A Warning To American Christians: You ‘Must Be Made’ To Obey

While actions speak louder than words, words often predict future actions. Secular progressives’ words and actions rarely align. This is because the pseudo-utopian, wholly dystopian perch from which they view the world is so detached from reality that, from a cultural and public policy standpoint, they must disguise their intended actions in flowery and euphemistic language, or face near universal rejection.

When they don’t like the terms, liberals redefine the terms to mean something they do not, never have, and never can mean. Consider, for instance, the once meaningful words “marriage” and “equality.”

Other “progressive” doublespeak includes words like “invest” (meaning socialist redistribution of wealth), “tolerance” (meaning embrace immorality or face total ruin), “diversity” (meaning Christians and conservatives need not apply), “hate” (meaning truth), or “The Affordable Care Act” (meaning unaffordable, unsustainable, and utterly inferior socialized medicine).

Even so, it’s during those rare moments of candor that our cultural Marxist friends’ rhetoric actually aligns with their intended actions. In other words, every so often, and usually by accident, they tell the truth.

Take this recent declaration by President Obama at Georgetown University. He was discussing his contempt for conservative new media in general and Fox News in particular:

“[W]e’re going to have to change how our body politic thinks, which means we’re going to have to change how the media reports on these issues,” he said.

How Kim Jong-un of him. In sum: Goal 1) Control thought by, Goal 2) Controlling the media.

This is an idea older than – and as well preserved as – Vladimir Lenin himself. How Dear Leader intends to reconcile his scheme to “change how the media reports on these issues” with the First Amendment’s Free Press Clause, namely, “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom … of the press,” is abundantly clear.

He doesn’t.

Our emperor-in-chief will force-feed his once-free subjects yet another unconstitutional executive decree – a Net Neutrality sandwich with a side of Fairness Doctrine.

Or take would-be President Hillary Clinton’s comments last month on the “rite” of abortion vs. the right of religious freedom.

Reports LifeNews:

The comment has Hillary Clinton essentially saying that Christians must be forced to change their religious views to accommodate abortions.

“Far too many women are still denied critical access to reproductive health care and safe childbirth. All the laws we’ve passed don’t count for much if they’re not enforced,” Clinton said, using the euphemism for abortion.

“Rights have to exist in practice – not just on paper,” Clinton argued. “Laws have to be backed up with resources and political will. And deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed.”

That’s a lot of “have tos.” See the pattern here? Whether it’s Obama saying government will “have to change how the media reports,” or Hillary saying “deep-seated religious beliefs have to be changed,” such despotic demands should spike the neck hair of every freedom-loving American.

And then there are those left-wing extremists whose designs on despotism require that Christians “must be made” to obey. Homosexual practitioner and New York Times columnist Frank Bruni is one such extremist. In his April 3 column titled, “Bigotry: The Bible and the Lessons of Indiana,” Bruni quotes homosexual militant Mitchell Gold, a prominent anti-Christian activist: “Gold told me that church leaders must be made ‘to take homosexuality off the sin list,’” he writes. “His commandment is worthy – and warranted,” he adds.

Of course, if homosexual behavior, something denounced as both “vile affections” and “an abomination” throughout both the Old and New Testaments, is no longer sexual sin, then there can be no sexual sin whatsoever. To coerce, through the power of the police state, faithful Christians to abandon the millennia-old biblical sexual ethic and embrace the sin of Sodom would likewise require that Christians sign-off on fornication, adultery, incest, and bestiality. Such is the unnatural nature of government-mandated moral relativism.

“But this isn’t free speech, it’s hate speech!” come the mournful cries of the ill-informed and the ill-prepared, desperately afraid to debate the issues on the merits. “Hate speech is excluded from protection,” opines CNN anchor Chris Cuomo in a recent tweet on the topic. “But there is no hate speech exception to the First Amendment,” replies UCLA law professor Eugene Volohk in a Washington Post op-ed. “Hateful ideas (whatever exactly that might mean) are just as protected under the First Amendment as other ideas.”

Of course this matters not to those to whom the First Amendment is meaningless.

Indeed, one man’s “hate speech” is another man’s truth; and as I’ve often said, truth is hate to those who hate truth.

And boy do they hate it.

And so they mean to muzzle it.

The time of which many of us have long warned is no longer on the horizon. The left’s full-on assault against freedom, most especially religious freedom, is at hand. Oddly, or maybe not so oddly, it’s at once the secular left and orthodox Muslims who lead the charge. These strange bedfellows share a common enemy. He is Truth in the person of Jesus Christ. In order to silence Him, they must silence His faithful followers.

Which brings us to this modern age of American lawlessness. We’re fast moving from a soft tyranny to hard tyranny, and “progressive” leaders like those mentioned above are, chillingly enough, emboldened to the degree that they will openly call for it.

Like our brothers and sisters around the world, American Christians must prepare for suffering.

But, like them, we mustn’t despair.

For there are different kinds of suffering.

Suffering through cancer, for instance, can, and often does, lead to death. Without Christ, who is mankind’s only hope, such suffering is hopeless indeed.

Yet when a young mother suffers through child birth, and while she may experience the same level of pain as the cancer sufferer, her crying out elicits an entirely different response–and her pain serves an entirely different purpose. While one type of suffering leads to death, the other leads to life. While one attends sorrow, the other attends joy.

Similarly, there is a kind of suffering, suffering in sin, which leads to spiritual death, and a kind suffering, suffering in grace, which leads to spiritual life. Anti-Christian persecution, be it efforts to force Christians into disobedience to God, attempts to silence them outright or, worse, the torture, enslavement, and even execution of Christ followers – now widespread in both Muslim and Marxist nations across the globe – signifies “the beginning of birth pains” (see Matthew 24:8).

And birth pains lead to new life.

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

How To Battle Those Anti-Christian ‘Stink Bugs’ At Graduation

Graduation season is upon us. Be it middle school, high school, college, or graduate school, now is a time of joy and celebration for millions. From coast to coast, graduates, faculty, family, and friends are gathering, or soon will, to celebrate academic achievement and years of scholastic seed-sowing. It’s a time of reflection and hopeful anticipation as those who have earned the distinction “alumni” prepare to reap hard work’s harvest and traverse the winding path ahead.

I love the graduation ceremony. As a law school educator, I’m re-charged each year by the electric expectation that hangs in the air. It clings, like so much static, to baggy gowns and dangling tassels as young and old laugh, cry, hug, and high-five. For some, the job hunt now begins. For others, it’s on to the next level of learning.

Graduation time is also a time for thankfulness. With plenty to go round, grateful grads bathe in appreciation, and deservedly so, parents, family, faculty, and staff for the sacrifices of time, energy, and financial resources so that they might reach this important milestone.

Still, for many, there is one person above all to thank. He is Christ Jesus, God incarnate and Savior of the world. As it was with me, without Him, they would not have made it.

And so thank Him they do.

Yet as surely as the stink bug infests Virginia in May, spring brings with it a swarm of secularist bullies in the public schools. At once agitated and aided by left-wing extremist groups like the ACLU, Freedom From Religion Foundation, Americans United, and People for the American Way, these anti-Christian segregationists seek to remove God from graduation altogether and intimidate His faithful into silence.

But try as they may, and succeed briefly they oft do, this annual campaign of religious cleansing is frequently stopped dead in its tracks when Liberty Counsel, one of the nation’s fastest-growing civil rights law firms, shows up with a colossal can of constitutional RAID. This band of Christ-serving attorneys works day and night to ensure that prayer and religious viewpoints are not suppressed during public school ceremonies.

To that end, Liberty Counsel is now launching its thirteenth annual “Friend or Foe” Graduation Prayer Campaign. The campaign serves to protect religious viewpoints at graduation and, from a legal standpoint, educate the educators as to what they can and cannot, must and must not do.

In a precedent-setting case against the ACLU that went all the way to the Supreme Court, Adler v. Duval County School Board, Liberty Counsel defended the right of students to pray or give religious messages at graduation. The case established the legal principle that public schools are free to adopt a policy that permits students or other speakers to present either secular or religious messages, including prayer, at commencement ceremonies.

“Despite what the secularists want you to believe, students do not lose their constitutional right to free speech when they step to the podium at graduation,” observes Mat Staver, founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel. “To allow a variety of viewpoints except religious viewpoints at graduation is religious hostility and unconstitutional. While schools should not force people to pray, neither should schools prohibit them from praying. If they do, Liberty Counsel will act quickly and decisively to defend the students.” (Liberty Counsel has published a free legal memo on graduation prayer. Make sure your school administrators, faculty, and staff get a copy.)

What this means is that in every public school across America – from grammar school through post-graduate – student speakers have an absolute constitutional right to pray and/or share their faith from the podium, whether such sentiments are written in prepared remarks, or uttered ex improviso. This includes leading others who may wish to participate in prayer.

And those who don’t?

Well, don’t.

So, if any administrator attempts to censor a student speaker’s remarks by redacting references to God, Jesus, faith, or religion, or by otherwise prohibiting student-led prayer, then that administrator is in violation of the law. He or she, whether deliberately or otherwise, has trampled the First Amendment.

It happens every year. School officials hostile to religion, most especially the Christian religion, begin spouting the mythological “separation of church and state” talking points spoon-fed them by the aforementioned secularist organizations. This disinformation campaign has had tremendous success over the years, and so we must set the record straight.

That’s what Liberty Counsel is doing.

If you know of any graduate being told not to pray, not to lead his or her fellow public school graduates in prayer, or otherwise being told not to share his or her faith from the podium (assuming that graduate has earned a role as a student speaker), then please call Liberty Counsel at 1-800-671-1776 or email them at Liberty@LC.org to file a report.

Let’s give these anti-Christian stink bugs a mouthful of constitutional bug spray.

And, graduates, congratulations. We’re proud of you.

And so is your Lord.

“Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with all your might …” (Ecclesiastes 9:10).

“Study to show yourself approved unto God, a workman that needs not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15).

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

A Prayer For Marriage

Abba, Father.

Come now, Holy Spirit, and speak through Your humble servant. Let this prayer be Your prayer – truth in love, salt, and light.

And war.

Lord Jesus, ours is a nation in rebellion. Evil is good and good evil. We are as drunkards, teetering at cliff’s edge – haughty, prideful, defiant, and soft.

We plead Your return, but tarry as told. We lament, like Lot, that a once great nation has been given over to a reprobate mind.

Sodom crumbles about as we gaze palmward, distracted and glassy-eyed, at shimmering digital confections.

They pound at our temple doors, demanding to know our heavenly hosts.

Yet naught we do.

Save cower.

Your bride has been unfaithful, Lord Jesus. As it was in the days of Noah, we tempt our Lord God.

We entreat Your mercies, but merit Your wrath.

Yours is a righteous anger, Holy Spirit. It indwells, with You, our very soul.

We share in it.

As it was in the days of Noah, so now we eat, drink, marry, and give unto marriage.

And as it was in the days of Noah, we arrogantly defy You, presuming to give unto marriage, that which cannot be given. “Vile affections.” A sterile, shameful, feculent mockery of Your masterful design for our fruitful multiplication.

What You cast asunder let no man join together.

Lord have mercy on those precious babes, acquired, like so much chattel, as selfish adults set up to play house.

The intentionally fatherless.

The deliberately motherless.

Be their Father where they have none.

You knew of this before time began.

They tear away at that which You designed and defined.

And so we, Your hands and feet, battle the powers and principalities who pull temporal puppets by marionette strings aflame from the pits of hell.

Forgive them, Lord; for they know not what they do. We lift up those enslaved by all sins of the flesh. For those who do not, may they come to know You, be justified, sanctified, and glorified.

Neither are we without blame.

Forgive us, Lord Jesus. We, Your bride, repent of our own part in this national sin. Forgive us for undermining this gift You have given – for succumbing to the devilish devices of divorce, infidelity, and spousal neglect.

For our selfish ambition.

For making unholy, holy matrimony.

Embolden us.

Strengthen us.

Guide and direct us.

Mortify this national sin, oh God.

End it.

Kill it.

This week past, we witnessed a circus – a Court called Supreme debated that which is closed for debate.

At least four of the nine appear poised to defy Your Supreme Authority.

Of the others, many a faithful were buoyed by words spoken.

Soften the hardened hearts of those black-robed autocrats who labor under the enemy’s deception, Father God. Humble them. Bless them. Direct them.

Even still, we gird for battle should Caesar misappropriate that which belongs to You. If this court attempts to do that which cannot be done – if our government defies You, then, with You, it becomes at enmity.

And we, Your faithful, will be marked subversive.

But waiver we shan’t.

Where the contrived “laws” of man are at odds with Your transcendent truths – with Your Law – it is You, oh Lord, to Whom we pledge obedience.

We will not comply with an unjust ruling.

And we will face persecution.

And we will count it all joy.

Because You are sovereign.

And victory is Yours.

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

‘Gay Marriage’ Rooted In Fraud, Child Rape

The very notion of “gay marriage” is an artificial construct. It’s the aberrant byproduct of the sexual revolution, which, itself, was largely instigated by bug doctor turned “sexologist” Alfred Kinsey.

Though married to a woman who took part in his many filmed “scientific” orgies, Kinsey was a promiscuous homosexual and sadomasochist. He managed to completely upend and twist the world’s perception of human sexuality in the 1950s and ’60s with his world famous “Kinsey Reports.”

While his “research” has been universally discredited and exposed as fraudulent, ideologically motivated, and even criminal, it remains, nonetheless, the primary source behind today’s “sexual orientation science.”

For this reason, and many others, the novel notion of “gay marriage” sits atop a house of cards.

On April 28, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on whether to attempt, once and for all, the deconstruction and redefinition of the institution of marriage. The court will then hand down a decision by the end of June. In anticipation of this landmark case, civil rights law firm Liberty Counsel has submitted to the Supreme Court a friend of the court brief that reveals the criminally fraudulent foundation upon which the “marriage equality” Tower of Babel has been raised.

Among other things, the brief features the findings of Dr. Judith Reisman, the foremost expert on Kinsey’s pseudo-scientific cultural activism. Reisman has served as scientific consultant to four U.S. Department of Justice administrations, the U.S. Department of Education, and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). She is a visiting professor of law at Liberty University School of Law and works hand-in-hand with Liberty Counsel.

As the brief reveals, most people are completely unaware that during his tenure at Indiana University, Kinsey facilitated, with stopwatches and ledgers, the systematic sexual abuse of hundreds, if not thousands, of children and infants – all in the name of science.

Kinsey asserted that children are “sexual from birth.” He further concluded, based upon experiments he directed and documented in his infamous Table 34, that adult-child sex is harmless, even beneficial, and described child “orgasm” as “culminating in extreme trembling, collapse, loss of color, and sometimes fainting. …” Many children suffered “excruciating pain,” he observed, “and [would] scream if movement [was] continued.” Some “[would] fight away from the [adult] partner and may make violent attempts to avoid climax, although they derive[d] definite pleasure from the situation.”

It’s little wonder that Dr. Reisman identifies Kinsey as a “sexual psychopath.” These children were as young as 2 months old.

Kinsey’s research also determined that rape doesn’t really hurt women. In his 1953 volume “Sexual Behavior in the Human Female” at page 122, Kinsey wrote: “Among the 4,441 females [reporting rape] on whom we have data, there was only one clear cut case of injury … and very few instances of vaginal bleeding, which however, did not appear to do any appreciable damage.”

Kinsey claimed that, like himself, over 30 percent of men are homosexual (today’s legitimate research has established this figure to actually fall somewhere between 1-3 percent). There can be no doubt that, if he were alive today, Alfred Kinsey would be one of the loudest voices clamoring for the redefinition of marriage.

“For the past 67 years, scholars, lawyers and judges have undertaken fundamental societal transformation by embracing Alfred Kinsey’s statistically and scientifically fraudulent ‘data’ derived from serial child rapists, sex offenders, prisoners, prostitutes, pedophiles and pederasts,” notes the brief. “Now these same change agents, still covering up the fraudulent nature of the Kinsey ‘data,’ want this Court to utilize it to demolish the cornerstone of society, natural marriage.”

“Changing millennia of history must always be approached with trepidation,” the brief continues. “In this case, the change must be rejected outright not only because it is seeking to redefine something which cannot be redefined, but also because the proposed change is grounded in fraudulent ‘research’ based on skewed demographics and the sexual abuse of hundreds of infants and children.”

The brief pleads with the Supreme Court not to “erase millennia of human history and dismantle the granite cornerstone of society in favor of an experimental construct that is barely a decade old.” Instead, Liberty Counsel asserts, “This case presents the Court with the opportunity to affirm and preserve the unique, comprehensive union of a man and a woman, the foundational social institution upon which society was built and the future of the nation depends.”

In the past, the Supreme Court has upheld marriage as a foundational social institution that is necessarily defined as the union of one man and one woman:

  • Marriage is “fundamental to the very existence and survival of the race.” Skinner v. Oklahoma, 316 U.S. 535, 541 (1942).
  • “An institution in the maintenance of which in its purity the public is deeply interested, for it is the foundation of the family and of society, without which there would be neither civilization nor progress.” Maynard v. Hill, 125 U. S. 190 (1888).

“Older than the Constitution and the laws of any nation, marriage is not a creation of any government, but it is an obvious relationship between one man and one woman. Marriage is a natural bond that society or religion can only ‘solemnize,’” said Mat Staver, founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel.

It is a tragic commentary on America’s moral freefall that the highest court in the land would consider, even for an instant, perverting the cornerstone institution of marriage to reflect the psychotic image and anti-social activism of a man who, himself, was a criminal pervert.

Liberty Counsel is calling Christians to unite in fasting and prayer for three days before the Supreme Court hears the case – on April 23, 24, and 25.

At this point, prayer alone may save marriage and keep, at bay, the wrath of a just and Holy God.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

A Message To Liberals: Bake Your Own Darn Cake!

shutterstock.com

Liberals overplay their hand. It’s part of the deficiency. Whether real or perceived, if the pagan left can rationalize a sense of “progress” on some freedom-killing cause du jour, then it’ll push, push, push until it falls flat on its face.

Step aside, America. Give them room.

Religious liberty is non-negotiable. Freedom of conscience is the bedrock of American society. Today’s anti-Christian lynch mob, which angrily imagines that some newfangled “gay right” to not be offended trumps the First Amendment, is not only on the wrong side of the U.S. Constitution; it’s on the wrong side of history.

It’s also on the wrong side of public opinion.

Bloomberg reporter Dave Weigel gets it. That is, he gets it to the extent that any mainstream media-type can get anything. Weigel is a liberal. Despite this affliction, he recently admitted that Religious Freedom Restoration Acts like the one signed into law by Bill Clinton in 1993 and those introduced in Indiana, Arkansas, and dozens of other states are, media propaganda notwithstanding, popular with the American people.

In his April 1 Bloomberg article, headlined “Democrats Turn Against Religious Freedom Laws. Voters Don’t Agree With Them,” Weigel laments that, “in panic about the backlash over the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, Democrats are settling in as the party that opposes religious liberty laws.”

“[I]t’s now expected for Democrats to denounce RFRAs, just as large corporations are denouncing them,” he continues. “In doing so, all of the critics are on the wrong side of public polling. According to a March edition of the Marist poll, 54 percent of Americans agreed with ‘allowing First Amendment religious liberty protection or exemptions for faith-based organizations and individuals even when it conflicts with government laws.’ By a 2-point margin, 47-45, even a plurality of Democratic voters agreed with that.

“The margins were even larger in opposition to laws that proposed ‘penalties or fines for individuals who refuse to provide wedding-related services to same-sex couples even if their refusal is based on their religious beliefs,” adds Weigel. “[A]ccording to Marist, Americans oppose penalties on businesses … by a 65-31 margin. The margin among Democrats: 62-34 against.”

It remains unclear whether Weigel intended to draw a distinction between Americans and Democrats, but the anti-Christian penalties and fines to which he refers – the very ones Americans reject by a 2-to-1 margin – are even now being levied by left-wing “human rights” Star Chambers with increasing frequency and intensity against Christian bakers, florists, innkeepers, caterers, photographers, and a litany of other small-business owners from coast to coast. This, not because these Christian individuals won’t “serve gays” (they will and do without hesitation), but, rather, because they politely decline to spend their time and talent contributing to, and thereby endorsing the message behind, specific events that run counter to biblical principles and otherwise infringe their deeply-held religious convictions.

You know, the First Amendment.

It’s the Constitution, stupid.

Even so, I say keep it up. With each overt instance of anti-Christian bigotry, discrimination, and persecution, public sympathy and support for religious liberty mounts. It also undercuts the withering LGBT-whatchits’ “We’re-all-a-bunch-of-victims!” blather. In fact, there is evidence suggesting that this systematic anti-Christian hostility is souring the public on “gay marriage” altogether.

Still, if there’s one thing the non-fascist majority hates more than freedom trampling, it’s blatant hypocrisy. “The dispute is illustrated in Colorado, where a Christian baker, Jack Phillips, is defending himself in court for declining to bake a cake for a same-sex ceremony,” reports WND.

“And at the same time, Colorado’s Civil Rights Commission ruled that ‘cake artists’ at Azucar Bakery, Gateaux and Le Bakery Sensual were perfectly justified in refusing to bake cakes that ‘violated their conscience.’”

In an apparent (and successful) effort to prove a point, a clever Christian activist sued these pro-”gay” bakers for refusing to create, at his request, Bible-shaped cakes with scriptural references to homosexual sin. What’s good for the Christian goose is evidently not good for the “gay” gander. It’s the textbook double standard. It’s the near-exact scenario in reverse with a wholly opposite outcome. In one case, the government discriminates against the Christian by forcing him, under penalty of law, to violate his right of conscience–while, at the very same time, it allows the “gay” baker to freely exercise his own.

It’s called viewpoint discrimination.

And it’s illegal.

To be clear, I think the commission got it right the second time. Whether “gay” or straight, pagan or Christian, nobody should be forced, against his or her will, to create unique works of art that endorse a message or event that he or she finds repugnant. That sort of thing happens in Communist Russia, not in America.

Yet here we are.

Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Legal Counsel Jeremy Tedesco agrees: “We commend the commission for reaching the right conclusion that these cake artists should not be forced to violate their conscience, but clearly the commission should have done the same for Jack Phillips. The commission found that these three cake artists have the freedom to decline creating unique cake creations because the artists found the requests offensive, but all Americans should be alarmed that the same commission determined that Jack doesn’t have that same freedom. Like the other bakers, Jack happily serves all people but declines to use his artistic talents to create cakes that violate his conscience. The commission’s inconsistent rulings mean that the owners of these three cake shops may run them according to their beliefs, while Jack cannot. He risks losing his life-long business altogether if he continues to run it consistent with his faith. Such blatant religious discrimination has no place in our society.”

Furthermore, and lest we forget, it was the same Christianity secularists now seek to silence that largely led, some time ago, to the abolition of both slavery and indentured servitude.

Why the comeback?

Whereas no “gay” baker in America should be made to slave away for another human being in creation of a product or service that he finds repugnant, neither should a Christian baker be forced to labor in kind.

In short: Bake your own darn cake.

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom