On Legitimate Rape? More of My Blog Posts

I didn't hear the gentleman on "legitimate rape," but let me guess --was he trying to distinguish between women who are really raped and those who would cry "rape!" just to get their abortions --and not because they were really raped? I bet that's what he meant by legitimate.

I think his concern probably was that if abortion is made illegal --but legal for rape --that all women will claim they were raped when they want abortions. There is nothing legit about rape, of course --and GOP knows it same as the DIMS. And it is very DIM and an effort to obfuscate the facts to misunderstand what the man meant .

Abortion takes a human life for selfish reasons. There are very few women impregnated by rape, incest --and hardly any who have to terminate a pregnancy in the 3rd trimester to save her life --via partial birth abortion. The child can be delivered early instead of aborted if the woman cannot carry to term.

Abortion should never have been legalized --except  for rape, incest, life of mother  --where the sad choices have some legitimacy.  Take the rare 12 year old rape victim who is impregnated.  (I wonder how many of these there are?)    Personally speaking,  I don't think she should also be forced through pregnancy and labor because of an act of rape, which is always against God's will.

  Gay marriage should not be legalized --for its effect on youth. 

  Romney will not  tax the middle class more than the rich.   And he isn't going to hurt the elderly.

What you don't get is that we are all going to be poor under O if we don't have REAL change --not socialistic change.  Why would we want to be like GREECE???   Obama is taking us there as fast as he can.   He's either ignorant and inept about economics --or he's determined to break us down and then take over in a  Bolshevik fashion.  I prefer to think the former.  In either case, "Hit the Road, Barack!"





 "God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

RecentBlog Posts of Mine on the Candidates and Election Issues

 Obama did it wrong --when he refused to defend federal law like DOMA --when he declared support for abortion for any reason and letting surviving abortion victims die --when he created 32 czars for unelected power at our expense --NOT legit part of the executive branch --NOT the way our gov't is supposed to work --when he disallowed our offshore drilling while funding it around So. America --when he bailed out GM who is now taking jobs to China -- when he passed the ACA (Obamacare) with its big gov't control of all aspects of healthcare and our lives --when he persecuted AZ for defending themselves against illegal aliens --when he ignored the plight of Syria --when he failed to take care of Iran --when he bowed to China's and Saudi's leaders and promised Russians (off mic --an accident)  he'd be able to please them more after the election and not before --when he said over and over again that we are not a "christian nation." When he ineptly lost weapons in Mexico to drug running murderers -- when he snubbed Israel --when he and his wife gave up their law licenses before they could be disbarred (her for insurance fraud and him for lying on application) --when he got pork money as a senator for Tony Rezko, the slum lord who blew millions of our money which Obama got for him -- when he let two terrorist radicals establish him in politics with a fund-raiser at their house --when he let himself be touted as a Constitutional law prof --when he was a lower echelon instructor who avoided the faculty discussion group mtgs. --when he invested tax money into failed green companies --when he told the Christian schools and Catholic institutions that they have to pay for birth control and abortifacients for students and employees --when his party gives money to PP whose primary business is abortion--despite their claim to provide general women's healthcare.  We have plenty of public health offices for the women's healthcare --we don't need abortionist PP and it is illegal to take our tax money to pay for abortion. 

Look at the mentors he had, and all he does is understandably either inept from no real job experience --or bent on our downfall for socialist "change."   There is a Catholic priest who reminds us at youtube --that socialism, little brother of Marxist Communism,  ultimately denies the validity of religion and takes away religious liberty.   ALready, Obama has started this in his Obamacare, forcing the religious institutions to go against their religious beliefs --or be fined hugely.
 _________________________________

You look at a man's record --Romney is successful at management and making money. He did this for free for 8 years? (the Olympics and the Governorship.)  His goal is to make us successful economically as a country--ALL OF US can then be lifted up. There is truth to "trickle down" economics --evidenced by fact that our poor people are the richest poor people in the world --with running water, heat, A/c, electric, IPods, big screen tv's, IPads, video game systems, nice clothes, furniture, free healthcare, free money, subsidized everything, food cards, and expensive tattoos and piercings.

NOW, if we could just study harder in school, we might all experience the upward mobility of the many who started out poor and are now rich (like many people I know.) There has been opportunity in this country--and I'm tired of hearing democratic constituency belly-aching about their SELF-IMPOSED poverty (with all the benefits I listed above) --self-imposed by smoking, drinking, fathering multiple families, and refusing to even look for legit work. (though granted, there isn't much work now in this socialistic nation. Obama wants to create more disabled on SSI (more than jobs currently) or gov't jobs --for which the gov't HAS NO MONEY!   And taxing the rich higher  can be done --but it will be a band-aid unless you stop this spending! and growth in entitlements!  

I believe he is setting us up for a violent response from his supporters if he doesn't win --his party and supporters are accusing GOP of racism and sexism (the war on women)  and greed.     The greed and envy are on the Democratic side --and it's not factually defensible to say the GOP has no compassion for the poor.  NOt so.  But we see a system that is rewarding all the wrong things --and fomenting unrest among the envious.  Convincing the elderly that they will suffer under Romney--when in fact, it is the other way around.  Obama Care rations treatment for the elderly -- in a draconian way. We have to do something to continue to care for the elderly and the truly needy who lack options  --we can't continue to do it with all the greed, fraud, envy, unrest, socialist thinking of OBama. 



"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

GAY MARRIAGE WILL TEACH OUR YOUTH THAT IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE

The law is a teacher.  Way more women abort now than before.    We have performed 50 million legal abortions since we legalized abortion; the pro-aborts with knowledge have admitted that reports of illegal abortions causing maternal deaths annually were hugely exaggerated as propaganda for abortion prior to 1973.    That's what gay marriage will do --TEACH the youth that it makes no difference whether you do it with a woman or a man.  Because what is legal is seen as "right."
I just had this conversation with a young marijuana smoker --he said it's LEGAL as medicine in some states so it must not be that bad.  Medicine can't be bad for you.    The mature know this is not true --and know the bad effects of mj on the brain.  But the immature think the law stands for what is right and good.   Therefore, the law teaches --that there is nothing wrong with abortion, drugs now deemed mostly illegal, and homosex-perimentation and exploring one's sexuality.
Consider that in Uganda MSM are  19 times more likely to be HIV infected than someone in the general popululation --that MSM are still the leading carriers and victims of new cases of HIV in the US and the world.    You just can't sanitize or disease-proof anal sex --or oral sex with infected people.  There is a high risk of harm for MSM and their women and children.  There is risk to public health via the lowered immunity of AIDS victims.  What they can get, we can all get because their vulnerability puts diseases out there for all. 
We need to cease and desist.   Who on earth wants his anus penetrated the first time?  Only a nutcase, so the likely recipients of this act were seduced or coerced --and the result is damaged gender identity.   Those who initiate others into this gay identity and  lifestyle or encourage them to experiment with it are doing a great evil to youth.    Legal gay marriage will be a pandora's box of  sex-ploration by youth, more  people with STD's, and risk to the health of all through lowered immunity of AIDS.  And more people disinclined  to procreate and sustain normal hetero relationships and family life.







"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

My Response on a Blog Re: Obama's Defense of Gay Marriage

On a blog --in response to specific comments of another blogger: 

 

Argue with St. Paul if you must. That was only 20 centenarians' lifetimes ago and he has more claim to divine insight than most of us since he was a persecutor of Christians who was blinded by a light on the road to Damascus ("he saw the light!".) He heard the resurrected Christ's voice telling him how and where and by whom (named him) to get his sight back (ironically on the street called Straight) --and from then on, he was a leading teacher/apologist for Christianity. Here's what He wrote: Romans 1: 18-32.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%201:%2018-32&version=NIV1984

I suppose you know Sodomy gets its name from the city where the men desired sex with the angels --who were visiting Lot as men. It refers to homosexual relations. Don't be so sure (as you stated)  that these acts possible for men with each other were as common as you think for married heteros through the ages ----especially anal --or swallowing semen. I'm pretty sure my mother and grandmother never did these things. And it's not the way I have sex either. And I've yet to have a lady friend tell me she loves sex this way--but I've had a few say they got rid of guys who wanted them to do gay acts. They told 'em to get hence and find a boyfriend for the yuck stuff.

Men want these acts once they experience them, evidently. Which is why sodomy is so forbidden in the Bible. God knows that men would put their do-hickies just ANYWHERE! and come to crave the forbidden if they pursued self-gratification this way (lovers of self.) The procreative plan is for man to crave intimacy with his wife in the normal way--not to say there isn't much variety in position and in foreplay --and in oral stimulation --which is probably all permissible. As Paul wrote, "The marriage bed is undefiled."

My remark about AIDS. It was quixotic what society/media did in the wake of the AIDS crisis. It seems suicidal to promote homosexuality as a normal, unavoidable, lifestyle. But we did it --and went to great lengths in our privacy protection--because we didn't want anyone to persecute AIDS victims for fear of their blood and fluids. The country WAS terrified that we didn't know how to stop this epidemic that was fluid-borne. We feared accidental contagion through contact sports, traffic accidents, bathroom accidents, hospitals --(and some of those were afflicted and died of AIDS because of needle-sticks or surgery accidents.) It WAS the gays and "men on the downlow" who brought it to America --to the blood supply, the prostitutes, the drug addicts, wives and their babies. The promiscuity of the gay community was amazing --horrifying --so the idea of marriage came up --maybe if they married....! But if heteros weren't faithful, why would we think that homosexuals would be more so? Considering the huge beach parties, bath houses, gay bars, and the extremely promiscuous nature of the movement. Newsweek noted the young gays, late in the epidemic, didn't use condoms.  They showed photos of huge beach parties, with hundreds of men standing around at night half-dressed --some women.  No, not swimming.  Holding their drinks, networking, finding temporary boyfriends.   Sad, not gay.

 

 

 

"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

Who's Nicest? Obama or Romney?

This is from a blog --NOT BY ME --by a guy named Dan and I thought it was great.  (Why don't I cite the blogs where i write?  I have good reason.) 


Nice guy??? Maybe it's like everything else under Obama...try to portray it as exactly the opposite of reality. Jimmy Carter was a nice guy....and an incompetent. Obama's certainly an incompetent...but not a nice guy. This is the most self-congratulatory, overreaching egomaniac who's ever occupied the White House. And he's a not-very-veiled corrupt thug of the Chicago variety. 
  
A short list: 

•  sacking an inspector general who exposed an Obama crony;
•  Fast & Furious;
•  trying to use the Endowment for the Arts for propaganda purposes;
•  trashing the U.S. in foreign speeches; 
•  crony capitalism with his bundlers; 
• standing up the leader of a trusted ally;
•  race baiting before he has all the facts;
•  lying (profusely, it turns out) about the impact of Obamacare and other legislation;
•  unprecedented deficits and debt; 
• appointments of anti-American ideologues as secretaries of Energy, Commerce, Environmental Protection, Health & Human Services, etc....and we could go on endlessly.                                         
• On an almost daily basis, this President has assaulted:
•  common sense, 
• the Constitution, 
• the principle of separation of powers,
•  Congress, 
• the Supreme Court, 
• ordinary citizens who dare to disagree with his ideas
•  and American values.
• We won't be forgetting. November is pay back time. Romney's fine...but it wouldn't matter who the GOP nominee is. We're mostly voting against this failed President who it turns out has nothing, at all, in common with the average hardworking, patriotic American. If you enjoyed 2010, you're gonna love  2012  
•                                                                                                                                                                                             "God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

Why Does Gay Marriage Lose at the Polls?

• A RECENT BLOG EXCHANGE:  
   
   The Texan:  

  The answer may have to do with voter turnout. People who support gay marriage, or at least don't actively oppose it, are less likely to make a special trip to vote on the issue. Those who genuinely (if absurdly) believe that gay marriage is a threat to their own straight lifestyle are motivated to show up. Double that for those who believe their god condemns it.
  

   

  Me:  To The Texan:   You are sort of right.  The irresponsible citizens don't always vote --and they are often the ones too ignorant to see that marriage matters.   You think gay marriage is opposed just because it is a threat to straight lifestyles?  Let's say homosexuality IS a threat to heterosexuals --say in the case of the Episcopalian minister who left wife and kids to be with his male lover --and then the church elevated him to bishop.  She might consider homosexuality a threat to her life and happiness and marriage.  I would if I were her.  I'd be furious if my husband wanted to get his jollies with anal or oral sex --and had also been doing so for years and then coming home to me.  Blccch.

   

   This activity should never be entertained in the mind, much less in act.  "Yield not to temptation --for yielding is sin,"  goes the old gospel song.  What's happened to our brains that we don't have a taboo fence to keep us from pondering the taboos of same-sex relations, polygamy, adultery, pedophilia, necrophilia, bestiality?    For all these activities start first in the mind. Today, we have tv and schools--all media--telling us "gay is good" --"choose your gender"  --"you can marry any other human(s)--regardless of gender."    This is all total bunkum and should never be entertained in mind or media or society --in any way at all.    We shall reap what we sow. 

   

   We don't just BELIEVE our God opposes gay marriage.  It's obvious from our design that we were NOT designed for homosexual coupling.  We are designed to couple with, and parent with, the opposite sex --only.   And God's Word is clear in Romans 1 --also Leviticus.  But nature tells us --even if there are aberrations in fallen nature --like the dog humping our legs --- the dog is still designed to hump a dog --not our legs.  

   

  Likewise, all men are designed for copulation with women --not each other.

  
  

  Nevertheless, God forgives the repentant sinner --and all of us have sinned.  But that's no excuse for legitimating sin via gay marriage. 

  
  

"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

OBAMA --the first gay president??? on Mother's Day

Last week, Newsweek featured Obama on the cover with a rainbow halo and called him "the first gay president."  Andrew Sullivan, a married, gay conservative, wrote the article.   I noticed he suggested that Obama lacked closeness to his father and step-father  as many gays did!  (Now there's an admission that fits MY theory of gay causation!)   He likened Obama's situation as a bi-racial man to that of homosexual men.  But I have to wonder if the democrats were not chagrined to see the title, "first gay president," affixed to Obama --since Sullivan was not saying he was actually gay. 

However, allegedly, the mother of the murdered choir director at Obama's church pastored by Jeremiah Wright, came out to say her son and 2 other church men were murdered on the eve of Obama's  first presidential  candidacy because they were known to be involved with him homosexually.  One gay man came out publically after those murders to claim that he had a sexual encounter with Obama in the back seat of a limo that he (not Obama) had rented.  He said he did this so he would NOT be murdered for it, figuring if he got the story out, they wouldn't dare do him in.  

http://conservativeallies.yuku.com/topic/9086/Three-Openly-Gay-Men--Rev-Wright-s-Chicago-Church-KILLED---M#.T7PT1lL93Mk


 Our  minister said Sunday, that, in effect,  Obama had announced with his gay marriage affirmation during Mother's Day week that mothers (or fathers)are no longer necessary for the rearing of children. Aren't they???

Same-sex kids idolize each other as a part of normal growing up; in my youth, to turn that admiration for same-sex individuals into sexual desire was as taboo as incest or pedophilia. We slammed the mind's gate down on taboos --"didn't go there." Now the public school and media entertainment feel obligated to encourage kids into gay relations. New law for gay marriage will be a TEACHER to our kids --that they can explore same-sex possibility. What a mess on the horizon!

We do need a constitutional amendment defining marriage.   The writers never dreamed we'd be lunatic enough to make a new definition of marriage. Had they had prophetic insight, they would've defined it. If we today have any prophetic insight we SHALL define it and get it into the constitution as most states have done --before all the kids are confused, believing marriage is for any 2 (or more) people. 

Proponents of gay marriage say they have over 50% of the country in their favor.  If this isn't true, it soon will be, with youth growing up on GLEE and SISTER WIVES  and all the other media and education propaganda that says marriage and sex are for any combination of people.

Read Romans 1 to see that this problem of homosexuality is as old as the Gospel.   And the Good News is that ALL people can be forgiven of their sins and experience new life in Christ.  Repentance comes first.  Agreement with God about what is right and wrong is essential for repentance. 


"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

DOES MEDIA SHAPE CULTURE --OR VICE VERSA?

I had a recent discussion with a couple who are PhD candidates and they assert that media reflects culture more than it leads it. I couldn't disagree more.

Cultural trends are always inspired --started by someone who gets a lot of publicity and admiration.  If there are no trend setters; no cultural change.    I believe Michael Landon's Little House on the Prairie tv series, based on the books,  inspired a generation of home-schoolers who wanted their kids to be wholesome and protected from the seamy side of life like the Ingalls girls --who wanted their marriages to be happy like the tv couple --who  even liked country decor and dress also. While we didn't all home school or dress our girls in dresses, we still ALL admired the little house family and their demonstration of "family values."   

Then came Seinfeld and Friends.   The Christian young people of college age were glued to Friends.   These are people who don't need parents or have them --and any parents are usually  ridiculous characters as in most sit coms.  And sure enough, Just like the Friends,  I find today's younger generation to be tolerant of gay marriage, transgendering, alcohol use (nothing new), cohabiting before the wedding (new as a cultural phenom) --even some who were raised to be Christians.  The shows  made light of immorality.  And while they sometimes showed glimpses of negative consequences of immorality--it never turned out THAT bad --with the woman and her kids in poverty.  Consequences are always more laughable than painful in such series.  Of course, we want them to have happy endings.

Dan Quayle wasn't wrong about Murphy Brown --that she made a choice to keep a baby and be a career woman raising her child without a father. As pro-lifers we support women who keep their babies --but would their kids have been better off in so many ways if they had been given up for adoption?    I don't in the least condemn single moms --but we are not speaking truth if we don't do as Santorum did --and tell the truth --that if you wait for marriage before parenting, you and your child have have much less chance of poverty status. 

TV says (watch Lifetime) single women can have jobs and raise their fatherless  kids just fine--and they will eventually meet a rich, single, professional man who will marry them.

I agree with being culturally savvy enough to engage others in conversation --and to point out truths that show up in good drama/good art, but the admired art today is selling us untruths --and we should protest and compete with better art and drama --like Courageous --which, for its alleged faults (maybe too many themes in one story,)  it had the power to move MOST of us in a good direction --in our realization that good Christian fathers are needed to impact our culture --for the sake of the children--for the sake of their ultimate salvation.





"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

THE LAW TEACHES!

THE LAW TEACHES!

The law really does teach a  concept of what is "right" and what is "wrong."   The Ten C's and the Golden Rule teach the believer --along with other commands of Christ --and the majority of what is written in the Bible teaches us.   Granted, government and religion don't agree today about what is right and lawful or not.  Despite our claim of church-state separation,  the law teaches the masses by determining what is legal or lawful and what is not.  The masses equate "legal" with "permissable" and also "right."  Sometimes the law of the land has been  Biblically right --when it outlawed slavery, polygamy, sodomy and abortion.  But this is no longer true today, since it has created new "rights."

In 1973, the Supreme court said state laws against abortion were illegal --that abortion was a woman's constitutional right --and thus "right."   I've heard girls defend abortion by saying, "It's legal!"  The whole case was based on a fraud --Jane Roe (pseudonym) was not pregnant by rape as the women's advocacy groups (NOW) claimed.   She did go on to have the baby because the case wasn't settled until it was too late for her to have the abortion she wanted.   Her daughter and she are both pro-life advocates today! 

One defense given for legalizing abortion  was that so many women died at the hands of back-alley abortionists before 1973.  Is that a true statement?  It is according to this liberal site:   http://socialistworker.org/2005-2/562/562_06_Abortion.shtml:

One 1932 study estimated that illegal abortions or complications from them were the cause of death for 15,000 women each year. Current, more conservative, estimates of the death toll still stand at between 5,000 and 10,000 deaths per year.Some of these deaths were the result of the abortions themselves, but many more were from infection and hemorrhaging afterward. Because of the fear of being punished and socially ostracized, many women--and their doctors--kept their real condition a secret.The right wing has gone on an organized campaign to discredit such statistics, going as far to claim that deaths from illegal abortion were "just" a few dozen a year--and that the anecdotes of items such as coat hangers being inserted into women's bodies to cause an abortion are false. In reality, coat hangers were just one horror among many during the years of illegal abortion.

 So approx. 1.5 million babies killed a year on average  since 1973 vs. 5 to 15,000 alleged deaths of unwed women (double the number for their babies killed with them)  by illegal abortion attempts annually? before legal abortion.   Someone once did a cemetary and death records study and couldn't find 5-15,000 unwed women of child-bearing age per year  who could be presumed to have died by illegal abortions, even factoring in the secrecy.  BTW, CA doesn't report their abortion records and they probably have many.

All I can tell you is that I went to a small town/rural township school --with 40 in my graduating class, we fulfilled the stats of 1 out of 40 unwed teen pregnancies for white girls  --and this one ended in a marriage which did not last --but she was at least not a single mother without any child support or a father to her child.   I never knew anyone who had to go to a home for unwed mothers from which many adoptions were made. I did know a lot of adopted children. I also didn't know anyone who had an illegal abortion --and usually such secrets weren't very secretive.  We all  knew who was rumored to be  "going all the way,"  and it was considered immoral to do so --even by the unchurched.  Sex ed. warned us about STD's and we all had heard of condoms as an attempt to prevent pregnancy and disease.   Those were the options to unwed pregnancy in those days.  Abortion was never  a school debate or paper assignment --and no one I knew thought it was "right" or argued for that view.

   In the 1970's, Planned Parenthood hit our schools with their Rocky Mtn. PP brochure about how "no longer was there a dichotomy between good girls and bad --no longer was there a double standard whereby "all boys did it"  and "good girls didn't."  The brochure told how grandma used to say, "Keep your knees together, " but this was no longer necessary.  Because we have birth control --and abortion.  

Even then, "Good girls didn't" and " immoral, weak-willed girls did"  wasn't the standard  that PP alleged. AFter all, the shot gun wedding was evidence that the males were held to account --though sometimes the parents preferred the girl go have the baby and give it up --seeing no future in the baby's father.   There was more compassion  then PP admits --and eventually  a realization that the father shouldn't get to stay in school and keep playing football while the pregnant girlfriend got expelled.  It was around that time that schools decided to help unwed mothers stay in school, even providing childcare in some cases.   One school nearby was known for its pregnant girls on the Homecoming Court.
 The sexual revolution started after the advent of The Pill, with legal abortion in '73 --and the hippie revolution with its free love emphasis.  There were only a few real hippies in society in the 60's but by the 70's the culture was on its way to the free-love, drug-using culture it became --the sexual revolution.

There were not nearly so many fatherless youth or "broken homes," in our day.    There was no trend to keep one's baby as a single unwed teen mother.  Steadily dating couples were just as tempted then as now to have sex --but casual intercourse among relative strangers and new daters  was very unlikely and uncommon.  And before the pill, in the 50's, everyone was afraid of pregnancy, so much more time was spent on the preliminaries of intimacy --guys didn't expect to go all the way with casual dates, and as much as they pushed for the "foreplay" activities, they typically would stop themselves before they made a baby because society was likely to make them marry the girl.    Many did marry their first loves-- or 2nd or 3rd at least.  Promiscuity was not encouraged as normal, the way it is today.  And divorce was not as easy to get --many would change their minds in the waiting period.


"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

Murphy Browns Get Married!!

Light in the darkness: National Review’s Rich Lowery wrote about marriage and out-of-wedlock births in Time magazine this week. He noticed that most *Murphy Browns –i.e. successful, educated, accomplished, deliberate choice-makers –are, in fact, MARRIED –”a bastion of marital traditionalism. It is left to the poor and the working class to ignore age-old wisdom about how to order our lives and thereby [they] suffer the consequences.”
According to his article, ONLY 8 per cent of women with college degrees are unwed mothers –compared to 70% of high school drop-outs, 51% of high school grads, and 34% for those with some college. I remember when it was 1 out of 40 white girls who had unwed pregnancies –and 2 out of 5 black girls. Now it’s 29 per cent white, 53% latino, and 73 percent blacks –who have out of wedlock births.
Lowry suggested Michelle Obama should use her position to encourage kids to wait for marriage –instead of worrying about their weight.
He said, “The decline of marriage is our most ignored national crisis. As it continues to slide away, our country will become less just –and less mobile. (I assume he meant “upwardly mobile?”)
I can’t think the courts promotion of gay marriage as a right is going to help at all. More and more men are contemplating hedonism with each other instead of making families with women for whom they are designed. Homosexuality is the gift that keeps on giving! from one generation to another and not through parents as much as through gays themselves.
* Murphy Brown was a tv sitcom character 20 years ago who decided to bear a child, accidentally conceived out of wedlock. She figured she could raise it herself when she should have considered adoption. Vice President Dan Quayle was ridiculed (later vindicated) for being so out of touch and old-fashioned about women's rights to bear AND RAISE children, married or not, that he criticized Murphy Brown. He spoke of the importance of fathers to children. Culture war in politics is nothing new. Unfortunately we are at the tipping point where more people are immoral than moral --and want policies to support the immoral.
"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

TIME MAG ON RICK SANTORUM'S INCONVENIENT TRUTHS

I was delighted to see a whole page in Time this week given to Rick Santorum's Inconvenient Truths --written by, of all people, Joe Klein (author of Primary Colors, a bio-novel about a couple like the Clintons.) Joe commended Santorum for his "sometimes eloquent," and "vigorous" defense on his controversial personal views. Rather than fumbling around to say "what I really meant was....", Santorum defends himself quite well when given the opportunity to speak.

I don't think Santorum opposes birth control in insurance or government programs --but he doesn't believe in it himself, as a devout Catholic --and he doesn't think Catholic institutions or their insurance should be forced by the state to provide it. He believes also in the right of conscience for individuals. (For sure, abortion is part of Obama's "women's health care" on the slippery slope. Obama twice voted for partial-birth/3rd trimester abortions which are always medically unnecesssary.)

Klein tells about Santorum having a baby born that survived only a couple of hours and how difficult the whole process was for his wife who nearly lost her life. Then he had the baby with the Trisomy 18 genetic defect that will end her life early.

About this child, Klein said he was "haunted by the smiling photos I've seen of Isabella with her father and mother, brothers and sisters. She has been granted three years of unconditional love and the ability to smile and bring joy. Her tenuous survival has given her family a deeper sense of how precious even the frailest of lives are.

Klein says yes, he supposes we should get to make our own choices about handicapped kids through pre-birth testing which Santorum religiously believes causes many abortions of Downs' Syndrome and other imperfect infants, and then Klein writes, "but I also worry that we've become too averse to personal inconvenience as a society --that we're less rigorous parents than we should be, that we've farmed out our responsibilities, especially for the disabled, to the state --and I'm grateful to Santorum for forcing on me the discomfort of having to think about the moral implications of his daughter's smile."

We need to realize a politician can hold beliefs which he doesn't desire to impose on everyone else. This is not an inconsistancy --it's a realization that not all our beliefs need to be public policy. But there are some religious beliefs we hold about culture which have very pragmatic implications for the future. Which should be encoded into law. We have more abortion because it's legal. We shall have more homosexuality, because we are trying to make it equal to heterosexuality as a lifestyle. We are not going to like the culture we get.

Watch for my review of another new Time magazine article I liked by the editor of National Review. On marriage before babies --by Rich Lowry.

_____________

I personally am not politically or religiously opposed to birth control, vasectomies and tubal ligations for those who have made several babies already, or who have health problems --though I wonder if there is any correlation to infertility these days with The Pill. But I understand a religion that thinks we should use natural family planning and otherwise let God give us all the babies he can. I understand their view that our sexuality is for procreation as well as one-flesh intimacy between man and wife. I understand their concerns for the Sovereignty of God.

These are areas about which we Christians agree to disagree. Abortion is taking innocent life for no good enough reasons. Abortion legality should ONLY be for life of mother, or maybe as a choice for the poster-child for abortion, the 12 year old rape victim. I know I would not have wanted my 12 year old daughters to have to experience pregnancy and birth from rape. I favor the rape kit at the hospital that does cleanse the womb of the foreign invasion. But those are my only 2 exceptions for "choice" --and they are really very rare.

I do think that manipulating one's fertility is a matter for the right of conscience --one way or another. We are co-laborers with God in all endeavors --maybe even family planning. But I don't think any insurance company or employer or the taxpayers should be required to cover contraception or abortion against their consciences. Most people will have some insurance choice, and can choose to have contraception coverage or not. Companies which provide pregnancy coverage are probably happy to pay for contraception. Catholic institutions are exceptions, and we hear that Catholics manage to use birth control anyway.

Obama's administration once more creates a controversy by defining "women's health" as having no babies. This controversy is designed to make all women feel abused by religion, abused if their insurance company pays for pregnancy but not contraception, and particularly abused by the GOP candidates who defend the Catholic Church. Media predicts the women's vote for Obama.

Not this woman!




"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

Freedom of Worship or Freedom of Religion?

Source of my comments is Mark Steyn's article in National Review this month, titled The Church of Big Government.

President Obama and Hillary have been using the phrase, "Freedom of Worship," and this is suspected to be significantly different than "Freedom of Religion" or "free exercise." Governments don't care how we worship within the four walls of the church or in our homes, particularly, but they care about what we say and do in public --and what we say about homosexuality and abortion in particular --and whether or not we proselytize, evangelize, and try to influence public policy, etc.

Notice how the media jumped on Santorum's 2008 speech about the Devil and his hold on our nation. He was right --but everybody groaned, "O no --he can't get elected with biblical beliefs like that! a literal Satan? Come on!" It was a speech to a Catholic student audience.

Big Brother is the secular god, and he wants to provide everything for everybody --being "my brother's keeper," Obama said. Only thing is, it's not Obama who provides for his brother. In fact it was noted that his brother lives in Kenya, Africa, in a shack on $12 a year with no apparent help from Obama, his real brother, most powerful man in the world--who is comparatively rich.

Steyn notes that the Catholic Church has supported Obama's healthcare plan, failing to realize that "if you agitate for state health care, the state gets to define what health care is." And in Obamacare, the state defines women's healthcare as abortion, pharmaceutical abortion, condoms and birth control. And the Obama's "compromise" states that insurance companies should provide it free since the conscience of Catholic institutions forbids them to do it.

Steyn suggests Obama thinks we are all too stupid to realize that there is nothing that is free. People need to be paid for their labors and products, and the only money the state has comes from tax-payers --not Obama, our Brother's Keeper. The state makes no money; it only spends ours. So Obama would take our money paid to gov't or insurance companies and use it for his idea of women's healthcare--against the consciences of the taxpayers. It's socialistic redistribution of money from have-mores to have-lesses. Which never seems to work. Look at Europe. According to Steyn, both the EU nurseries and churches are empty; their retirees are 50, their students are 30 (living on the gov't) and the Muslims are bursting out of their ghettos gaining all sorts of respect for their consciences (lest they riot as in Afghanistan.)

E.G. England requires booties on sniff- dogs searching for terrorists in Muslim territory, because dogs are offensively unclean to Muslims. We bend over backward to accommodate their religious sensitivities (which is kind of us) but in the U.S., we are comparatively mean to Christians, fining bakers and photographers around $20,000 for refusing to do gay weddings.

Obama admires Europe's secular, socialist government which Steyn says EU leaders happily refer to as a "post-Christian Europe" --or "future post-Christian Europe." But look what's happening there (besides their financial problems) : a man in England named David Booker worked for a church homeless shelter and said to a colleague in private conversation that he didn't believe church vicars should be allowed to marry their gay partners. The colleague didn't object to his comment, but told on him and he was suspended and the hostel announced that "action has been taken to safeguard both residents and staff" from the dangerous, insulting idea that vicars (pastors) should not have gay partners.

In Canada, Hugh Owens took out an ad in a Canadian newspaper and they were fined $9000 by the government. That case has worked up to Canada's Supreme Court this year. Meanwhile, no newspaper will ever do what this one allowed Owens to do. He posted the scripture references (not the scriptures) to the verses against same-sex relations.

In 2003, the Vatican issued a ruminative document on homosexual unions. The Irish Council for Civil Liberties warned Catholic bishops that "distributing the statement could lead to prosecution under the 1989 incitement to hatred Act, and 6 months in the slammer."

Steyn mentioned the minister Ake Green who preached against homosexuality in Sweden and was convicted of "hate crimes" because, in 2002, Sweden criminalized criticism of homosexuality.

As Steyn says, "The state is willing to intrude on core rights--rights to property, rights of association, and even rights to private conversation."

He quotes Henri de Lubac in 1944 who said concerning WWII and its causes: "It is not true, as is sometimes said, that man cannot organize the world without God. What is true, is that, without God he can only organize it against man." Steyn notes that atheistic humanism became INhumanism in the hands of the Nazis and Communism. What we have in Europe today is "dehumanism" in which a culture is amusing itself to death, he says.

And so it is today that, more and more, the state in the US bullies the churches, the conscientious objectors, the evangelists, the Bible-preachers and believers who would dare try to influence culture and thus the state along the Biblical definitions of morality and life. Even conservative Bible-believers are content to fiddle while Rome burns, buying the church/state separation ideology that squeezes our cultural foundations behind the walls of the church.


"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

You Go, Rick! He Didn't Say Women were Emotional!

Santorum's looking better every day.

Watch what even Fox news did to him on what he said about women in front lines --he never said women were too emotional but even Fox headlined it that way. He said that with women in combat, there can be emotions that would interfere with The Mission at hand. He later said he really was thinking more about men's desire to protect women --and their attraction to them--the men's emotions. Same reason gays don't belong in the military either: attraction of polar opposites. Same reason there are always shipboard romances and pregnancies when women are on board.

Sexual attraction interferes with military missions. I'm not saying women shouldn't serve, but they should never be bunked next to the men in a submarine. There is a place for regarding sexual differences (and orientation differences) in various jobs and situations --without being unfair to women.

Watch the late night comedians --always after the republicans.




"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

Pres. Obama & The Catholic Church --Women's Health Care???

I am astounded by our president's boldness in dictating new regulations, spending moneys we haven't got, bossing around the churches, insurance companies and banks! All in one week!

He meets with Catholic hierarchy, assures them they won't have to violate their consciences in his healthcare program, turns right around and caters to his ardent left-wing, extremist, feminist base by announcing that religious institutions will have to provide for their employees birth control/abortifacients --not abortion per se --but the chemicals that prevent pregnancy by abortion --and pay huge fines for non-compliance. One commentator noted that it would cost Notre Dame U. 10 million dollars for non-compliance.

There was such an outcry (in conservative media outlets) that he held another press conference and said the insurance companies, nor religious institutions, would have to provide these things --free --to the Catholic institution employee. Again, against the conscience of the employer/the church. As though the insurance company won't raise rates or get it back some way. As though the employee and church employer weren't paying for the insurance. Does he think we're stupid --or is he --that he doesn't know that all his give-away money comes from US and indebts our grandchildren?

Seems he takes on way more authority than he should --even failing to have his justice dep't. defend DOMA, the 1996 federal law in defense of marriage. Since he doesn't agree with the law (he has said both that he does believe marriage is between a man and a woman and that he thinks gays should have "equal rights" --code word for marriage.)

Who is the president to boss around churches and private business? It's all part of his big brother take-over of the health care industry, banking, insurance companies --creating new entitlements and relief programs daily with money we don't have!!!

It's clear he's buying constituents to vote for him with every give-away program, every expansion of entitlements. It's going to take voter fraud, however, and a Democratic turn-out of everyone on the public dole, to get him elected --so irritated are those who know what's going on.














"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

Obama Speaks Out of Both Sides of Mouth

I saw the prayer breakfast in D.C. and heard Obama say great things about faith and prayer.

Then we get this in email from Tony Perkins of Family Research Council:

It's happened again.

In a move that's reflective of the Obama Administration's continuing track-record of hostility toward Christianity, Lt. Gen. William Boykin (USA, Ret.), was recently pressured to withdraw from speaking at the United States Military Academy at West Point. General Boykin had been preparing to speak at the West Point Prayer Breakfast about the importance of prayer in a leader's life. The Academy moved Boykin to pull out of the event when a handful of atheist and Muslim cadets complained about Boykin's beliefs. The message to this elite, three-star warrior was obvious: You and your faith aren't welcome.

General Boykin is an American hero. There are few who would be more qualified to speak at a West Point prayer event. A former Delta Force leader who has faced danger for his country on missions in places like Iran, Somalia, and Grenada, General Boykin is also a man of deep Christian conviction. It is his outspoken faith that has made him a target of groups like the Council on American Islamic Relations, who lodged a complaint with West Point, which led to Boykin not speaking at the event.

This isn't the first time that an outspoken Christian has been booted from military events. Just over a year ago, I was disinvited from an event at Andrews Air Force base because of my biblical views. Before that, evangelist Franklin Graham's invitation to a Pentagon prayer service was rescinded because he too spoke the truth about his faith. These high-profile snubbings of religious expression are only the tip of the iceberg. The Obama Administration is advancing an environment of religious disarmament among the military -- and it must be stopped quickly for the sake of our soldiers' spiritual lives.

You can help the brave men and women of our military. Please join with me in signing our petition that calls on Congress and the Obama Administration to take action to ensure that America's brave warriors have access to free and full expression of their faith.

If Obama is not responsible for military actions above, as FRC believes he is, he should intervene.

"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

IS WHITE AMERICA COMING APART? Read Charles Murray's New Book

Ron Haskins wrote a review titled The Virtue Deficit for Natl Review. Feb. 6, 2012. He was reviewing the book Coming Apart --by Charles Murray (author of The Bell Curve.)

Murray says there are 4 “founding virtues: –marriage, industriousness, honesty and religiousness.” And these are dividing America as the lower socio-economic class declines in commitment to these virtues. He says the lower class has doubled since 1960, “changing national life.” He might've added that the entitlement roles increased accordingly.

This is obvious to me –and it started with removing prayer from classrooms causing a hostile gulf between religion & education–and then the hippies parented the white Americans between age 30 and 49 today -whom Murray analyzes in the book.

By 2010, more than 1/3 of marriages of this age group in the lower class (lower by occupation and education) end in divorce compared to 5 % for the upper class.

By 2010 more than 1/4 of white babies are born out of wedlock –but for college grads, the percentage is 5%. For h.s. drop-outs, unwed births are 60 per cent.

Combine unwed births and divorce rates and the result is that 6 or 7 times as many lower-class children as upper, live with single parent. And more go to jail. (don’t know if he’s still talking only about whites here, or not.) The result is a continually widening gulf between upper and lower classes --as more and more children in the lower classes follow their parents' pattern.

Finally, he refers to upper class (elites) as wimps in the fact that they walk the walk –but don’t talk it. i.e. Elites or upper classes don’t stand up for these "founding virtues" in their own traditions that make for success in life — despite all the evidence in support.

I say that’s because the elite leaders need votes and are afraid of offending or seeming judgmental. And also because they don’t BELIEVE in traditional morality even if they live it publically. They are more committed to moral neutrality and values relativity –just as the education elites taught them in all those values clarification classes of 70's-90's: “No one but you can decide what is right for you –blah blah blah.”

Santorum said recently in debate that 98 % of Americans who do these 3 things are not in poverty; only 2 % are. The 3 things : marriage before child-bearing, h.s. graduation, and work. This is consistent with Murray's findings and theory.

He also noted that Obama administration discouraged ed. programs that promote marriage before sex. The Obama administration took offense and defended their refusal to advocate abstinence in sex education HERE. They say they advocate marriage --but is that the same as "waiting for marriage" --as in the abstinence model of sex ed? I doubt it. It's "Latex and Abortion before Marriage." And many aren't listening to that message either, but do interpret it as adults condoning pre-marital sex as inevitable bio-drive.

Religion still has the best chance of producing life-long marriage --whether or not the couple gets the cart before the horse.

"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

What about Newt?

A Leftist Blogger:

It seems to me that the Right was all about saying the affair made Clinton unfit because he lied about it, while we were extremely disappointed in him but didn’t see a sex scandal as a deal breaker, but now the Right willfully ignores what they once denounced (Newt won in SC), while we merely point it out and laugh at you all.

Well, you rightly can mock us if we end up with Newt as our candidate –Nevertheless, in that case, I would vote for him for competence over Obama who I believe is only a speech contest performer and “community organizer.”

I believe Obama has proven that he knows nothing about business and how to get this country moving. He’s failed at that. His policies and proposals are socialistic --how Big Gov't can solve problems with the workers' money --instead of letting the private sector and the market work. Consequently, more and more people depend on gov't to support them and will vote for such socialism. FDR set us up for this with the doomed Social Security System. Now we even have alcoholics and addicts getting 700 a month in SSI --Supplemental Security Income. Even in our protectorates like Puerto Rico. World magazine told about a family that had its 4 members on SSI and wanted to get the four-yr. old pre-schooler on it --so gave her their meds and she died!

I do think Newt is a genuine conservative, very smart and a good communicator –and wouldn’t have trouble besting Obama in debate –but he’s not a warm and fuzzy, likable guy despite his ability to get women –and sad to say, tv charisma is important. I don’t know that Newt can keep his arrogant airs and obnoxiousness in check –especially when he takes offense when we criticize his past –much as we’ve liked his debate performance.

He would be really smart to be humble about past sins and not bristle when they are brought up. We want to hear that he HAS changed –and that spiritual change is what all philanderers need! And that he knows he sinned against past wives. To tell the public it is irrelevant –well, that’s not for him to do. And the GOP should say it was wrong for King David and Bill Clinton and Newt Gingerich –and that we hope that Newt, like David, could sincerely practice the repentance of Psalm 51 in the blog thread below.

Then and only then can Newt be a family values candidate. According to scripture, repentance can make us clean and useful again –qualified to fill the “bully pulpit” of the presidency. Of course, he has appealed to the religious right with his “God in America” book/DVD. He "gets us" on that issue.

We surely need overhaul of family and spiritual values to save American economy. We are SOOOO dependent on the money of workers other than ourselves now, and family breakdown is the reason. High gas prices aren't helping and I do wish the fat cats of that industry would have compassion and less greed. I also think the gov't should develop sources in Alaska, etc.

This is not the time for the Left to make the clamor for gay marriage and abortion the biggest issues --when we, the people, should instead be saving the economy via:

• shoring up families by publically condemning shacking up, abandoning wives and children
• showing the Courageous film
  
• promoting marriage, fidelity, Golden Rule and Grace attitudes to couples
  
• promoting abstinence until marriage to our youth,
  
• chaperoning youth and providing more youth leadership and activities that teach good Biblical morals and promote school achievement –private and church activities like Bush’s “points of light.” Volunteerism with youth is so needed.

(While Obama presents the facade of a good family–any truth to the Rev. Wright’s murdered choir director and Obama rumors?) Barb

"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

Re: Clinton vs. Gingerich

I've been blogging where they are talking about Gingerich and the GOP hypocrisy if they nominate him --considering their stance on Clinton.

The not guilty verdict for Clinton indicated three things: a Democratic majority in the Senate who exonerated their leader 2. Democratic short-sightedness; they could've kept majority with Gore in office possibly if they had made the change then. 3. Democrats' disregard for morality, truth, and law re: perjury and work place ethics.

That God should punish a nation with such atrocious disregard for righteousness at the highest levels is nothing new, judging from the Old Testament. For us, some key events were the prayer ban in public ed, then Roe vs. Wade, 53 million abortions and as many shacked up couples and irresponsible fathers and women and children on the dole-- and now new sinful definition of marriage pending. If He spares us and restores our prosperity and security as a people, it will be because of God's mercy for the praying people, and/or real repentance and commitment to His ideals on the part of leaders and laity--or some plan for the world where He still needs us to be strong --like in protection for Israel.

Here is the attitude we need from the Clintons and Gingeriches and other leaders --as well as charitable generosity from the super-rich toward the poor.

We also really need to get ahold of the hearts of young people before they start bed-hopping --hard to do, given our culture's influences and their parents' examples and the lack of chaperoning as kids get older.

King David's remorseful prayer needs to be ours as a nation, leaders and laity:

Psalm 51: 1Have mercy upon me, O God, according to thy lovingkindness: according unto the multitude of thy tender mercies blot out my transgressions.

2Wash me throughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin.

3For I acknowledge my transgressions: and my sin is ever before me.

4Against thee, thee only, have I sinned, and done this evil in thy sight: that thou mightest be justified when thou speakest, and be clear when thou judgest....

... 9Hide thy face from my sins, and blot out all mine iniquities.

10Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me.

11Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy holy spirit from me.

12Restore unto me the joy of thy salvation; and uphold me with thy free spirit.

13Then will I teach transgressors thy ways; and sinners shall be converted unto thee.

Only then can America continue to be the shining city on the hill --the beacon of liberty --rather than the mud pit of licentiousness (for which the Muslims call us "the Great Satan.") The West West is a temptor with our declining religious faith, our disregard for morality in entertainment, law, leaders, and ethically challenged education philosophy, and in our waffling churches --who don't think the Word of God really is "The very Word of God!" )







"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

Wood County Area 9/11 Remembrance with Elmwood Schools

Yesterday, after our own church service which memorialized the 9/11 event, we attended a wonderful BG-Area /Wood Co. community service --a collaboration of local fire/EMS, law enforcement and Elmwood Schools -- to honor the local first responders and to memorialize and sympathize with all who’ve lost people in the event and its war aftermath. We attended because our daughter, the Elmwood director, planned it with the police/fire departments of her university county.

Both police speakers alluded to the prophet Isaiah, quoting him from the Bible –and one to Christ.

A joke told by the police chief: God made firemen for children to look up to; God made policemen for firemen to look up to.

One of them said, “You might think that we think of family first when charging into a building –but no, our mind is on the task at hand –more like, “O poop –look at all the steps!!” (I think "poop" was the sanitized word for the children present!)

The music was prepared in only 2 weeks of school with a few show choir kids coming in 2 weeks early. Sacred piano pieces were played in prelude by a school administrator followed by the high school girls singing Heavenly Voices –an absolutely beautiful piece of collegiate difficulty with ethereal effect of repeated Alleluias. The National Anthem was well-done by a student duet, a Latino boy and caucasian girl.
Police and fire officials opened and closed with prayer. All the firemen and police in their uniforms recessed in and processed out with a big, talented, Scottish-clad bagpiper leading them –who also did a rendition of Amazing Grace. Highschoolers did a flawless trumpet duet of Taps with echoes at the end.
The 6th grade sang tunefully and stoutly from memory (learned in 2 weeks!) “There’s a Hero on the Way” (available on the internet --see the video used accompanied by the song) --so honoring to all the police and firemen seated in the front rows. It showed rescuers in action and looking battle-weary in various situations typical of their work.
The high school choir did 3 beautiful numbers and got a thunderous standing ovation: Salute to our Heroes –incorporating narration and America, the Beautiful. They sang an arrangment of God Bless America by Irving Berlin (Jewish) –and In Remembrance –by Jeffery Ames –a college-level piece sung in Latin and English with Fr. horn and amazing vocal harmonies.
In Remembrance included The Lord’s Prayer (as taught by Christ.) The director reminded the audience that this prayer was recited by Todd Beamer –on the phone with an operator –from the plane of United Flight 93. (According to this account, other passengers also joined Beamer in reciting “The 23rd Psalm” together before he said the famous “Let’s Roll.”)
There was a Moment of Silence –the tolling of the Bell.

Mayor Bloomberg’s secular idea of a memorial service couldn’t compare to this one.

ACLU and terrorists –too bad for you. Let freedom ring! Barb(Quote)

"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

Where was I on 9/11? A Mattress Methodist

I admit I was still in bed when my grad student daughter came up to turn on the tv in my room–“Mom, you gotta see this –the Trade Center was attacked!” My husband had taken the kids up in the buildings on a previous NYC school trip –probably 8 years earlier. And then we saw the 2nd tower hit and both of them fall to the ground. People jumping out to escape the fumes and flames –preferring a different death –and people running, running, running.... we were stunned –what would some unnamed enemy do next? what other buildings and planes? What more was coming? Who had it in for us?

I was touched by Great Britain’s official service for us afterward –and all prayers, remarks of brotherhood with America –and the great old hymns of English/European Christendom they sang. As with the royal wedding, I thought, “God isn’t dead yet in Europe –in the important times, they acknowledge the Book and the Judeo-Christian God and Christ of their fathers.”

Many Americans also looked to God and church for comfort in the aftermath of 9/11.

"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible