"Create The Family You Want: Boy Or Girl"

2012-04-24T07:57:00.000-07:00

Bellevue doctor, James Kustin, says he can "deliver your dreams."

If you want a baby boy, he can deliver.

If you want a baby girl, he can also deliver.

He calls it "gender selection" and "family balancing."

Is this legal? Well, it is and it isn't.

His marketing focus is presently directed toward Canada.

KOMO News reports that the medical term is "preimplantation genetic diagnosis" and is illegal in Canada.

Canadian law prohibits any procedure designed to impact the gender of an embryo, except when there's a disorder or disease.

Apparently, Dr. Kustin has not allowed this technicality to affect his business plan. He is advertising extensively in Canada.

This is a clear picture of the secular progressive, so-called pro-choice ideology colliding at the intersection of money and morality.

The Money.

Lifesitenews reports that a recent study indicates that unborn girls are being targeted for abortion by immigrant groups in Canada, and that a Washington State clinic is targeting Indo-Canadians in British Columbia with an ad showing an ethnic boy and a girl dressed in traditional ethnic attire. The ad says, "Create the family you want: Boy of Girl."

Sabrina Atwal, director for the Indo-Canadian Women's Association in Edmonton, says she's "appalled" by the ad because it devalues women and girls. She says, "Girls are fighting for their lives even before they are born."

But Ms. Atwal, the women's feminist movement of which you are a part, is devaluing human life of both genders "even before they are born," by advocating and advancing abortion on demand.

Raminder Dosanjh, with the India Mahila Association says, "Somebody is trying to cash in on the belief that some sections of the Indo- Canadian community believes in having male offspring."

So it's about the money.

Dr. Kustin says he has done nothing wrong, but refused to be interviewed by KOMO News.

The Morality.

Donn Moyer of the WA State Dept. of Health says, "Genetic pregnancy screening on its face is legal."

He says, "If the doctor conducts only screening and gives results to the parents who use that information independently to go to a different doctor for an abortion, it would be hard to prove a violation by the doctor who did the screening."

In a murder trial, I think they call that an accomplice.

Planned Parenthood has perfected the practice. They receive hundreds of millions of tax payer dollars every year, are the leading abortion provider in the nation, but tax payer money, they say, never is used to perform abortions. It is, as most of us know, only used to pay the bills and provide the place where the abortions are performed.

Kelly McParland, a Canadian celebrity, has written an op-ed column for the National Post in which he points out the moral and ideological conundrum this has surfaced in what he calls Canada's "free-for-all baby market."

He also points out that with no law restricting abortion in the country, the sex selection clinic would be "perfectly justified" in going even further.

He says, "Why not be specific, with a two-for-one special on male twins? Crude? You bet. Barbaric? Some would say that, but certainly not the feminists, who support sex selection as another legitimate choice."

He also says, the abortion activists who have built an entire empire on the ideology of "abortion on demand for any reason" are now willing to sacrifice their own sister's blood by defending sex selection for the sake of holding fast to their ideology.

And secular progressives call biblical Christians rigid and dogmatic on moral issues.

Once again we have the champions of equality, tolerance, anti-discrimination and choice, advocating the inherent value of one sex or gender over the other.

Violating core biblical values always leads to destruction and confusion. It paints one into the proverbial corner, for an individual or a nation. And it destroys the foundations.

Those secular progressives who seek to remake (destroy) the moral foundations of our country, introduce a surreal moral proposition to one generation that will be affirmed in the public classroom and in entertainment as "normal" to the next generation.

May God help us to resist the accepted silence and speak truth to the culture.

Thank you for supporting our voice in this present darkness.

Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Prayerful. Be Active. Be Blessed.

3 Things: Schram's Response, Remembering Chuck Colson, R-74 and I-1192

2012-04-23T06:47:00.000-07:00

Hope you had a great week end. Don't you love the sunshine?

3 Things.

1. Within the hour after we published our Friday Blog about Ken Schram and the Arch Bishop of Seattle, Schram was on the phone inviting me to be on his program on KOMO later that day. Many of you in the Puget Sound area heard the program. Many of you also wrote to me wondering what Schram's response would be after you read the blog.

I was on his program on KOMO Friday afternoon. I have been on the radio with him several times in recent years, this time he seemed to be a wee bit softer. He told me he actually enjoyed reading my blog, in fact he laughed about it and said he wanted to explain to my readers and his listeners that he had gathered some fig leaves and covered himself as I had suggested. He complimented us and our blog. I told him I would notify the kids in the neighborhood so they could uncover their eyes.

This is a link to Friday's Blog.

I had a good conversation with Ken on air, and was able to say some things off air. I was also able to speak to his audience about issues that we feel very strongly about, particularly who should lead regarding moral and spiritual issues in the culture. I'm not suggesting Ken Schram was transformed Friday, but hopefully we gave him some things to think about. There was indication that we did.

2. I know you know by now that Chuck Colson passed away this weekend. He was 80. I was not a close personal friend, but interviewed him several times on television in the 1980's and 1990. I have had contact with him from time to time over the past 20 years. My last contact was a personal email from him a few months ago, thanking me for promoting a special national event he was hosting on behalf of his Centurion Program---a ministry to advance a biblical worldview.

The Christian Post said this of his passing: "While the still skeptical secular media chose to describe Chuck Colson as a 'mastermind of dirty tricks' in obituary columns, Christian leaders focused on his life and work after his transformation and remembered him as a great friend, mentor, apologist and witness for Christ."

"I'm saddened by Chuck Colson's passing yet rejoicing that he is now in the presence of the Lord he loves so much," Lee Strobel, author and Christian apologist, told The Christian Post."

Chuck profoundly impacted my life through his writing and speaking---I'm sure he did yours as well.

3. R-74 and I-1192 are well under way. R-74 needs a little over 120,000 valid signatures to make the November ballot, so the goal is to have at least 180,000 or more signatures.

Initiative 1192 needs over 200,000 valid signatures to be placed on the ballot.

Both are very important to the defense of marriage.

R-74 has stopped the homosexual "marriage" law from going into effect, pending the signature gathering. If R-74 makes the ballot, the homosexual "marriage" law will be further suspended pending the November election.

The value of R-74 is that it suspends the law until the people have an opportunity to speak. If R-74 prevails, it will overturn the homosexual "marriage" bill passed by the legislature during the 2012 session. Senator Ed Murray, Rep. Jamie Pederson and other homosexual legislator-activists will need to start over next year with a new bill.

They are taking a long view of redefining marriage. I have no doubt they will continue into the future, should this law be overturned. We too, must have a longer view if we are to protect marriage. However, we must meet this challenge to marriage, now.

Initiative 1192 clarifies the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) by specifically requiring State government to issue marriage licenses only to one man and one woman couples. It does not suspend the current homosexual "marriage" law passed by the legislature pending signature gathering, but would essentially invalidate it, if passed, by prohibiting the state from issuing same-sex marriage licenses.

In order to overturn Initiative 1192, if passed by the people, the legislature would have to get a 2/3 super majority vote during the next 2 years. Frankly, they do not have that super majority vote at this time. After the 2 years, they could over turn the will of the people with a majority vote, which they had when they passed the current law this past session.

Both are very important. We strongly support both.

Personal Request. Faith and Freedom's area coordinators will be trying to assess how many signatures we have gathered for each---R-74 and I-1192 over the next week or so. Thousands of you are circulating petitions. Would you take a moment and let me or your Faith and Freedom area coordinator know how the signature gathering is going?

We are only looking for an update as to about how many signatures you have gathered so far and your personal best guess as to what you think you will be able to do by the end of May.

You can include any comments you feel would be important as well. It will be confidential.
Please take a moment and let me know personally at gary.randall@faithandfreedom.us.

Thank you for your support in this and all Faith and Freedom is doing to advance Christian values in the culture.

I am honored to be working and standing with you on these import eternal issues.

Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Prayerful. Be Active. Be Faithful. Be Blessed.

Has KOMO's Ken Schram Eaten The Bad Fruit?

2012-04-20T07:51:00.003-07:00

Ken Schram, the secular progressive voice of KOMO 4 TV and KOMO radio in Seattle, has taken to holding catechism class for the Catholic Church in which he was raised.

This week he publicly reprimanded and slammed Seattle's Archbishop J. Peter Sartian for asking 180 parishes to make Protect Marriage petitions available to the church members.

Why? Because the Bishop believes in traditional, biblical marriage. Schram does not.

Schram awarded the church leader his "Schrammie" award because, he said, Bishop Sartain may remember his Latin, but "I think he's forgotten his place." Schram says the Bishop is "using the church as a weapon."

Perhaps Mr. Schram has forgotten his place and is using the press as a weapon.

He condemns the Bishop for having biblically based convictions about marriage and teaching them in the church he leads, while forcefully advancing his own secular agenda of redefining marriage.

I am not a Catholic, nor do they need my defense. However, Schram seems to be suggesting that spiritual leaders should not lead in spiritual matters in their own church, but rather seek to match up with and affirm current, relativistic cultural beliefs.

So, according to Schram's catechism, the church should follow, not lead. There are others who also believe that.

Schram seems to think the Christian church is a big box retail store trying to discern what the customers want so they can market and merchandise toward the latest cultural, moral whim.

In fact, he seems to suggest that he, rather than the leadership of the church and their biblical teaching on marriage, should write the lesson plan for catechism and the basis for personal conviction.

This reminds me of another, older, yet current narrative.

Coming to the woman, the serpent said, I know God said you could eat all of the fruit except for the one, but God is good and loving, surely He would not punish you. In fact, when you eat that particular fruit you will "become like God, knowing good from evil."

They ate it.

They did not become like God. And they became confused over what is good and what is evil.

The long term consequence of this act of rebellion is that "by one man sin entered the human race. "

The immediate consequence after eating the fruit, was that Adam and Eve recognized they were naked and estranged from God and His Truth. So they sewed a few fig leaves together in an attempt to cover it up.

God has clearly taught in His Word that homosexual relations are wrong. He calls it sin, regardless of what Sen. Ed Murray, Rep. Jamie Pedersen, Gov. Gregoire or Ken Schram happens to believe.

On moral issues they should follow, not lead.

MEMO to Schram:

You have eaten the fruit. Please sew together some fig leaves and cover your self. You are naked, unattractive and should be charged with indecent exposure.

And I present you with the "Bad Apple" award.

Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Prayerful. Be Active. Be Faithful. Be Blessed.