My Church First Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) Endorsing Idea of White Cops Gunning Down Unarmed Blacks. Don't Like It.

I had recently posted a blog here about how my church at the national level jumped on the Leftist/Democrat/Secularist bandwagon about Indiana and the hyped up and lied about the Indiana religious restoration act. It was all propaganda and media hype. Now the leadership has come out with a letter supporting the Leftist/Democrat/Media hype about white cops gunning down unarmed black men. I’ve understood from when I’ve joined First Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) that the national leadership was Leftist. Churches are independent for the most part, and I can deal with it. With this letter, supporting the lie of structural police racism and the murder of Blacks, they’ve entered that world putting politics before God, and using Jesus Christ as the tool.

This is like so many essays, blogs, social media posts, and articles that invoke Christ’s name to support Welfare, “Social Justice”, extremist environmentalism,  and other Leftist causes. Leftist Christians call into question the Christianity of Conservatives or, to my mind, those that don’t apply the life and teachings of Christ to the sociopolitical narrative of the day.

The names of Blacks assaulted or murdered by police are in the letter to members of the church and are listed as examples. From the letter, “Most recently the struggle around racial reconciliation has been centered upon justice or the lack thereof mediated around police shootings and the deaths of unarmed African American young men. The aggregates of protesters—mostly young adults in Ferguson, MO, New York, NY and other urban cites across America—are waging a fight for justice regarding excessive force resulting in the deaths of…” and they list some names.There are no crime statics anywhere to show there is excessive force resulting in the deaths of unarmed Black men, young or old.

The first they list is Travon Martin. He wasn’t assaulted by, or shot by police. It was an incident between two private citizens.  Eric Garner is the man in NYC that resisted arrest. The anti-cop Left, including the media, keep reporting that the choke hold killed him. After the investigation, including the vid of the incident show no choke hold was used. Garner died because of his health related issues. Walter Scott was also brought up, and apparently he was shot by a white cop who is guilty of murderous police racism, even though the investigation is only a few days old. 

Some details about NYC policing. The use of force in arrests means the officer touched the suspect, and the first half of 2014 had that reported in 0.6% of arrests. Reading the NY Times and others, one would think that loose cigarette sales arrests (what Garner was being arrested for) was a huge deal, and use of force was a regular thing. In that same time period, 2014, there were no, zero, use of force arrests for loose cigarette sales.

Threat assessment? Bad guys in NYC were involved in 1,103 shootings, with 1,299 victims in 2013. NYPD shot 17 people in 2013, dispatched 80,000 times to weapons involved incidents, and had 30,000 of those ending in arrests. So where’s the threat coming from? The racist part? Whites were 5% of suspects shot by police; they committed 2% of weapons crimes. Blacks were 75% of criminal shooters and 79% of police shootings. NYPD have brought down NYC homicide rate 80% in the last 15 to 20 years.

Have shootings and crime gone up or down under Mayor De Blasio? Measured against the previous year, NYC shootings were up 82% the week of Jan 5 through 11 of 2015 (over same week previous year). The month before shootings were up 12% over the previous year.

Who are the victims of shootings? Mostly minorities. De Blasio stopped all the policing programs that had driven down violent crime. He said those policing procedures were racist. So now violent crime has skyrocketed in NYC.

The city of Ferguson is the other lie of racist white cops gunning down unarmed innocent Blacks. The ‘hands up, don’t shoot’ narrative is a bald face lie. It never happened, and even the media had to report it didn’t happen after testimony, and vids, showed up of the event. In both the Garner case and the Michael Brown shooting in Ferguson, both men were resisting arrest.

In both the Garner and Brown cases, no indictment of the officers was handed down. Does the DOC leadership think both grand juries were rigged by white racists?

That our church, First Christina Church (Disciples of Christ) runs with the idea that white police are inherently racist, that there is rampant gunning down of unarmed Blacks by them, is a lie and absurd.

Because of this, in the letter, the national leadership wants some programs initiated. A couple at the regional level: “…to form Anti-Racism teams to develop strategies and training for pro-reconciling action, consulting with the Disciples’ Reconciliation Ministry, and to review the goals of each ministry to confirm that pro-reconciling objectives are implemented and realized”. At the ministry level of individual churches one of the things is to “work in partnership with your regional church as pro-reconciling strategies are developed, and with your general church by interpreting and supporting our Reconciliation Ministry in the local church”. Which is to endorse this idea that white cops are gunning down unarmed Blacks. Underlying that is the idea that there is so much violence in Black communities because of White Racism.

These issues are getting worse because this nation has turned its back to God. This letter is part of that, and not based on God or the teachings of Jesus Christ, despite the DOC leadership saying it is.

Here’s some of what is being instructed that individuals need to do:

• to pray for the leading of the Holy Spirit in moving the Church beyond the normal comfort zones to build up all of God’s people;
• to advocate for public policies that respect and empower all people;
• to pray for and support Disciples Reconciliation Ministry financially and to participate in Anti-Racism/Pro-Reconciliation training when offered in your region; and
• to speak up when you see or hear something that demeans people through racist individual comments or institutional practice.

This letter has nothing to do with the Holy Spirit, but everything to do with racist/secular policies and politics. As to advocating for public policies, do that in the political arena. Don't use position as DOC leadership to advocate political causes. When conservative Christians advocate for something in the public sphere, we are told to shut up, religion has no place in politics or the public square. This member rejects the idea of financially supporting or praying for the Reconciliation Ministry, and certainly not volunteering my time to attend a reeducation camp for racism when I’m not a racist, nor do I think anyone in the church I attend is a racist. As to that last statement, I am speaking up because I’m seeing and hearing something that demeans people. It’s coming from the national DOC leadership advancing the lies of the secularist elite.   

“We, the College of Regional Minsters of the Christian Church (DOC), believe that ‘Black lives matter’. Regional ministers, cops lives matter. They are being assassinated. All lives matter. That these nasty race lies are support by the DOC leadership, as are the anti-Christian lies about Indiana’s Religious Freedom legislation, yet claiming these are done through the teaching of Jesus Christ is vile. This DOC leadership needs to enter back into prayer. This is pure politics and has nothing to do with our work as Disciples or Jesus Christ. 

Disciples of Christ (First Christian Church) Is Joining the Anti Christian Bigoty Assault on Indiana. I'm a Member of the Church. Don't Like It.

The denomination I belong to had a post on Facebook that they were going to move our National Convention from Indiana because of the anti gay law. Story here. It's not that at all, that is a lie, and several in my church 'liked' the post. I posted the following. Support this move in my view supports the anti Christian bigotry of half the country and certainly the Left and Democrats.

My post, which I sure will piss off a bunch of church members, but must be said.

If they do this, I'll have to rethink being a member of the Disciples of Christ. This is not an anti gay bill. None of these freedom of religion bills, the federal one or the 19 states, have ever been the source of gays civil rights being violated, or discrimination against them. What I see here is discrimination against Christians. The reason states are passing these laws is because Christians don't have a way to protect ourselves from state supported anti-Christian hate and bigotry. This is no more than part of the culture war, and is a viscous attack on Christians. These hate-filled anti Christian bigots are being helped by the secular government. How dare Christians try and protect themselves from these attacks. Never ever have these laws been used to discriminate against gays, but gays are forcing Christians to loose their businesses and go bankrupt, losing everything because they practice scripture and the rules of their churches, and spiritual consciences. And Christians are the intolerant ones? I had thought about leaving the Disciples' Church in 2000 or 2001 when the Council of Churches meeting in South Africa, the Protocols of Zion were trotted out, and was just accepted by the Disciples' representatives. To me, that Antisemitism and this anti Christian bigotry are equivalent. My view is if you support this action then you're not supporting the freedom of religion, you're contributing to the destruction of Christianity. It used to be protected by the Constitution. Cal Thomas: "The uproar about Indiana’s law is political theater. It is also a trap set by the Left, which Republicans risk falling into. It works this way: Find a Republican state (Gov. Pence is a Republican and the legislature is overwhelmingly Republican); pick an issue you can twist to your political advantage – and Republicans' disadvantage; enlist the help of a gay-friendly media; threaten a boycott of the state by prominent individuals and businesses; use this issue in the next presidential campaign to brand Republicans as racists, bigots and homophobes. In this theater of the absurd, any defense becomes indefensible. The die has been cast; the scarlet letter attached. ... One potential good has emerged from this, however. Miley Cyrus has announced she won’t be bringing her 'twerking' self to Indiana, which is bound to have a positive effect on the state’s moral climate." More of my thoughts about this here.

How Republicans Can Win Back the Culture and Political Seats

Giving a leg up, not a hand out.

The last presidential election was won by the Democrats by their campaigning on the ideas of envy and empathy. It was Bill Clinton's "I feel your pain" writ large. It was the tipping point where feeling trumped information, knowledge, and from that, who was most likely able to address those issues effectively, was tossed out.

This nation rejected a man with a proven track record of personal and business financial success, of organizational success, to a man-child with a knack of getting others covering for him even with a record of failure. This nation decided to go with the guy who says he cares about people when he's never done anything to show that. We rejected the guy who through his actions, personally and professionally, has helped thousands, if not millions of people.

In my job, mostly customer service, the idea of "empathy" for the customer is emphasized; not sympathy. This is a huge misuse of the word, and irritates me to no end. It's become a double down term for sympathy. Empathy is the complete substitution of one's emotions\feelings into another. The idea comes from the German "einfuhlund", where one projects one's own feelings onto inanimate objects, i.e., how a painting or sculpture makes you feel. That grew into the usage of entering into another's experience to understand them, which is okay, but now it has become a political tool.

By using it, the Democrats portray themselves as the party of compassion, even though their policies create more poor, more dependence on the State, and diminishes liberty. George Bush II created the term "compassionate conservatism" to counter that notion, and it became something to be mocked by the Left, and refuted by Conservatives.

Making people dependant is not compassionate. It's the old saw about teaching a person to fish rather than giving him fish. What Obama is doing reflects what Libertarian Harry Browne has said, "Government is good at one thing: It knows how to break your legs, hand you a crutch, and say, 'See, if it weren't for government you wouldn't be able to walk'."

Conservatives must continue to guide the RINO controlled Republican Party to the original ideas of sympathy and compassion.  Earl of Shaftesbury [18th century] on compassion:  “To compassionate, i.e., to join with in passion,” ...  “ .  .  . to commiserate, i.e., to join with in misery. .  .  . This in one order of life is right and good; nothing more harmonious; and to be without this, or not to feel this, is unnatural, horrid, immane [inhuman].” Adam Smith pointed out what we all have in common, rich and poor alike, is “the propensity to truck, barter, and exchange”; and through that better themselves.

The earliest charities, a Christian, not government or pagan idea, were based on the idea both the provider and the recipient of help benefitted. There were a lot of "societies"  and "associations" to help the poor, most notably in England. The poor, abandoned children, the sick and dispossessed, the invalids. There were corruption and exploitation to be sure, but overall many were helped, and both the givers and receivers benefited.

Then governments decided to offer insurances against hardship, usurping the helping hand and replacing it with the giving hand. Welcome to Marxism, where the State, not caring people help each other; the Christian ideal where both bodies and souls benefit. It all becomes about things, the material. Obama and the Democrats can claim they "empathize" so they give people in trouble stuff.  Republicans must re-present themselves as the Party that can show people how to get stuff for themselves, and from that help others to do the same, and their spirits are better for it too.

From Augustine's (The City of God, Book XIV, Chapter 28):

[Hat tip to The Windrose Hotel]

Accordingly, two cities have been formed by two loves: the earthly by the love of self, even to the contempt of God; the heavenly by the love of God, even to the contempt of self. The former, in a word, glories in itself, the latter in the Lord. For the one seeks glory from men; but the greatest glory of the other is God, the witness of conscience. The one lifts up its head in its own glory; the other says to its God, You are my glory, and the lifter up of mine head. In the one, the princes and the nations it subdues are ruled by the love of ruling; in the other, the princes and the subjects serve one another in love, the latter obeying, while the former take thought for all. The one delights in its own strength, represented in the persons of its rulers; the other says to its God, I will love You, O Lord, my strength. And therefore the wise men of the one city, living according to man, have sought for profit to their own bodies or souls, or both, and those who have known God glorified Him not as God, neither were thankful, but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened; professing themselves to be wise,— that is, glorying in their own wisdom, and being possessed by pride—they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things. For they were either leaders or followers of the people in adoring images, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. [Romans 1:21-25] But in the other city there is no human wisdom, but only godliness, which offers due worship to the true God, and looks for its reward in the society of the saints, of holy angels as well as holy men, that God may be all in all. [1 Corinthians 15:28]

I'm convinced this country is degrading and becoming increasingly uncivil and barbaric because, like ancient Israel, we've turned our back on God.

And in the Literal Commentary on Genesis (XI, 15,20) Augustine writes:

These are the two loves: the first is holy, the second foul; the first is social, the second selfish; the first consults the common welfare for the sake of a celestial society, the second grasps at a selfish control of social affairs for the sake of arrogant domination; the first is submissive to God, the second tries to rival God; the first is quiet, the second restless; the first is peaceful, the second trouble-making; the first prefers truth to the praises of those who are in error, the second is greedy for praise, however it may be obtained; the first is friendly, the second envious; the first desires for its neighbor what it wishes for itself, the second desires to subjugate its neighbor; the first rules its neighbor for the good of its neighbor, the second for its own advantage; and these two loves produce a distinction among the angels: the first love belongs to the good angels, the second to the bad angels; and they also separate the two cities founded among the race of men, under the wonderful and ineffable Providence of God, administering and ordering all things that have been created: the first city is that of the just, the second is that of the wicked. Although they are now, during the course of time, intermingled, they shall be divided at the last judgment; the first, being joined by the good angels under its King, shall attain eternal life; the second, in union with the bad angels under its king, shall be sent into eternal fire. Perhaps, we shall treat, God willing, of these two cities more fully in another place.

 Obviously the second city are the Leftist\Democrats of the second love. Conservatives and Christians must talk about and show they are for the common welfare, to provide peacefulness and truthfulness, to offer those things that are important to them, to others. This is politics too, and there must be some hard hitting at the same time. 

Conservatives and Republicans must talk about what caring and charity are, what empathy and sympathy are, invoke those Christian values, while at the same time avoid directly mentioning them. Look at what Leftists/Democrats have done by changing the language and using that as the foundation for creating a mindset for a majority of citizens that being dependant on the State is not only a good thing, but something desirable. Under the guise of Empathy they demean the human spirit and create dependency and a majority are okay with that. That, without once mentioning their totalitarian intent.

If those that put self above others, exploit them, diminish them, enslave them and convince citizens this is a good thing for them, why can't those that put the common good first, convince citizens that helping themselves and others is to their benefit?  Christians and Conservatives, by putting God first, will have the winning hand again.

Politicians and Their Faith. Practice or Political Practicality?

During the Vice Presidential debates, moderator  Martha Raddatz asked the two contenders about abortion and how their faith informs their lives. VP Joe Biden said,  “My religion defines who I am...”  He is, like Paul Ryan, a Catholic. Unlike Ryan, it appears he decides which doctrines and dogma he decides to accept.

The longer quote:

"I accept my church’s position on abortion as a — what we call a de fide doctrine. Life begins at conception in the church’s judgment. I accept it in my personal life. But I refuse to impose it on equally devout Christians and Muslims and Jews, and I just refuse to impose that on others…"

Not being Catholic I had to look up "de fide": De fide (of the faith) is a "theological note" or "theological qualification" that indicates that some religious doctrine is an essential part of Catholic faith and that denial of it is heresy.[1] (Wikipedia Dictionary)

This also, to my understanding, something revealed by God. Apparently the issue of abortion doesn't qualify. 

To my greater point, politicians often separate their faith from their politics. This causes me severe cognitive dissonance. If your faith informs and defines you, how can you in practice ignore the values, beliefs or teachings of your Faith or Church?

Biden's answer is typical; he refuses to impose them on others. The Kennedy's are all pro abortion and nearly all have gotten divorces against the doctrine of the Church they claim to belong to. Nancy Pelosi, another Catholic has even said abortion is an unsettled matter in the Church, and doctrine has developed only in the last fifty years.

"I would say that as an ardent, practicing Catholic, this is an issue that I have studied for a long time.  And what I know is, over the centuries, the doctors of the church have not been able to make that definition.  And Senator–St. Augustine said at three months.  We don’t know. The point is, is that it shouldn’t have an impact on the woman’s right to choose.  Roe v. Wade talks about very clear definitions of when the child–first trimester, certain considerations; second trimester; not so third trimester.  There’s very clear distinctions.  This isn’t about abortion on demand, it’s about a careful, careful consideration of all factors and–to–that a woman has to make with her doctor and her god.  And so I don’t think anybody can tell you when life begins, human life begins.  As I say, the Catholic Church for centuries has been discussing this, and there are those who’ve decided…"

 The Catholic Church teaches life begins at conception. It has been since at least 70 CE.  

“The second commandment of the teaching: You shall not murder. You shall not commit adultery. You shall not seduce boys. You shall not commit fornication. You shall not steal. You shall not practice magic. You shall not use potions. You shall not procure [an] abortion, nor destroy a newborn child” (Didache 2:1–2 [A.D. 70]).

The Catechism in paragraphs 2271, 2272, and 2274, and explicit in 2322:

 "From its conception, the child has the right to life. Direct abortion, that is, abortion willed as an end or as a means, is a “criminal” practice (GS 27 § 3), gravely contrary to the moral law. The Church imposes the canonical penalty of excommunication for this crime against human life."

If a politician claims to belong to a religious institution, or claims belief in the teachings and values of their stated Faith, when they say, like Biden, their Faith defines them, they should walk the talk. It's not a matter of forcing beliefs on others. Such people deciding to be politicians, regardless of political affiliation, should vote issues according to their Faith if they state it's what defines them. They should run for office stating they cannot vote for pro abortion laws or State funded abortion because of religious beliefs. The same with any issue. They should tell the public their affiliation and beliefs when they run for office, and that they obey and practice them. Biden saying his Religion informs his life, then not acting on that, makes him both a hypocrite and a liar. These people's politics and lust for power inform their lives, not their Church or their Faith.

What church or what religion one practices is a matter of choice. Belonging to a Church is voluntary.

If one disagrees with those teachings, dogma, doctrine, another Church should be found. To do anything other than that is hypocritical and cowardly.

 From the debate:

http://youtu.be/KOpb9irG3Cw

Religion of the State vs Religion of God

Alleged journalist and Leftist political hack, and anti Christian bigot Chris Matthews, said when the Catholic Church sued against the health care mandate to provide contraception, sterilization and abortion against religious belief and tradition, asked "Do you think they’re all Republican, the bishops?" Matthews himself is a Catholic, or claims to be, and definitely a Democrat. A 2011 Pew study showed 48% of Catholics are Democrats as opposed to 43% Republican.

Leftists\Democrats, are myopically political, so even see religion as politically motivated. They're incapable of knowing, or even seeing it's the other way around. Religious people put God first, in everything we think, say, and do. What we get then are Democrats that claim to be Catholic supporting abortion and gay marriage, even advocating for it. Nancy Pelosi, asked by  Christopher Goins of CNSNews.com,“Many of the people that are opposed to gay marriage cite their religion as the reason why they're opposed. You're a Catholic that supports gay marriage. Do you believe that religion and the idea that you can support gay marriage can be separated? And how do you grapple with the idea that you support gay marriage as a Catholic?” Her answer:  "My religion has, compels me--and I love it for it--to be against discrimination of any kind in our country, and I consider this a form of discrimination. I think it’s unconstitutional on top of that. "  That despite the very clear teaching and position of the Catholic Church to the contrary. Plus her dismissal several times of the Constitution and not being bound by it.

Back to the point of the politics informing Faith, Matthews has said: "I think there are people who have chosen to convert to the Catholic faith because they don't like the liberal positions taken by their sectarian groups. That's a fact. So, you can write that down. No, you can write that down."  Huh? People join the Church because of political reasons? Certainly makes my point. I wonder too why he doesn't quit the Catholic Church since it's against everything he's for. What studies is he referencing?

There have been several Democrats that have held office, claiming to be Catholic, yet passing legislation for abortion, sterilization and contraception against the teachings of the Church they claim to belong to. Plus use taxes to pay for these against the will of citizens that object to these practices.  The rationalization for it is they don't want to enforce their beliefs on others, but they will force obedience to the healthcare mandates,  claim separation of church and state is in the Constitution (it's not), and claim the Establishment Clause is to protect citizens from religion (it doesn't).  I'm sure we can all come up with long lists of things the government forces we citizens to do that are against our beliefs.

If these politicians were true practitioners of their religion, when campaigning would say they cannot vote for certain things because it's against their faith belief, then follow though in practice if elected. Truly religious people put God first, and He informs how we act. Politics trumps religion for Leftists\Democrats, and if a politician put his\her politics before religion, God, and the Church they should quit the Church, and state their religion is the State. If they don't they're immersing themselves in hypocrisy and should stop throwing stones at people that proclaim Faith and make errors in judgment and behavior at odds with their usual behavior and beliefs.

   

Medieval Prayer, Reading, and Modern Times

Densitometer

We’re focused on ourselves and have been since the dawn of people. This is both a political and religious observation. The religious part of this is shown by an analysis of medieval books. Most books then were religious, and a device called a densitometer measures dirt density on pages; more dirt, more usage. The process was designed and developed by Scotland’s School of Art History at St Andrews, Professor Dr Kathryn Rudy.

The process shows people were terrified of illness, and prayers for protection and healing were used a lot. Prayers for salvation for others were used much less than prayers for self. Full article here.

I wonder if the same is happening now. Have we improved on that? I look at all the work Christians do helping others. The hundreds of $millions tithed and charities contributed to every year; shelters, food banks, missionary outreach that takes care of material as well as spiritual needs of people. Our prayers, though, still focus primarily on our own needs. Usually when we pray, it’s to meet our own needs. We need to train ourselves to pray to include others. Jesus knew this, which is why he gave us His prayer, the Lord’s Prayer, to guide us. This leads to the ACTS prayer formula - Adoration, Confession, Thanksgiving, and Supplication. Adoration, we praise God. Confession, we acknowledge our sins. Thanksgiving, we show gratitude. Supplication, we ask for ourselves. I had to train and discipline myself to go beyond even that, because there’s so much more to prayer.  

Our Father, which art in heaven,

Hallowed be Thy Name.  [Adoration]

Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done

On earth as it is in heaven.

Give us this day our daily bread,

And forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors. [Confession]

And lead us not into temptation,

But deliver us from evil. [Supplication]

For thine is the kingdom and the power and glory forever. [Thanksgiving]

A brief note on the political and self. No matter how many rules, regulations and laws governments pass, people look to their own needs first. Democracy and capitalism allows for this idea, knowing that by taking care of self, family, friends, and community, the greater good for all people are served. Marxism, socialism, communism, fascism, Nazism, all demand, upon penalty of death and imprisonment, that the government is first, beyond self, and it will decide what needs are to be met, and in what quantity. All must be done for the State. Of course the people at the top of government and those that choose to be subservient to them make sure their selfish needs are met first before addressing the needs of the citizens.

They deny citizens the ability of acting for Self, so they can meet their own needs. This runs against human nature, natural law, and is why centralized governments always fail, and have to murder and imprison people to survive and stay in power.

We pray for less selfish prayer, less selfish, self serving government, politicians that believe in the Scripturally based Constitution. We pray that we look to ourselves to determine how we, regular people, can serve each other, and not a centralized government. By serving each other we serve God, and that is what our government needs to be about.  

Religion in the News in Just the Past Week

Michelle Obama recently stated if a Republican wins the White House the first amendment will be shredded and shelved; there would no longer be freedom of religion. This is rich considering more Democrats believe in UFO’s than God, and is the Party that promotes anti-Christian bigotry, secularism, anti-traditionalism, and anti-Semitism. She included that free speech will end; also rich considering they are the propagators of political correctness; which is being only able to say what they approve of.

Jesus said lots of people are going to despise anyone who believed and practiced what he taught. Indeed. "Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and kill you, and you will be hated by all nations for My name's sake." Christians are being jailed and killed in the tens of thousands worldwide. I'm grateful that's not happening here, yet. If our government (and Europe's) keeps bending to Sharia Law, all bets are off.  Here is some religion news from the past week.

Atheists are ramping up for their anti-Christian Hate Festival, also known as Christmas by many.  Backyard Skeptics, an atheist group in Orange County, put up a billboard with a quote from Thomas Jefferson, “I do not find in Christianity one redeeming feature. It is founded on fables and mythology.” Problem was Jefferson never wrote it, or was quoted saying it. The billboard was taken down. Atheists spend an inordinate amount of time attacking Christians, which is counterintuitive since God doesn’t exist; why bother? It’s odd so much time is spent attacking people that believe in something that doesn’t exist. This same group showed its tolerance and courage about a month ago standing on a pier in Huntington Beach tearing up a Bible. (Last week while the Pope was having Mass, a knucklehead got on a ledge and burned a Bible. They’re everywhere.) Courage is mentioned here because they don’t attack Muslims, also a monotheistic religion. There will be more of the same expressions of hate and intolerance in the next couple months as we get into our celebration of Baby Jesus’ birth. Atheists have nothing positive and uplifting to offer, no love, compassion, charity or care, so they preach a message of hate and intolerance.

Going overseas a bit, there’s a play in Paris, part of which includes the throwing of feces at Jesus Christ’s face. Understandably Christians aren’t happy with this and gathered in protest. The Christians are being branded as “fundamentalists” (the label bigots toss at anyone professing Christianity, excluding false Christians that claim the Faith but put Marxism first). The mayor of Paris is having the city file a lawsuit against the protesters. It’s apparently okay for everyone else to protest against stuff that angers them, just not Christians. I wonder if the coward that wrote the play, “Sur le Concept du Visage du fils de Dieu” (”On the Concept of the Son of God’s Face”), by Italian Romeo Castellucci, would write a play with feces being thrown at the face of Mohammed. The mayor of Paris, by the way, let Muslims rampage through the streets of Paris, striking fear into citizens and destroying $millions of property.  He allows them to block traffic and disrupt business when Muslims do their prayer ritual, as does the anti-Christian London mayor and government.

The Wall Street Occupy protesters in London camped out on the steps of St Paul’s Cathedral. The cathedral closed, one would guess to protect it. The Western Anglican Church has rejected Christianity and embraced Marxism and the rest of the Left’s agenda. The leadership of the Church saw the closing as a threat, being damaging to Christianity, so had it reopened. Actually the threat was damage to the cathedral. Protecting historical property, or any property for that matter, is a wise thing to do; especially if people camped on your steps are anti-Christian and anti-property. Of course London government, like Paris’ government, and the most of the leadership of the Episcopal Church, are more interested in embracing and practicing Leftist ideology that embracing Jesus Christ. The Episcopal Church by the way, is in dire straights, there being a huge split between those that want to adhere to the Word of God and Christian beliefs and those that want to put that second to Leftist secular political and socio-cultural ideology.

The Catholic Church is also playing with Leftist secular political, socio-cultural ideology. The Vatican’s Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace published a document, ”Towards Reforming the International Financial and Monetary Systems in the Context of a Global Public Authority,” advocating for the international redistribution of wealth and an international global authority to control the flow of money, overriding national economic sovereignty. Supposedly this would create a moral and ethical guide to economics. Really and truly? Good grief. International socialism is the answer? Not God? There’s no way international leaders that hate Christianity would be guided by ethics and moral laid out in Judeo-Christian Scripture. Their scripture is the Communist Manifesto.

Coptic Christians in Egypt are fleeing and being murdered. No word from the Islamist supporting President of the United States.

Back to atheists’ antics in this country, there was a brush up in the town of Whiteville, TN. There was a cross on the top of a water tower that upset them. Don’t understand why; it represents something that doesn’t exist. The Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) had brought suit, and the town couldn’t afford the legal battle. The mayor was going to move the cross to another location, but instead had one of the arms cut off so it was no longer a cross. Hoot! The citizens liked this so much, hundreds of crosses have popped up all over town on private property and now they’re everywhere. The intolerant bigots of the FFRF have withdrawn their lawsuit. Freedom from religion; who's making them worship, pray, convert, believe? Seems they're already free from religion. 

Bigotry and hated against Christians is on the rise while Islamists are given a pass. Governments support anti-Semitism and anti-Christianity. Reason being governments need to take religion, especially Christianity, out of the equation because we are to render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and God what is His. Governments want everything rendered unto them and only them. I’m saddened the Episcopal  Church, the Catholic Church and so many of the Protestant Denominations (including the national leadership of my own First Christian Church [Disciples of Christ]) embrace Marxism, Liberation Theology, and the acceptance of cultural and social mores antithetical to Jesus and the Apostle Paul’s teachings.

NY Times Advocates for Sharia Law in America. Really.

NYC Mayor Bloomberg supports the Mosque of Triumph, has defended Islamofacism, suggested Christians and TEA Party members are terrorists, and now comes the NY Times, Amerika's Pravda, supporting the implementation of Sharia Law, which is the exact opposite of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

Being against Sharia Law being recognized is “…exactly wrong. The crusade against Shariah undermines American democracy, ignores our country’s successful history of religious tolerance and assimilation, and creates a dangerous divide between America and its fastest-growing religious minority. The knuckleheads at the NY Times link the idea of resisting the implementation of Sharia Law in the US is equal to anti-Semitism.  Them talking about religious tolerance with their record of religious bigotry, anti-Christianity, and anti-Semitism is laughable.

  

Sharia law tells people what clothes to wear. Are you women ready to wear hijabs and be beaten or killed if you refuse? Christians and Jews do not make this demand. How much music will have to taken off the air and censorship of iTunes will result because it doesn’t pass the puritanical test; read for Islamic chanting 24/7? Christians and Jews do not make this demand. Sharia Law’s purpose is to regulate every single aspect of personal and private life. If you don’t obey you will be imprisoned, tortured and murdered. Good grief, they even have morality police.

Listening to Leftists and their official Party, the Democrats, Christianity is worse. The way they attack evangelicals (never defined by them except as a demeaning term), Methodists (Rick Perry), Lutherans (Michelle Bachman), and in a recent article in the NY Times by religious bigot Bill Keller wrote, Rick Santorum is part of a “fervid subset of evangelical Christianity”. Santorum is a plain ol’ Catholic.

The only time Leftists bring up religion, which they are totally ignorant of, is when trying to demean their political opposition and change the subject of their loser record. Their socio-economic world view, when put into practice, has a 100% failure rate 100% of the time.  Because Leftists goal is to make everyone subservient to the State, there’s a natural symbiosis between them and Islamists. The goal is the same, to obey the State; so much for diversity.

This is why the NY Times can publish an article like this and think it actually has merit. 

Democrats Mining the Religious "Field" for Votes

 The poll that shows more Democrats believe in UFO’s than God is one of my favorites. Coupled with the observation that one sees Democrat politicians in church mostly during campaigns, and mostly Black churches at that, is a telling tale.

Percolating in the Leftist media is the idea that part of the reason for the massive loss this past election is the Dems didn’t reach out to faith groups. (Still denying the truth that citizens don’t want the government raising taxes [taking their earnings away] and telling them how to live their lives). They think that they didn’t “target” Faith groups as aggressively this election cycle as they did the last, and this was a major factor in the loss. Truly, they’re thinking this.

They point to polls showing progressive religious people stayed home and didn’t vote. Obama, who is religiously fluent and a committed Christian (truly, they think this) didn’t speak to the Faithful. That Obama is a committed Christian is an amazing observation. This is the guy that early in his administration traveled the Islamofacist countries of the Middle East praising Islam and dismissing Christianity, and even called the US a Muslim nation. On his current Jihad Jaunt in Asia he’s been praising Islam at every stop. He hasn’t said a word about the way Christians are being tortured and murdered in Iraq and significantly ignored the recent violence against Christians, by Muslims, in Indonesia. Good grief, he was right there, and this violence is very recent. Instead he called Islam, once again, a religion of peace and tolerance. Truly?

The Democrat Party has a group, the Eleison Group, a consulting firm, tasked with targeting Faith groups with a political end in mind. If a politician or political party needs a consulting group to create an image of being a religious, or caring about faith based issues, then it’s obviously insincere. True religious people speak of such things from the heart. They don’t need consultants.

The internal discussion of this issue is now about how the Democrats need to increase the funding and staffing of faith based political action organizations, so the Republicans don’t have that “field” to themselves.  Religion as a political field to be mined for votes.

When Republican and Conservative politicians make statements about their faith, they are mercilessly attacked by the Left and Democrat politicians for expressing such a thing. Just ask George Bush and Sarah Palin. Democrats are constantly whining about the separation of church and state (Christine O’Donnell was right, it’s not in the Constitution) and wanting to tax churches (which would destroy most of them).

Democrats, Liberals, Statists continue with their dishonesty in this, as they do with most things. Bash Christians in between elections and go to church during elections. Call Obama a “committed” Christian when all he’s done is be dismissive of Christianity, and having consulting groups advise how to veil their anti-Christian bigotry to trick people into voting for them.

They worship the State, and those damn Christians keep getting in the way with all those biblical values and are keeping everybody from worshipping the State too.

Religious and Political Integrity

There's a disconnect between Liberal politicians and their professed religious beliefs. We have politicians like the late Ted Kennedy that was Catholic and supported abortion, and Nancy Pelosi that supports abortion and other un-Catholic ideas. She's even been chastised by the Pope, and then lied about even that.

I wonder, if you claim to be of a particular faith, why run as a politician with an agenda antithetical to that faith? I have the same problem with Jews that as a block support the anti-Israel, antisemitic Democrat party; or Blacks that vote Democrat in block when the Democrat Party subjugates Blacks with the view that they don't have what it takes to be successful and must depend on the State. Victims.

The word "integrity" comes from the Latin "integer", to be whole, complete. Integrity is to have consistency of values, beliefs and principles. A hard thing to do. If you fail in presenting integrity, then you're a hypocrite.

I have to wonder why Statist politicians that advocate for abortion when their Church and Faith is against it aren't called hypocrites. Yet when someone that is not a Statist falls short of living up to their stated beliefs, they are called a hypocrite. I'm thinking of the non-Statist politician that has an affair, or is outed as a homosexual, or is caught coming out of a strip club. They are hypocrites. The Statist politician that claims adherence to a Faith that doesn't practice it, is not a hypocrite. They are given a pass on non-traditional, even deviant behavior.

Liberal politicians embrace the Marxist secular view, present that to the public, and justify the disconnect between religious belief and political belief by saying they don't want to subject their constituents to their own religious beliefs. Why run advocating positions antithetical to your professed Faith? I have to ask, if you don't fully embrace the tenants of your religion, and have integrity between political and religious world views, why state you do? If your ethics and morality are situational, why not just state you believe in situational ethics? Obviously to gain power and money. I would like to see politicians like Catholic Pelosi and Lieberman (an orthodox Jew) actually say they put the State before God. That would be integrity.

I would like too for non-Statist politicians that claim adherence to religious beliefs to keep their pants zipped for one, and adhere to other correct religious behaviors at least while in office. If you can't, don't run. Statists get a pass, religious people don't.

Non-Statist politicians advocating for traditional values, for the rule of law, for the Constitution which makes it clear in its own language that our freedoms are granted by God, must absolutely live according to those beliefs and values. Not to do so imperils Liberty just as much as Statists enforcing Marxist ideology.

Some nonsensical rambling from the hypocrite Pelosi