Relevant News
Don’t Miss Our Interview with Gov. Tomblin!
by Nathan A. Cherry, 02/22/2012
Martinsburg, WV – Maybe you missed this interview we did with Gov. Tomblin on the critical social issues that concern us as West Virginians. It’s rare for a candidate, much less an acting Governor to speak so candidly on some of the hottest issues in our society; especially in an election year. So when FPCWV president Jeremy Dys had the opportunity to spend some time talking with Gov. Tomblin we were pleasantly surprised and grateful for his honest answers to our questions.
As I listened to this interview I was happy to hear directly from the Governor himself that he believes in life and seeks to be a defender of life politically. That is certainly encouraging for pro-life advocates in West Virginia that want to see strong pro-life lawmakers elected. It also means we should be able to count on Gov. Tomblin for his support in strengthening life laws in West Virginia.
The issue of marriage is center stage in West Virginia right now thanks to the introduction of a bill to the legislature by Del. John Doyle to legalize same-sex unions. Gov. Tomblin talks openly about his views on marriage and answers some tough questions that many lawmakers would seek to avoid.
We thank Gov. Tomblin for his time and honesty in speaking with us about these important issues. We hope you will take a few moments to listen to this interview and then perhaps email the Governor to thank him for speaking candidly on some tough issues.
You can listen to the interview by clicking this link.
Help Protect the Family Now! Please click here to give through our secure online server
Related posts:
Is “Under God” In the Pledge Discriminatory?
By Tom Stark, 2/22/12
Parkersburg, WV - As many times as the ACLU, other atheist groups, and other people who do not believe in God have tried and failed to force the country to take “under God” out of our Pledge of Allegiance you would think they would get the idea. And that idea is that either the courts do not believe that doing so is important enough to force the change, or they truly believe that our system of government allows the Congress, not the courts, make the rules in our country. Since Congress decided to change the Pledge then the rest of us should learn to live with it just like we do with a hundred other laws that Congress passes that do not agree with our view of what our representatives were sent to Washington to accomplish.
The “under God” issue has been litigated to death, but a family of five in Acton, MA, has filed yet another lawsuit against the local school board because they are atheists and their children…well, here’s how their lawyer characterize it:
“Every day these kids go to school and the pledge is recited declaring that the nation is in fact under God. That marginalizes them and suggests that people who don’t believe in God are less patriotic.”
In responding to the suit, the Acton-Boxborough School District pointed out that there is no coersion, no stigma, no harrassment, and no bullying of any student that chooses to remain silent during the daily morning recitation of the Pledge, or simply omit the words “under God” as they recite it. Apparently the family is not against the Pledge, per se, but does want those two words removed from it.
It is highly questionable whether any other student in the classroom would even be aware of someone who chose not to include those words in their morning pledge. The entire argument is bogus and a terrible waste of time and money.
Dr. Stephen Mills, superintendent of the Acton-Boxborough school district reports that the school district had already spent $10,000 on the suit and added that he’d rather be spending that money on text books.
Massachusetts state code requires that students be lead in the Pledge of Allegiance each morning that schools are in session. For the school district to stop the practice would result in their violating state law.
And this is one aspect of this case that is unique. It is challenging the practice of including the words “under God” in the Pledge as a violation of the Massachusetts equal right amendment as opposed to the establishment clause of the U.S. Constitution. As a result, the decision of the court (assuming no appeals are filed) would only affect schools within the State of Massachusetts.
Although not widely noted, the American Humanist Association, a Washington-based non- profit, has added its name to the lawsuit as a co-plaintiff. The Washington-based non-profit is described in The Blaze article as an organization that strives “to bring about a progressive society where being good without gods is an accepted way to live life”
And, there again, we find the hidden agenda of the progressive left at work. They do not seek to be allowed to believe as they wish, but they seek societal acceptance of their way of life as “being good.” In effect, they want governmental sanction of their Godless existence as a good thing. Since nearly eighty percent or more in this country profess at least a basic belief in a supernatural God, the small minority of activist atheists are trying to get the government to force the rest of us to accept their beliefs as “good.”
It seems that the issue has been nearly exhausted at the federal level with a significant number of suits being unsuccessful in altering the Pledge. As a result, the emphasis may be shifting to one of scatter-gunning the state courts with state suits where the wording or intent of state statutes is that each student be required to recite the pledge every day. Look for more of this as the days go by.
The only conclusion we may draw from this and similar suits is that we are faced with a determined enemy who is not easily discouraged from attempting to enforce the “freedom from religion” mantra by removing God from every aspect of public life. If we stand still and remain silent, eventually they will succeed. By remaining constantly vigilant and aware of what is taking place in our state, we can keep West Virginia a place that is “Almost Heaven” by keeping “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance.
Remember…qui tacet, consentire videtur ~ silence gives consent.
Related posts:
Graphic Video: Planned Parenthood Video Exposes Sex Indoctrination of Kids
by Nathan A. Cherry, 02/21/2012
Martinsburg, WV – Just when you think you’ve seen and heard it all, you get a glimpse of a video exposing the depravity of Planned Parenthood. This is not an organization that does “good” things and is just getting a bad rap from people like me. This is a deeply corrupt organization that seeks to spread a message of casual sex, abortion on demand and homosexuality to our kids. As a parent I cannot tell you how disturbed I am by this organization and the perverse ideology they spread.
The video, “Hooking Kids on Sex” is no exception as it exposes the agenda of Planned Parenthood. The American Life League (ALL), which produced the video, wants to warn parents of the dangers their kids will be exposed to through associating with Planned Parenthood. All says;
“Any parent that sees the video of Planned Parenthood’s material for school children will be horrified. Planned Parenthood’s business model is aimed at making money from people who are engaged in sexual activity. The earlier Planned Parenthood can get girls having sex, the more money they make. Many of these children will become the women who will have abortions, which made up 51% of Planned Parenthood’s clinic revenue in 2010.”
ALL encourages parents to speak openly and honestly about sex with their kids because, if they don’t, someone will. And most likely that someone will be Planned Parenthood or a PP affiliate, a fact that could be disastrous to anyone with even a strand of moral fiber. All commented;
“Planned Parenthood wants kids to choose them for their sexual education over their own parents. They want to be the trusted friend and advocate for kids of all ages. They know that a conversation about sex with a stranger or browsing a Planned Parenthood website about teen sex is easier than talking with their parents. The abortion giant has no problem using tax dollars to exploit that fear and make money off those kids.”
Watch the video below. But be warned that it contains graphic images not suitable for young viewers. (If the video doesn’t appear please refresh your browser)
Related posts:
Marriage in America – Will You Stand United?
by Nathan A. Cherry, 02/20/2012
Martinsburg, WV – You can hardly turn on a television or surf a blog without seeing news of the Prop 8 decision out of California. Truly it is a sad characterization of where we are in America to see that something a majority of voters approved has been struck down. (Click here for news coverage) What does that say for any voter initiative? Is there any reason to put an issue before voters if a court can come along and simply decide to overrule the will of the people?
I recently wrote an article on the definition of marriage and if it is even possible to redefine what marriage truly is: the union of one man and one woman. Family Policy Council of WV president Jeremy Dys interviewed Dr. Bradford Wilcox on the different qualifiers that determine what kind of marriage a person will have. Then Jeremy had a great conversation with Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin on his views on marriage and the need to strengthen marriages in West Virginia.
Despite all that has been written and all the news coverage that has taken place it has become clear that a small minority of liberal activists – both inside and outside political office – have made it their mission to see the traditional definition of marriage destroyed. They will seek to accomplish this goal at any cost, including trampling over the will of the majority of Americans.
To this end Alan Sears, president of the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) is calling for a national day of prayer specifically for marriages in America. Below is a copy of an email that was sent out a few days ago to strategic partners of the ADF asking for our help and cooperation in activating a grassroots movement of prayer:
“The ruling two days ago from the Ninth Circuit on marriage was simply no surprise to us. This is just one setback in a struggle that we will tirelessly fight until the case reaches the Supreme Court.
“The future for marriage is far from decided by the events of Tuesday; but the need for prayer has never been more palpable.
“We are encouraging Sunday, February 26th to be a day for all believers, to pray for marriage – that marriages across our land will be strengthened, and that God’s design for marriage be upheld and honored.
“The attached document outlines how we are beginning to inform our ADF ministry friends about this special day. Would you dear friends join us in adopting this day – in ANY form you deem appropriate – so that as many believers as possible will know, and participate, in this day of unified, focused prayer?”
It would be a mistake to assume that prayer has not been an intentional part of the fight to defend traditional marriage. No doubt families, pastors, churches and politicians across America have made marriage a focal point in their personal prayer lives. As a foundational issue to our society’s well-being many of us have prayed for God’s guidance, wisdom, and intercession in defending marriage.
It would also be a mistake to assume that because we are now asking for people to pray that we have somehow given up, or are ready to admit defeat. Neither could be farther from the truth. This battle is not over and will no doubt be carried to the Supreme Court. Prayer is not a “last ditch” effort to get what we want when all else fails. Prayer is a power weapon that unites the hearts of God’s people across distance for a specific purpose.
So, will you pray?
We are asking all friends, partners, and allies of the Family Policy Council of West Virginia to unite on Sunday, February 26th in a time of prayer for marriage. Pray that marriages in America will be strengthened; pray that traditional marriage will be upheld in our courts, our legislatures, and the hearts of Americans.
However you choose to take part in this time of prayer please be intentional and specific. Please don’t rail against any person, court, or group of people. Please simply pray for marriage in America.
Thank-you in advance for your partnership in this very important issue.
Related posts:
Planned Parenthood has Gone Fishing In Your Pond
By Tom Stark, 2/18/12
Parkersburg, WV - Planned Parenthood (PP) has gone fishing, but it’s not where they should be doing such things. They are fishing for future customers and the pond they are fishing in is the one that holds our children for much of each week day. Yes, our public schools are helping with their search and the bait they are using is pure, raw, unfettered, and sometimes unnatural sex. Yes, they are using sex as bait to indoctrinate our children into the world of unrestricted sexual behavior.
If you really want to know just how devious and committed PP is in distributing such information without any moral foundation, just visit their propaganda site here.
In order to explain what is happening, though, some specific terms may be used that might make some of you uncomfortable, but as parents, you need to know just what Planned Parenthood is being paid to do with your tax dollars. Nothing is left to the child’s imagination here. Their literature lays out everything from masturbation through sexual intercourse to same-sex activities and sodomy, complete with pictures, cartoon characters made to look like sex organs.
This video and article shows you some of the actual printed material that is used in this process of setting children up for potential problems with pregnancies and STD’s before they reach their junior prom or even earlier. They are starting them off young and claiming the whole time that this is good, solid, scientific information that every child should know and understand before they face these problems without the benefit of knowing what they are doing or how to do it.
Again here, the video is quite graphic but it an absolute necessity to understand if you have children or grandchildren attending public schools in the United States. There is no such thing as a “safe school” anymore. There will never be such a thing again unless funding of this program through PP is ended and prohibited in the future. What drives me a little batty is that while distributing this kind of information they claim to be supporting abstinence as well. From their website:
(Their program) includes information about abstinence as the best way to avoid sexually transmitted infections and unintended pregnancy
Make no mistake, friends, this organization is intent on doing only one thing with this material and it is not helping to make your children into upstanding, moral citizens or push abstinence as the best choice. It’s intended to increase their revenue under a sick business model based on attempting to increase teen pregnancies in hopes that more abortions will be required in contending with these situations. It is nothing but big business. Abortions alone represented more than fifty percent of PP clinic revenues last year. It is a multi-million dollar operation.
So what’s a parent to do? There is nothing better that we can do but contact our elected representatives at both the state and federal level and tell them clearly and plainly that you want this material removed from your schools and you want your tax dollars protected from the likes of PP. Any time there is enough public outcry, things mysteriously get done quite rapidly in Washington – especially in an election year. There is no time like the present to stop this activity dead in the water.
Additionally, demand that the school administration provide parents with notice when this material is to be distributed and let them know that you do not want your child given any such material and do not want your child to be permitted to remain in any assembly or classroom where this material is being shown, discussed, or made available in any way to students. As the video makes mention, this is not being limited to junior and senior high school students. This material can make its way into the elementary and middle schools as well. After all, the claim is that all these materials are “age appropriate.” Appropriate to who is the relevant question here and that is subject to a lot of strong argument.
Lastly, parents and citizens that care what will be happening to our future leaders as they receive their education (or is it indoctrination) in the public schools is this: Pay attention to what is happening, ask questions, attend school board meetings, and speak out when things are happening that are not supporting your family values and beliefs. Only through constant vigilance will we be successful in turning back this progressive tide of immoral and disgustingly vile approaches to sexuality outside the confines of marriage. Within marriage, between one man and one woman, pregnancies and STDs are neither heard of nor any kind of problem for those who abstained before marriage.
Related posts:
How I Helped the Abortion Industry Pass a Bill and Became a Bigot at the Same Time
Unless you just crawled out of your spider hole, the last two or so weeks of news watching/reading have been wall-to-wall coverage of the Federal HHS’s decision to force most churches and religious employers to fund contraceptives, many of which may be classified as, “abortion-inducing drugs.”
Well, that’s not just happening at the Federal level. The abortion industry is trying to force that upon us in West Virginia too.
It started last year as the abortion industry suddenly sounded the alarm that West Virgina’s teen pregnancy rate had dramatically increased in a year in which 49 other states went down. If true, that’s bad, but something about that data stinks to me given the fact that for over a decade the teen pregnancy rate in WV decreased, but, in one year, it is said to have increased by 17%. That’s hard to swallow as gospel. Though, it may well be true and we ought to address it by both strengthening marriages and increasing abstinence education.
However, the way that the abortion industry wants to address this rise in teen maternity is by requiring health insurance providers to cover contraceptives and extend maternity benefits to teen mothers-to-be. So, this has been billed as a way to reduce teen pregnancy in West Virginia.
Well, somehow, the abortion industry seems to have fallen asleep at the switch. When the bill came up in this legislative session, it defined contraceptives as that which would, “prevent maternity” and the industry’s public discussions seemed a lot more focused on their concern for teen childbearing, rather than teen pregnancy. A curious and cold switching of nouns, if you ask me.
This all came to a head last week when S.B. 194 came up for a hearing in the Senate Banking and Insurance Committee. The bill was voted down. And the Charleston Gazette took notice.
Along with a couple of pot-shots. Here’s how the Gazette editorial board portrayed it on Monday:
S.B. 194 seemed on track to pass. Neither the Catholic Church nor West Virginians for Life opposed it. But it was rejected 6-5 Thursday by conservatives in the Senate Banking and Insurance Committee. One source said gay-hating fundamentalist lobbyist Jeremy Dys roused opposition.
Zing!
I’m not sure whether I should be flattered or frustrated. On the one hand, when others couldn’t or wouldn’t, we did lead the effort to kill S.B. 194 in its current form; on the other hand, if their triple-adjective description of me is true, I’m worried. But, it is not true and they don’t know the whole story. With apologies to the late-Paul Harvey, here’s the “rrrrrrest of the story . . . “
Yesterday, S.B. 194 came up before the same committee that, just a week prior, had killed it. This time it passed. What made the difference? Well, that depends on who you ask. The abortion industry finally settled on the rubric of this being a victory for the reduction of teen pregnancy:
“The bill is alive,” Margaret Chapman Pomponio of reproductive rights group WV Free said Thursday of the committee’s reconsideration of the bill. “A lot of West Virginians want this bill. We need this bill to address the state’s high teen pregnancy rate.”
According to one of the primary sponsors, it was just a big misunderstanding:
In its earlier version, the bill used the phase, “to prevent maternity.” The bill’s lead sponsor, Sen. Ron Stollings, D-Boone, said he believes that confused the debate on the issue last week.
But, Phil Kabler aptly gets it right when he explains in his story this morning:
The committee also added an amendment that would exclude coverage for emergency contraceptive pills, commonly known as “morning-after pills.”
The amendment states that covered contraceptives do not include, “drugs or devices that may cause the demise of a zygote or embryo at any time after its fertilization by the combination of sperm and egg.”
That’s right. That is precisely why it passed. But why is this significant? There are at least three reasons . . .
First, because this was never about teen pregnancy in the first place. This was about forcing all insurance providers in West Virginia to fund contraceptives, including – and most especially for the abortion industry – coverage for so-called contraceptives like, “Plan B,” the “morning after” pill, Ella, and other drugs that destroy an innocent human life at its earliest stages. What the bill now says is that anything post-fertilization is not to be covered by insurance.
Second, how did that language get in there? I wrote it and worked with a broad coalition of pro-life advocates to have that language inserted. Quietly, but firmly, the pro-life community took away the most dangerous element of this bill, while extending our compassion for teens caught in unplanned pregnancies. This bill cares for the pregnancy, it doesn’t – as the abortion industry would want – terminate the pregnancy.
Finally, this is significant because the abortion industry has been caught with their hand in the cookie jar. They first talked about the importance of reducing teen pregnancy, but then fumbled when they kept using the creepy rhetoric about how they wanted to reduce teen childbearing. Then, their bill had the Orwellian language that would have made you and me fund contraceptives that would, “prevent maternity” or what is more rightly termed, “abortion” at any stage, for any reason.
Now that they have had access to abortion-inducing drugs completely cut off, they seem to be putting on a brave face to the watching world – even rejoicing that the bill cleared its first hurdle – remarking that this is a triumph for their legislative agenda. Here’s how Kabler’s column put it this morning:
Pomponio said that while she would prefer not to have that amendment, it would be preferable to losing the legislation outright.
“The senators have answered the call. We’re thrilled to see them addressing the issue of pregnancy services,” she said.
LOL! I bet they’d, “prefer not to have that amendment!” Doesn’t that second line ring a tad hollow?
Where do we go from here? S.B. 194 travels now to the Senate Finance Committee. Its fate there is far from certain, but I know that there is more work to be done on it to make it something we are fully comfortable with. To be sure, we are pleased that the definition for contraceptives is now very tightly (and correctly) defined, but there is more that needs to be done to protect both life and religious liberty.
You see, like the debate raging on the Federal level, there is a religious liberty debate about to unfold here in West Virginia too. S.B. 194, as amended, leaves in place a, “religious employer” exemption that is quite narrowly defined. In fact, the FPCWV would only be half-exempted (our 501(c)(3) would, but our 501(c)(4) corp would not) under this law. Likewise, many churches and church-related ministries would not be exempted and forced to violate their theological convictions in order to comply.
That is why we will continue to ask senators (and delegates, if necessary), that the religious employer exemption be stricken and, in lieu thereof, replace it with a much more broad, “religious conscience” objection.
Reality is that the primary reason that bill will likely die before it completes legislation is because it has, according to the Gazette, a $12.6 million price tag on it. There too, we can help. We believe that, if the conscience exemption we propose is included, it may significantly reduce the potential cost to insurers and taxpayers.
The effort is far from over, but I’ve been chuckling at the irony of it all. As the week began, I was deemed a, “gay-hating fundamentalist lobbyist” who “roused opposition” to S.B. 194 sufficient to crush it. But, as the week concludes, I may, in fact, be responsible for both the resurrection of S.B. 194 and its passage.
Somehow, I don’t think that either the Gazette or the abortion industry will be sending any thank you letters my way.
Or apologies.
Related posts:
Obama Ignores Objections – Implements Insurance Mandate with No Changes
by Nathan A. Cherry, 02/17/2012
Martinsburg, WV – It’s an issue that just won’t go away. Thankfully many pro-life leaders and, most recently, evangelical leaders are keeping this before us and continuing to sound the alarm. By now I would hope you understand the severity of this issue and the danger to our religious liberty if the current insurance mandate does not change.
As it stands today the “compromise” offered by the Obama administration will still force religious institutions, churches, and individuals to pay (through subsidizing) for contraception, sterilization, and abortifacients in insurance plans for employees. Though they will not pay for these services “directly,” this is nothing more than a political sleight of hand because the cost will be passed from the insurance company to the employer in the form of higher costs. NO matter what politicians try to sell us, the fact is, nothing is for free.
Now, evangelical leaders are calling for civil disobedience in order to stand for religious convictions and conscience. This is not simply a “Catholic” issue; this is a religious freedom issue that will impact every one of us both now, and in the future. With Obama’s refusal to change the law and further to secure religious liberties top leaders like Rick Warren, Chuck Colson, Richard Land and Barrett Duke are signaling the time to stand together in civil disobedience and obey God rather than men (Acts 5:29).
Rick Warren tweeted several days ago showing his support for religious freedom:
“I’m not a Catholic but I stand in 100% solidarity with my brothers & sisters to practice their belief against govt pressure…I’d go to jail rather than cave in to a government mandate that violates what God commands us to do. Would you? Acts 5:29”
Chuck Colson issued a clear declaration that the time for civil disobedience may be upon us and we must be ready to stand:
“We have come to the point—I say this very soberly—when if there isn’t a dramatic change is circumstances, we as Christians may well be called upon to stand in civil disobedience against the actions of our own government. That would break my heart as a former Marine Captain loving my country, but I love my God more . . . I’ve made up my mind—sober as that decision would have to be—that I will stand for the Lord regardless of what my state tells me.”
And Richard Land and Barrett Duke wrote in an op-ed:
“The Obama administration has declared war on religion and freedom of conscience. This must not stand. Our Baptist forebears died and went to prison to secure these freedoms. It is now our calling to stand in the gap and defend our priceless First Amendment religious freedoms.”
It’s confusing as to why Obama would seek to alienate a group that supported his 2008 election campaign during an election year. Certainly this mandate does not make good political sense when even an Obama spokesman admitted that the mandate violates religious rights.
And lest anyone be fooled into thinking the “compromise” is acceptable, consider this article by Ed Haislmaier and Jennifer A. Marshall at the National Review, which shows that the original mandate – which caused all the uproar – is the one that has been put in place rather than the “compromise.” They write;
“The Obama administration Friday afternoon put into federal law the very regulation that drew objections from almost 200 Catholic bishops, some 50 religiously affiliated colleges and universities, 65 North American bishops of Orthodox churches, numerous other Jewish, Evangelical and Lutheran leaders, and even some liberals — and without changing so much as a comma…Thus, instead of delaying final regulations until they could be revised to reflect the prospective changes President Obama outlined Friday, the administration went ahead and locked into regulation its original position, accompanied by a (non-binding) promise to revisit the issue.”
In other words, your religious liberty, your religious convictions, your conscience doesn’t matter at all to Obama and his administration. Now is not the time for cowardly apathy, now is the time to let our president, Congress, and even state lawmakers know just how much we value our religious liberties.
Related posts:
Some Good News: Help Your Kids Choose Proper Role Models – Like These!
by Nathan A. Cherry, 02/16/2012
Martinsburg, WV – I spent some time watching the Grammy’s this week. Thankfully I had the forethought and wisdom to record it so I could simply fast-forward through some of the garbage. (Dear Nicki Minaj, please retire. Please) (Dear Lady Ga Ga and Katy Perry, please see note to Nicki Minaj). I started out wanting to see the Grammy’s in order to watch Adele perform. I must admit I have a thing for her musical ability; not to mention the fact that she is real. As in, she doesn’t look like a twig about to faint because she has lived on ice-cubes and crackers all week.
I couldn’t help but transition my watching into a sociological exercise to see who I would actually enjoy my kids watching and looking up to. You know, as a role model. Before I go any farther let me say I do hope my kids will see my wife and I as role models and will find Jesus Christ and other Biblical characters to look up to as well. But let’s face it, kids are enthralled by pop-culture and we all at one time looked up to someone in music, television or movies.
And if you have been paying attention lately, there is a distinct shortage of role models in our society. It seems far too many stars end up on drugs, overdosing, being arrest for any number of crimes, or simply lack any substantive character worth emulating. So I was hoping the Grammy’s would showcase someone worth looking up to, someone, anyone? Should I choose Nicki Minaj, Lady Ga Ga, or Katy Perry?
Well, the Grammy’s don’t seem to have anything to offer. But I ran across some stories that I thought were worth sharing because they feature some currently high-profile people that are standing for their faith. These are men and women that believe life is sacred, that religious freedom is important, that the Bible is more than just a book of stories.
Ex-Victoria's Secret model Kylie Bisutti
Maybe you heard about the Victoria’s Secret model that quit because her faith convicted her about her own profession. Kylie Bisutti had a dream job that countless other models only hope to gain. She was working for the world’s most recognized lingerie company and had achieved success and wealth doing so.
Then her heart began to convict her that what she was doing didn’t honor the Lord. So she quit. CBN.com reports:
“The 21-year-old model recently decided to leave one of America’s most well-known lingerie companies because showing off her body left her feeling convicted…‘The jobs that I choose are going to be honoring the Lord.’”
The Gospel Coalition reports that Kylie’s desire to honor her husband also played a factor in her decision:
“But the more I was modeling lingerie – and lingerie isn’t clothing – I just started becoming more uncomfortable with it because of my faith. I’m Christian, and reading the Bible more, I was becoming more convicted about it…My body should only be for my husband and it’s just a sacred thing.”
In a recent article on the Live31 website, Kylie explains that if we want our young women to overcome our society’s idea of what a “model” is we must be showing them the Biblical idea of womanhood.
There is absolutely no doubt our young men need Godly men of faith they can look up to. In a world where athletes are arrested and pop-stars get praised for beating women we need men, like Tim Tebow, that our sons and grandsons can be proud to look up to. Enter Jeremy Lin.
New York Knicks Point Guard Jeremy Lin
Odds are you have never heard of Jeremy Lin. I’d never heard of the 23 year old New York Knicks pointgaurd though I am an avid sports fan. That is, until he started dropping 38 points against the L.A. Lakers and appearing on ESPN’s Sportscenter.
What makes Lin news worthy is that like Tebow, he is an unashamed Christian that gives the glory and credit to Jesus Christ for all he does. Even though his road to the NBA has been a difficult one, and only time will tell if he is able to stay at the level he is currently at, Lin believes that God is working; as he shared in a recent interview:
“I think one of the most rewarding experiences in life is to see people come to Christ and make lifestyle changes. When that happens, you definitely see God behind it. . . . I’m really thankful that God is changing somebody, or sometimes he’s changing me. To see that transformation brings me a lot of satisfaction and fulfillment. I definitely want to do something in ministry down the road, maybe as a pastor if that’s where God leads.”
I would hope our kids will see us, their parents, as their earthly role-models in addition to Jesus Christ; and that they would find Godly men and women in their churches to look up to. But as kids are prone to look to sports, movies and music to find other role-models we can be instrumental in steering them towards men and women like Tim Tebow, Jeremy Lin, and Kylie, Bisutti.
Otherwise, who are they going to emulate? Nicki Minaj, Lady Ga Ga, Chris Brown? God forbid.
Related posts:
6 Year Old Sex Offender? Is that Where We’re Headed?
By Tom Stark, 02/15/12
Parkersburg, WV – How do people get to be principals of elementary schools and still believe that a six year old child can be guilty of sexual battery on another student by playing tag on the playground? Don’t believe it, read the story.
That is exactly what happened recently in a California Elementary School where the very young and tender are now routinely exposed to sex education and homosexual indoctrination which magically extends a child’s ability to commit sex crimes against his classmates. It’s so crazy it frightens a sane mind to know these people walk among us on a regular basis.
Seriously, though, isn’t this just the ultimate extension of the theory behind granting homosexuals “protected class” status under the new West Virginia Board of Education regulations regarding “bullying?” Under the new rule (see Page 52, Category 3 offenses), effective on July 1, 2012:
Acts of harassment, intimidation, or bullying that are reasonably perceived as being motivated by any actual or perceived differentiating characteristic, or by association with a person who has or is perceived to have one or more of these characteristics, shall be reported using the following list: race; color; religion; ancestry; national origin; gender; socioeconomic status; academic status; gender identity or expression; physical appearance; sexual orientation; mental/physical/developmental/sensory disability; or other characteristic (emphasis added).
Don’t get me wrong, bullying is wrong when committed against another within the population of any school or community. However, if our Constitution is to be given even cursory lip service, it states very clearly that the law shall apply equally across the entire population. It is clear in more than one place within the document that everyone must be treated with “equal protection under the law.” It does not say everyone except the largest majority class. It does not say everyone except this group or that group because there are fewer of them in the country than another group. It does not single out anyone that deserves more protection from the law than another.
This kind of selective enforcement is really the foundation of the ever-popular liberal class warfare rhetoric and is the kind of wedge issue that progressives love to introduce in order to foment disorder and in-fighting among the electorate. Then they can come out as the champions of the down-trodden and make themselves the saviors of those minorities.
In reality, by so doing, they have actually created exactly the kinds of animosities that keep minorities in the shadows instead of allowing everyone to look at each other as equals. This does not mean that every group must embrace the beliefs of every other group, but rather, that we do not single them out for mistreatment that represent physical or mental abuse.
We can disagree vehemently with the idea that the homosexual lifestyle is wrong in the eyes of God, but we are not, by so doing, mistreating or abusing or bullying that group of people even when expressed openly and strongly. We should be reaching out to change minds and encourage repentance while ensuring that the government does not institutionalize and offer special protections to one group over another or create situations that cheapen or denigrate our beliefs in order to cater to another’s as in the case of codifying homosexual “marriage” as the same thing as traditional marriage.
In this case, the West Virginia Board of Education, as they have in other situations, bypassed the will of the majority of West Virginia citizens, bypassed the legislature that has resisted (admirably) the temptation to codify special protections for additional “special classes,” and created their own “law” that does what the people did not support and added yet several more groups that are more worthy of protection than the rest of us.
Bullying is bullying regardless of to whom it is applied – because the party being bullied is of a particular class should not entitle the bully to undergo more stringent penalties than would otherwise be applied in a disagreement between two of the same “class.”
All of this starts the ball rolling toward restrictions on thought. Yes, thought. One must first have a reason before one carries it out. Deciding who gets special protections is effectively telling us what we can or cannot think about a given group. It is really one of those progressive things where what is being said is not really what is intended. We are back to that common thread that runs throughout all progressive thought… control of others – forcing conformity to their elitist point of view while currying favor among minority classes in order to garner votes. It’s getting tiresome to say the least.
Related posts:
Engaging the Issues: Gov. Tomblin – Part 2
Governor Earl Ray Tomblin, Jr.
In this final part of my interview with Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin, Jr., we learn the Governor’s position when it comes to the important topics of religious liberty, abortion, and the definition of marriage.
Frankly, I cannot recall a time when another sitting governor in West Virginia has been asked (let alone answered) as many questions on these important topics. I urge you to listen carefully to this portion of the interview and hear what Governor Tomblin has to say. It may be that you will be surprised to learn he holds a position closer to you than you thought. Or, perhaps, you will discover that what you thought Governor Tomblin was for may not be what he actually professes here.
Finally, listen through to the end for some additional commentary from yours truly and be sure to download the ETI@Home – our companion resource to help you get the discussion going at home.
To listen to Part 2 of my interview with Governor Tomblin, go to FamilyPolicyWV.com or click on the media player below:
Related posts:
What We Can Learn from Whitney
by Kelly Clinger, 02/14/2012
Atlanta, GA – Dear Whitney,
I think we owe you a sincere apology.
When we first bought your cassette tapes so many years ago, we were taken in by your voice. The strength and control of every note and the emotion with which you sang was truly captivating. Your voice was described as “timeless” and “flawless”. You gave us perfection and in return we demanded it from you.
Time after time, you delivered what we wanted. We will never forget when you so effortlessly sang the National Anthem at the Super Bowl in 1991. We watched you receive countless awards and cheered for you as we ascended you to a pedestal among other celebrities we esteem.
Then you gave us The Bodyguard, and you stole our hearts with “I Will Always Love You”. No one could hit those notes like you. We, perhaps prematurely, called you a legend. What a voice. What a heavy burden to bear.
What happened next, only those closest to you would be able to explain and understand…or maybe only God knows. The fame and accolades don’t fill the void like we think they will, so we try other things. We make choices with lasting consequences…destructive relationships, drugs, compromise.
The truth is that this void we have is God-given. He made us with a longing to be great, to be enjoyed, and to make an impact. I think in your heart you knew that, but you became known for what you DID and not for simply being a child of God. Your identity was in your songs and not in the sound God put in you.
So, we watched you unravel. We demanded perfection from the voice that could no longer deliver. We were disgruntled customers who wanted our money back, and I don’t think you ever recovered from that. I’m so sorry.
You see, those of us who like to be entertained did not consider your soul. We did not think about your heart that was obviously broken for a very long time. We could have helped to hold your weary arms up. We are selfish, entitled people, and I’m so sorry. You deserved kindness and mercy and a chance to be free and whole, but we did not love you well.
I’m praying that at this moment you are worshiping the One who is the very definition of Mercy and Love. I am grateful that He delivered me before it was too late, and I hope we can all learn from this to extend kindness and forgiveness in the midst of each other’s failures.
Lovingly,
Your Fans
Related posts:
Is Android’s “Iris” Better than Apple’s “Siri?”
by Nathan A. Cherry, 02/13/2012
Martinsburg, WV – Have you ever met one of those Apple-only people that believe every electronic device they own must be made by Apple or its junk? So they have an iMac (or two), an iPhone 4S that they bought three hours after it was released after standing in line for 42 hours at Best Buy, an iPod, all newly released version of the iPad; and they’re just waiting for an iCar and iHouse to complete the set. Sure, we all know those people.
I have to confess that I don’t have any of that. Wait, I do have a 5 year old iPod I picked up at a used electronics store. But other than that, I don’t have any of that stuff. My computer is a Toshiba, the other is a HP, I don’t own a tablet, and my phone is a Samsung Galaxy S. This brings me to the point of this post – which I am sure you were really starting to wonder about.
It seems that Android’s version of “Siri” which was released recently – called “Iris” – is making waves for more than simply adding fuel to the Andoird/Apple battle over who rules the tech world. (By the way, did anyone catch the irony in the name “Iris,” it would be hard to miss.)
Iris, the artificially intelligent voice assistant of the Android platform seems to be pro-life, pro-Bible and pro-creation; among other things. We all remember when Siri made waves for refusing to direct someone to the nearest abortion clinic, and now Iris is joining the controversy by quoting the Bible and defending life.
A recent post by The Blaze explains what happens when you ask Iris about abortion:
“When you ask Iris ‘is abortion wrong?’ the Android app will answer: Yes, abortion is wrong. The Lord has said, ‘You shall not murder,’ (Exodus 20:13). The life that is growing within the mother is a child, a baby. The Bible looks at the life in the womb as a child. Thanks!
You can hear Iris answer this question in the video below, or click here. (If you can’t see the video please refresh your browser.)
If you thought that was interesting check out Iris’ answers to some other hard questions:
[Is] Noah’s Ark real: “is biblically believed to be real. It gave forth a new beginning to a underserving earth.”
[Did] humans come from monkeys: “a part of Darwin‘s Theory of Evolution is that human’s over time evolved from apes. Since it is a theory, it can’t be proven.”
[Did] God created humans: “we were created for God’s pleasure! Don’t you know that God loves you and wants you? It was His whole purpose in creating mankind.”
It is an interesting thing to note that two separate “artificial intelligences” were both accused of being pro-life, and that accusation sparked outrage. It’s as if some in society are so blinded by their hate for life that they don’t even want artificially intelligent people to be pro-life, let alone an entire society of truly intelligent people.
But the fact is that the culture of death is losing this war. More Americans now identify as pro-life than ever before, more pro-life laws were passed in 2011 than any other single year, Planned Parenthood was defunded in a record number of states with other states seeking to follow suit. Quite simply it is far more intelligent to defend life from conception to natural death than anything else.
The belief that murder, sanctioned or not, is acceptable is not enlightened, evolved, or respectable; even artificial intelligence can conclude that.
Update: hours after this article was published, ChaCha is changing the answers to those questions and, I’m sure, frantically searching for others.
Related posts:
Engaging the Issues: Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin, Jr. – Pt. 1
Governor Earl Ray Tomblin
We are honored to welcome Governor Earl Ray Tomblin, Jr. on Engaging the Issues.
Earl Ray Tomblin, Jr. became Governor of the State of West Virginia following the death of Senator Robert C. Byrd and the election of Joe Manchin to the United States Senate. Since that time, Governor Tomblin has ably filled the office of Governor of the State of West Virginia, first on an interim basis and, after October’s special election, more permanently. Gov. Tomblin began life in Chapmanville, West Virginia, attended West Virginia University and began his 36-year career in public service as the youngest delegate ever elected in West Virginia. He has since served in the West Virginia State Senate where he was president of that body for 18 straight years. In Part 1 of my interview with Governor Tomblin, he explains several of his policy issues and reflects upon his time in the office of Governor to this point. Because he was so gracious with his time, we decided to split his interview into a 2-day special. Part 1 airs today and Part 2 – which largely covers his position on life, marriage, and religious freedom – will be available first thing Wednesday morning. You can listen to Part 1 at FamilyPolicyWV.com or by clicking on the media player below:Related posts:
Update: National Leaders Speak on the Obama Insurance Mandate
by Nathan A. Cherry, 02/13/2012
Is this what Obama thinks of our religious convictions and liberties?
Martinsburg, WV – Over the last several days we have been trying to make sure you are well informed on the current battle in Washington, D.C. over the religious freedoms and convictions of millions of Americans. I’m talking about the insurance mandate of the Obama administration demanding every employer, including religious employers, offer contraception, sterilization, and abortifacients to employees. This mandate clearly violates the religious convictions and conscience protections afforded to citizens by the 1st amendment.
In about a week’s time Obama went from refusing to compromise on this issue to honor the Constitutional rights of citizens to deciding – most likely in order to gain favor with voters – that a compromise was in order. (If I had his poll numbers and dreadful popularity numbers I would be desperate to gain favor with people as well.)
The problem with the “compromise” is that it’s not really a comprise that solves the problem. As I wrote in an earlier blog, according to Lifenews.com;
“The revised Obama mandate will make religious groups contract with insurers to offer birth control and the potentially abortion-causing drugs to women at no cost. The revised mandate will have religious employers refer women to their insurance company for coverage that still violates their moral and religious beliefs. Under this plan, every insurance company will be obligated to provide coverage at no cost.”
As anyone with a high school education in business and economics knows there is nothing free in this world, the cost must be accounted for somewhere. So while the Obama administration is assuming we are all stupid enough to believe this is a compromise, we clearly understand that this will only raise premiums on everyone in order to offset the cost of these services. In other words, this “compromise” continues to violate the religious convictions and 1st amendment rights of anyone opposed to offering – or subsidizing – these services in insurance plans.
I’m not the only one that understands this is not a “compromise” we can accept and this is not a fight we can afford to lose. This could be, if unchallenged, just the first step in eliminating the freedoms and liberties we hold sacred. Below is a wide variety of articles from around the country on this issue and the reactions of many of our nation’s top pro-life and pro-family leaders to the so-called “compromise.”
I highly encourage you to take a few moments and scan these articles. They will solidify the urgency of this issue for you and equip you to speak truth in your conversations with others.
“Focus’ Jim Daly Reserving Final Judgment on Obama Contraception Announcement” – Daley made clear that he, and many others are still unsure of how safe our religious convictions and conscience protections truly are. Daley said: “As an unapologetically, unswervingly pro-life organization, we disagree strongly with the Obama administration that free access to drugs that can cause abortions makes women or society healthier or safer. Today’s announcement seems to be an acknowledgement by the White House that it went too far in disregarding the deeply held values, and constitutionally protected conscience rights, of religious organizations and individuals. Still, we are not convinced this tweak to the proposed policy, when analyzed at a level deeper than simple sound bites, truly addresses the religious-liberty concerns that have been raised.”
“Americans United for Life says Obama Administration’s Strained Health Care Policy Pronouncement ‘Turns Roe on its Head’” – Americans United for Life does not support the attempt to force people into participating in Obama’s abortion inducing drug mandate: “It is clear that Americans need Congress to step in to protect their rights of conscience under the law and to end their forced participation in President Obama’s abortion-inducing drug mandate.”
“What Compromise? This Policy Leaves Religious Liberty in Peril and Planned Parenthood Smiling” – Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary says that this compromise doesn’t solve the issue for those with a true conscience objection: “What does this resolve? Well, to state the matter bluntly, nothing. At the end of the day, this “compromise” will resolve the issue only for those whose conscience can be resolved by an accounting maneuver.”
“The Catholic Tribe Closes Ranks Against Obama’s Intrusion” – Maggie Gallagher shows the Catholic position on this issue and explains how deeply upset Catholics are with the mandate (though this isn’t just a Catholic issue): “Obama’s decision to use Obamacare to force Catholic hospitals, schools, universities and charities to fund abortion pills, contraception and sterilization constitutes a deep betrayal of his staunch allies…”
“State AGs threaten to sue over birth-control mandate” – At least three states’ attorneys general (so far) have said they would sue the Obama administration in order to see the insurance mandate repealed/overturned: “Not only is the proposed contraceptive coverage mandate for religious employers bad policy, it is unconstitutional…It conflicts with the most basic elements of the freedoms of religion, speech and association, as provided under the First Amendment.”
As you can see, this is not a simple matter that we are willing to ignore. This is a fundamental fight to preserve our religious liberty that we must be willing to engage. If we refuse to engage this issue it will only lead to attempts to further restrict and regulate the freedoms we are Christians and citizens hold dear.
Related posts:
Video: Obama Insurance “Compromise” a Slick Trick?
by Nathan A. Cherry, 02/12/2012
Dr. Richard Land of the SBC
Martinsburg, WV – We’ve been doing our best to keep you up to date on the situation with the Obama administration demanding religious employers violate their convictions and consciences by offering contraception/sterilization/abortifacients in insurance plans. First Obama was resolute and unwilling to give any ground or change the narrow definition of “religious exemption” that excluded churches and religious institutions.
Then, Friday, Obama announced via White House press conference his “compromise” that was supposed to secure religious freedom and conscience protections. The problem is that the president may have made the situation worse with a “compromise” so poorly constructed that it essentially changed nothing from the original mandate.
So where do we stand? Below you will find a couple on the developing story that should offer some insight into the situation and the outrage taking place across the country over this blatant attempt to force citizens to violate their conscience, religious convictions, and trample the 1st amendment.
This video from CBN.com has commentary from Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission. In it, Mr. Land explains how this “compromise” is not a compromise at all but an “ignorant” attempt to stifle religious freedom. Click here to view the video.
This second video from Family Research Council president Tony Perkins explains the problem with the Obama administration “compromise” and how it will affect every person in America. Perkins show, through nothing more than common sense, that religious employers will still be paying for the services they oppose and the cost will be passed on to every person. In the end, this “compromise” is a lose-lose for employers and insurance companies; not to mention everyone that pays a monthly premium.
Take a moment to watch this video and pass it along to someone that is still trying to make sense of this whole mess. (If the video doesn’t appear please refresh your browser.)
We will continue to bring you updated coverage of this situation because this issue touches us all and the outcome will affect us all. No should be able to choose between their religious convictions and penalty under the law. Yet the Obama administration is demanding such a choice. What’s next? Where does this slippery slope of lost freedoms end?
If we refuse to stand up for the rights and freedoms we have been fortunate enough to enjoy in America we can be sure that those seeking to destroy our country will systematically remove them. This is just one example of religious liberty being threatened and our actions may very well determine the safety or loss of this freedom.
Related posts:
This Gives New Meaning to “Smoke and Mirrors”
By Tom Stark, 02/12/12
Obama's idea for protecting religious liberty is to violate it.
Parkersburg, WV – To paraphrase FDR’s famous address to Congress after Pearl Harbor was attacked…February 11, 2012, a day that will live as the ultimate day of Obama’s many insults to Americans, was the day that Barack Obama came before the podium to pronounce that he had the perfect solution to allowing all women to receive contraceptives and abortifascient drugs – FREE – without requiring religious employers to pay for those “benefits.” It’s such a brilliant idea that he had to deliver the message personally to the American people. Now such benefits will have to be paid for and provided – FREE- by the insurance companies.
Whom does he think he is kidding? Any high school senior should know (but probably doesn’t with the schools we have of late, but that’s a story for a different article) that no business gives anything completely “free.” Why, you might ask? Because businesses that give away free stuff are usually not profitable in the long haul and therefore do not exist for very long.
Any reasonably intelligent adult who takes the time to think about it knows that the cost of these benefits will be built into the cost of the other benefits that the employer pays for and thus nothing is changed by this most recent pronouncement by “the messiah” of the left wing progressives. So that is my simple argument that the “solution” to the problem facing religious employers is not solved, but rather that more smoke and more mirrors have been added to the Obamacare law through regulatory manipulation that has not been approved by our elected legislators. That’s the obvious tip-off that we’re not getting the whole picture. Let’s look a little deeper.
What is really at work here with this mandate to provide the contraceptive, sterilization and abortifascient drugs within all health insurance plans? Most people are seeing this dust-up as something that is unique to the Roman Catholic church because that group specifically prohibits contraception of any kind.
Religious employers represent about five percent of all employers – a relatively small segment. What many are missing is that these same requirements are imposed on the other 95% of employers as well. So, if I am a practicing Catholic and I employ x number of employees making me subject to the Obamacare regulations, I am required to violate my beliefs just as much as the Catholic Church-run businesses. Everyone is affected…not just Catholics. Nothing is being said about the other 95% because those people are really the targets because…
This is not just about Catholic employers and their principles. This is about disassembly of First Amendment rights under our Constitution so that the progressive end game of statism and central control is achieved. Every person in the United States is at risk if this regulation is allowed to remain on the books, and it is highly significant that the administration has insisted that the original regulation remain on the books in spite of yesterday’s alterations which are really meaningless. As I said, more smoke and mirrors. Check this video interview with two experts in the field. The point is made at about the 3:oo minute point in the interview.
Exactly how does this threaten every American? If the government can ignore the First Amendment and impose mandates on religious organizations that force them to compromise their faith, then does this not violate the “free exercise” clause of the First Amendment? Does this not prevent the free exercise of religion?
If this is OK, then what will stop this or any other administration from creating a regulation that limits the press from telling any story that contradicts the official position of the government? What stops that administration from declaring public demonstrations illegal? The recently passed National Defense Authorization Act has already gutted the principle of due process and the right to a speedy trial by a jury of one’s peers. Why is it such a stretch to see where this is quickly leading?
It is time to step back and take a cold hard look at the picture that has been created once we blow away the smoke, look in the mirror and understand that many have been asleep at the switch and must wake up to what is going on here. The Catholic Church represents every last citizen in America. We are all at risk.
Related posts:
Update: Has Obama Caved to Pro-Life Pressure on Abortion Coverage?
by Nathan A. Cherry, 02/11/2012
Is your religious and conscience protections at risk?
Martinsburg, WV – It has been a crazy couple weeks. First there was the Komen/Planned Parenthood fiasco that no one is quite sure where exactly we stand. Now we are dealing with Obama’s demand that religious employers provide contraception, sterilization, and abortion inducing drugs in their insurance policies; even though these violate the religious convictions and consciences of these employers.
Last week it appeared we were heading for a showdown that could only end up in the Supreme Court as the Obama administration seemed unwilling to broaden the definition of “religious exemption” to actually include religious groups such as Catholic charities and churches. Then talk spread late last week that Obama was going to “compromise” on the issue and not force people to violate their conscience or face jail (Is this America or a communist dictatorship?)
After reading a few dozen articles on what has taken place in the last week I think I can help clear up the situation so you know exactly where our religious freedom and convictions stand. The scary part is that Obama would actually try and force anyone to violate their religious convictions. The arrogance of this president continues to astound as he seems to ignore centuries of precedent in protecting the religious freedoms and convictions of American citizens. Then again, his blatant disregard for precedent, the Constitution, and American exceptionalism have no other logical end.
Thankfully the backlash against this mandate was so quick and fierce that Obama – no doubt hoping to woo a few voters – had no choice but to address the issue and seek a compromise. But will the “compromise” actually accomplish what is needed to secure the religious/conscience protections of religious employers? According to a post by LIfenews.com the “compromise” is just as bad as the original mandate:
“Responding to a firestorm of opposition from pro-life organizations, Catholics groups and even some Democrats, the Obama administration has revised the mandate in a way that pro-life advocates are saying is even worse…The revised Obama mandate will make religious groups contract with insurers to offer birth control and the potentially abortion-causing drugs to women at no cost. The revised mandate will have religious employers refer women to their insurance company for coverage that still violates their moral and religious beliefs. Under this plan, every insurance company will be obligated to provide coverage at no cost.”
So, on the surface this appears to be a “fix” for the problem. But in reality this is just as bad, perhaps even worse because it still requires religious employers to offer contraception/sterilizations/abortifacients in insurance plans; only now they will be subsidizing them, which will increase their premium rates.
Commenting on the fact that costs will increase for everyone thanks to this new “compromise,” FRC Vice President Tom McClusky said:
“Our Administration person basically said that whether fully insured or self-insured that the insurer is not going to eat the cost of the free contraceptives, so everyone’s premiums will still rise and the costs a religious employer pays ‘Blue Cross’ or another insurance provider will increase to pay the difference.”
But even more disturbing is that groups like Planned Parenthood have been vocally opposed to any religious exemptions in insurance coverage and sought to have them eliminated. Yet they are supportive of Obama’s new “compromise” because it effectively eliminates any exemptions and requires every employer to offer these services in their insurance; even if they violate their religious convictions. This is nothing more than a trampling of 1st amendment rights by the Obama administration in an effort to squash the freedom of religious organizations and institutions.
Bill Donohue, president of the Catholic League made is feelings clear on the issue:
“President Obama’s latest ploy just adds insult to injury. If the insurance plan of a Catholic institution must cover services it deems immoral, then such a healthcare plan is offensive, plain and simple…The Catholic League, for example, uses Christian Brothers as its insurance carrier. So if a future employee of ours were to demand free abortion-inducing drugs, and she is allowed to request free drugs from Christian Brothers, then the rest of us would, in effect, be subsidizing her abortion. This is outrageous and will not stand judicial scrutiny.”
And even though a few groups, like the Catholic Health Association of the US seem appeased with the compromise and willing to let the president off the hook, most are not. Most recognize this for what it is; a political ploy to gain favor with religious and conservative voters during a difficult election in which Obama’s popularity has taken a nose dive.
Stay tuned for more coverage on this developing story and for reactions from pro-life and religious leaders across America.
Related posts:
Are Catholics the Only Target?
By Tom Stark, 02/12/12
Parkersburg, WV - The decision by the Obama Administration to force Catholic health care facilities to include contraception, sterilization, and “morning after” abortion medications in their employee health coverage, or face heavy fines under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (aka Obamacare) has many all “atwitter” (pun intended). No, it is not something to take lightly, but if you don’t keep it light, you will scream or cry or both.
At least, this decision brings Barack Obama and his administration out of the closet when it comes to hostility toward anyone who puts conscience above ideology or personal preference. And believe me, this decision is all about “personal preference.” How can I be so sure? Let’s look at the facts, as Joe Friday used to say, just the facts.
Based on very vague statements in the 2008 “Abortion Surveillance” study for the Centers for Disease Control, and other published statistics, it appears that the overwhelming majority of abortions are totally elective as a contraceptive measure. This leads one to the obvious conclusion that very few abortions actually fall under “cases medically necessary to save the life of the mother.”
If this assumption is accepted, then all of the arguments about abortion and these requirements being a women’s health issue fall directly into that black hole of left-wing logic; the rationale for the requirements in Obamacare are proven to be motivated by ideology, not medical necessity. Thus the requirements placed on religious organization that provide medical services to citizens who are not necessarily of the same religious persuasion are that much more abhorrent and offensive and totally unconstitutional.
Not only are they offensive to Catholics; they should be offensive to every freedom-loving American who believes that religious freedom is sacrosanct and inviolable under our Constitution. To be sure, it is inviolable unless apathy on the part of Christians and others of faith makes it otherwise. I believe the anti-Christian, anti-religious, and pro-humanism agenda that has advanced rapidly in this country over the past sixty years is largely the result of exactly that – apathy; with a sprinkling of ill-advised self-isolation from the political process because of a mistaken belief that politics and religion should never mix company.
For this reason, the attempt to impose such hostile requirements on religious institutions is frightening. It could cause those institutions to close their doors in the face of citizens that depend on them for basic, and often free, health care needs. It is completely maddening.
Back on December 1, 2011, another blog by Nathan Cherry, sounded eerily prophetic with regard to these newly imposed regulations (notably issued without the approval of Congress). At the time, Nancy Pelosi was squawking about the Catholic “conscience thing” and that Republicans would “let women die on the floor” rather than accept such regulations.
Remembering that roughly 97 percent of abortions are elective, the real goal of these regulations is to make certain as many people as possible have access to abortion purely as a convenience. There is little doubt in my mind that any abortion performed as a medically necessary preventive measure would likely be covered by any insurance policy with the presence of a doctor’s certification of necessity. With that being the case, there would be no reason other than ideology to require this regulation. This is purely a limitation imposed “because they can,” not out of legitimate need.
Does it take much of a leap to carry that thinking over to other matters related to religious freedom? Could they come after tax-exemptions that have existed for many decades out of need for more revenue? Could they continue the onslaught of “hate-speech” legislation toward any denomination that quotes the Bible publicly in a way that suggests that homosexuality is wrong? The slippery slope is both very moist and very steep. Before you know it, you are being told that religious freedom must take second chair to the community’s convenience.
So what can be done? The same thing that needs to happen when ever the government does things that are against your faith and your conscience…object! Within their oath each representative takes is an inferred expectation that when something is clearly unconstitutional, and additionally, one’s constituents oppose what is going on, they should stand up and express those concerns on the floor of our Congress and oppose the bill. But you have to let them know about it. Light up their switchboards! Fill up their email INBOX! It will work. Whatever else you do, pray for this regulation to be rescinded quickly; because if it remains the law of the land, you can bet that your church and your faith could be next in the government’s regulatory cross-hairs.
Related posts:
Rick Warren, Bart Stupak and Obama – Do They All Agree?
by Nathan A. Cherry, 02/14/2012
Is Rick Warren going to jail?
Martinsburg, WV – Remember way back, what seems like forever ago, when “pro-life” Democrat Congressman Bart Stupak made an 11th hour deal with President Obama regarding Obamacare that secured Stupak’s vote and helped the unpopular socialistic bill pass? Stupak became the Benedict Arnold of the pro-life community and decided to retire rather than face a near impossible re-election campaign after his traitorous actions against the unborn. Stupak claimed Obamacare contained “conscience protections” for pro-life people, groups, organizations and businesses so he was confident in supporting Obama’s bill.
As I have previously written, conscience protections are under attack and in no way safe from the Obama administration’s desire to impose its will on everyone. And now it seems everyone from Rick Warren to Bart Stupak is realizing just how endangered our Constitutional rights are under the Obama administration.
If you haven’t seen the news lately you might be shocked to learn that President Obama has mandated that every employer offer health insurance to employees that include contraception, birth control, and abortion inducing drugs. This of course violates the pro-life conscience of many conservative and religious employers. Lifenews.com explains what is causing the massive backlash:
“The Obama Administration issued a statement re-iterating the ‘contraceptive mandate’ requiring all insurance providers cover the full range of FDA-approved drugs and devices would remain intact. This mandate, issued in August, includes drugs that work after conception to destroy life rather than prevent it. The statement included a postponement of one year for religious groups that do not already carry contraceptives and additionally would not be exempted under last year’s narrow definition of ‘religious employer.’”
The fact is, by demanding that any employer offer insurance with items like contraception, sterilization, abortion inducing drugs etc., they are being asked to violate their religious beliefs and their conscience. This is something our government has never demanded or asked of U.S. citizens, ever. And now the Obama administration is trying to force these employers to violate their religious convictions and consciences by offering such insurance; it’s an unprecedented attack on religious liberty and freedom.
Now, many outspoken advocates for life and even some that supported the Obamacare bill are speaking out against this affront to religious liberty and calling it what it is: an attack. Father Frank Pavone of Priests for Life said this:
“It’s unthinkable that President Obama would force Americans of any faith to violate their consciences. Yet here he is, arrogantly imposing these regulations that clearly discriminate against Catholics and all Christians as well as people of any faith who believe in the sanctity of innocent human life. This has clearly become a human rights case — and is no longer just a partisan political football.”
Rick Warren, pastor of Saddleback Church made it clear where he stands on the issue:
“I’m not a Catholic but I stand in 100% solidarity with my brothers & sisters to practice their belief against government pressure. I’d go to jail rather than cave in to a government mandate that violates what God commands us to do. Would you? Acts 5:29.”
Timothy Dolan, President of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops issued his strong sentiments:
“In effect, the president is saying we have a year to figure out how to violate our consciences. To force Americans to choose between violating their consciences and forgoing their healthcare is literally unconscionable. . . It is as much an attack on access to health care as on religious freedom.”
Pro-life leader Richard Land left no doubt where he stands on this issue:
“When it comes to abortifacients, and many birth-control methods are abortifacients,” Land said, this mandate is “reprehensible in its demands for people to violate their conscience. We are not going to do this. We have a First Amendment right to freedom of conscience, and we’re going to defend it. If we have to defend it by going to jail, so be it.”
And Becket Fund National Litigation Director Eric Rassbach said in a statement Wednesday:
“Why doesn’t the government just tell people where to get it? Why should there be some obsessive need to force religious objectors to be involved in this? If this were actually about access, the government would do just that. In reality, this is a cram-down of religious individuals and institutions.”
These statements are no doubt representative of a majority of Americans. Even without a pro-life conviction it is easy to see that the government is trying to force people to violate their conscience. This is not about partisan politics anymore, this is about freedom. No one should ever be made to violate their conscience by the government; and the Obama administration seems to be the first to be so arrogant as to think they can do such a thing.
I hope, however, that more evangelical leaders will rise up and speak out on this issue. The eerie silence from pastors across America is chilly considering this will directly impact every church and para-church organization. Just as many Catholic leaders have vocally opposed this mandate, America needs to hear from other pastors. If we refuse to stand up and speak out what’s next? Today it’s abortion in health insurance, tomorrow it will be public prayer, Bible reading, and the freedom to assemble. Waiting is no longer an option; silence is no longer an option.
Which freedoms are we willing to see taken before we are moved from our apathy?
Action Alert!
Sign a petition asking the Obama administration to eliminate the contraception mandate.
Related posts:
It’s Like Swatting Flies
By Tom Stark, 02/11/12
Parkersburg, WV – A recent blog by Nathan Cherry described the case of Brandon Wegner and his treatment at the hand of his local school board. It’s well worth the read! But it leads one to think further about the pattern of behavior among the homosexual rights groups, the pro-abortion groups, hard-left liberal politicians, and the “one world order” gang, and the end-game behind their behavior.
The “flies” at this particular picnic are the near continual assaults on the ability of an individual to freely express their opinion about social issues. Things like the existence of God, the propriety of homosexual behavior…you know, basic things that impact the family, society, and our nation’s future
Similar cases are popping up all over the country and are invariably instigated by a very small but vocal minority that desires to impose their views and lifestyles on society at any cost. They are only interested in the constitutional protections we share when it furthers or supports their position and want all dissenting viewpoints shut down as inflammatory, racist, bigoted or greedy and selfish.
If you really want to understand the hatred and vitriol we are facing with these kinds of complaints, read this article and compare the facts as well as the tone with the facts described by Nathan’s article. It is hard to believe they are talking about the same events. Caution, the opinions expressed could be shocking to some just by their extreme nature.
So what is the end game? First, we need to understand that all of the efforts to undermine the morality and Christian foundations of our American society are rooted in the need for control and power. Those who seek this power are committed to the “fundamental transformation of the United States” as well as the world, and see the recognition of something greater than human authority as a stumbling block to assuming the control they seek. Given their way, these elitists would declare themselves “Gods” and the rest of us their subjects tomorrow!
When liberals/progressives can achieve the neutralization of all authority greater than humans, then anything they decide to implement becomes justifiable and necessary “for the common good” (which never includes them). As long as God is on the throne, however, those who believe will recognize the actions and decisions of the non-believers for what they are and will resist. And resistance is essential for us to prevail and them to suffer defeat. Since we know that God will always remain on the throne, we also know that eventually we will prevail, and that should give us all hope for the future, right?
In the meantime, fortunately, Alliance Defense Fund and Liberty Counsel, both Christian legal defense groups, have frequently stepped into the breach to protect innocent people like Brandon from unfair and outright illegal infringements on their right to speak the Truth publicly. And in case you didn’t know it, this is exactly what the Family Policy Council of West Virginia does on a state legislative level. Often in these cases, the “offended” person’s complaint includes unsubstantiated claims – often ridiculously extreme – that the offending statements were the kind that “caused kids to commit suicide” or “bullied” the so-called victim. When they have no facts, they substitute emotion-laden terms that inflame.
The bottom line? Attempts to silence the voice of Christian morality will continue to assail us. How we react to these attacks will go a long way toward nullifying their effect on our society. We must stand firm in the face of it. We must continually speak out when the attempts to stifle our voices are made; and, as I have said here before, we must elect leaders with the moral fortitude to stand up for Truth and stand against the swarms of flies that would ruin our country.
By educating ourselves to the threats and their origins, and standing fast against those attacks, we will preserve our way of life along with the quiet enjoyment of the freedom to speak openly about our faith and beliefs without fear. Remaining silent or passive is not a viable choice.
We have all been taught that our leaders are in their positions by the grace of God. However, we must consider the possibility that God put some of our leaders here to provoke his faithful to wake up and pay more attention to what is happening. Biblical history is replete with examples of Godless rulers being used to teach His people lessons in faithfulness and righteousness. Who among us can claim with certainty that He is not doing the same with America right now?
Related posts: