Recent Posts
Conservative, Liberal or Christian?
by Randy Alcorn
Original source: InPlainSite.org
Conservatism seems to be getting more popular in America. In the moral realm that encourages me. In the political realm, I have mixed feelings.
While it was still unpopular conservatism offered many necessary correctives to the liberal status quo. I'm not sure, though, how it will stand up under greater power and popularity. Conservative politics as usual may prove not much better than liberal politics as usual.
When liberalism was popular it became arrogant and presumptuous and sunk to its lowest levels. I fear the same could happen to conservatism. And I fear it not only in society, but in the church.
The largely liberal philosophies that have dominated American media and politics for years have failed us miserably. Some recent elections testify to the fact that America is fed up with the lies and half truths of liberalism. While the media are still much more liberal than the country as a whole, even they have been penetrated. Rush Limbaugh and a host of other conservatives jam the airwaves with their ideology. Millions of Americas, including many Christians, are taking notes and saying "Amen."
Rush Limbaugh
But what about conservatism? Does it have its own dangers? Or is "Conservative" simply a synonym for Christian?
Many people I have talked with and many articles I have read seem to equate a return to conservatism with a return to the Christian faith. "Rush is Right" bumper stickers share space with "Jesus is Lord" bumper stickers, as if both are undeniable truths existing on the same plane.
I get the feeling from excited politically-oriented Christians that voting Republican is equivalent to falling on your knees at a revival meeting and getting your life right with God. It's like if America gets more conservative it's the same as drawing near to God.
The possibility of a Republican controlled House, Senate and White House may have some merits (it's hard to imagine things getting worse in Washington), but it's hardly on the level of the Great Awakening.
Though they are too slippery to allow simple definitions, the words "conservatism" and "liberalism" contain hints as to their essential nature. Conservatives want to conserve for society what is right. Liberals want to liberate society from what is wrong. To this extent, both philosophies are in theory right and biblical. Unfortunately, in their practice both are capable of being thoroughly unbiblical.
Liberals want to change the status quo. That's good when the status quo is wrong. Liberals desired to change from the status quo of racism in the 60's and they were right. Even though I oppose most of what it does today, I thank God for what liberal groups like the ACLU accomplished in the racial arena.
But liberals didn't know where to draw the line. They seemed to want to change everything, as if the notions that society once held (including that abortion and adultery and the homosexual relations are wrong) are restrictive and unhealthy, demanding liberation.
But it is wrong to seek liberation from all norms. It used to be that marriage was much more sacred, divorce was much more rare and abuse was much less common. Children learned how to read, achievement scores were much higher. Life was more sacred, religious values more respected and upheld.
Liberals have done much to "liberate" society from what is right, removing the guard rails that kept Americans on the road. In so doing they have enslaved while claiming to liberate.
Too often politically liberal Christians end up being liberals first and Christians second. They redefine compassion according to current political correctness. They act as if you either have to hate and vilify homosexuals or you have to say their behaviors are right. As if these are the only two alternatives.
They need to read Ephesians 4:15 about "speaking the truth in love." We are not to choose between being loving and being truthful. We are to be both. Jesus loved the woman who committed adultery. He loved her the way she was, but loved her too much to let her stay that way. His love didn't compel him to say "adultery is okay, you don't have to change," but "Go and sin no more."
Conservative Christians, on the other hand, like to conserve and hold on to the existing or past norms. In a society they believe to have been recently ruined by liberalism, they want to go back to the way things used to be, i.e. the old status quo. They want to go back to when America was a Christian nation, when there was prayer in public schools, when abortion and homosexual behavior were illegal and known to be immoral.
Conservatives seem to want everything the way it used to be, like it was when kids weren't bringing guns to school and killing each other in gangs and dying of AIDS and when television wasn't filled with garbage (which many of them watch, despite their complaints).
Well, that all sounds good. But you have to qualify what you're talking about. "The way things used to be" includes women being unable to vote. "The way things used to be" includes slavery. In the post-slavery era it included notoriously racist Jim Crow laws and segregation. And frankly, to their shame, many, even most conservatives wanted to conserve these unjust practices.
Many conservatives today want to go back to the days when prayer was allowed in the schools. But they forget the same schools that allowed in prayer did not allow in black children. To be nostalgic without qualification about times that were racist and demeaning to many Americans is unjust and insensitive. Politically conservative Christians can thus end up being conservatives first and Christians second.
As undiscerning liberalism tries to liberate us from not only the bad but the good, undiscerning Conservatism tries to conserve the bad along with the good. Liberals live under the false notion that change is always good, conservatives under the equally false notion that change is always bad. ("Who do those northern agitators think they are comin' down here and stirrin' up our negroes?")
So when conservatives talk about going back to our godly roots, theologically conservative but socially liberal Christians (both black and white) are understandably skeptical.
"You mean go back to those godly roots where black people were enslaved and beaten and raped and had their families torn apart by plantation owners who were deacons in their conservative churches? Or back to those days of Ozzie and Harriet and Leave it to Beaver, where you wouldn't let black people in your restaurants and theaters and schools, and you wouldn't let us drink out of your water fountains?"
I know conservative evangelicals who are selective in standing for what's right. They may want the schools to be more hospitable to truth and Christianity. But they may not bother intervening on behalf of the unborn. Or they may be active in pro-life work but ignore or minimize the issues of poverty and racism. In the 50's and 60's, while defending the Scriptures, a very good thing, they defended institutional racism, a very bad thing. As some liberals have no discernment as to the fact that some people are poor due to laziness and need to be required to work, likewise some conservatives seem to have no heart for the truly poor, those who are not at fault for their poverty and who given opportunity and training would work hard to escape it.
Some conservatives seem to think that free enterprise (in which I believe) solves everything. They seem to have no ecological concerns, as if a sense of stewardship of the earth God has entrusted to us is restricted only to "environmentalist wackos."
Some conservatives serve the god of patriotism. Their Christian faith is dangerously intertwined with their faith in America. Ours is a great country, as countries go. But countries only go so far. Despite its flaws, America deserves our respect and loyalty. It deserves neither our uncritical endorsement nor our worship.
I know politically liberal evangelicals who are as quick to disregard the rights of unborn people as many conservatives were quick to disregard the rights of black people. To them, pro-life efforts are just another "white middle class right wing agenda."
Some liberals, even professing Christians, equate animals and trees with human beings and defend preborn eagles while advocating wholesale destruction of 1.5 million preborn humans each year.
Liberal solutions to economic problems are stealing (via taxation) from other citizens and indiscriminately passing out the money to the poor, creating a permanent underclass riddled by no sense of personal responsibility and by bitter resentment. Often liberals are more concerned about appearing to be racially sensitive by throwing people's money (others, not their own) at ineffective programs for minorities, including the largely (though not exclusively) debilitating welfare program. As black economist Walter Williams has said, "If I were the Grand Imperial Wizard of the Klu Klux Klan and my goal was to destroy black Americans, I could not have come up with a more effective plan than America's welfare system in our inner cities."
I have in front of me the evangelical but socially liberal magazine The Other Side. It professes to believe the Scriptures. Over the last thirty years The Other Side spoke out against racism and advocated racial reconciliation in America when most conservative Christian magazines had nothing to say, and by their silence perpetuated injustice. Yet in my current issue of The Other Side there's a full page worth of books endorsed by the magazine, which advocate "Christian" homosexual relationships. One book, which I've read and reject as blatantly unbiblical, is described this way: "From an evangelical Protestant perspective, the authors argue for the validity of faithful, permanent, same-sex relationships." In their attempt to be compassionate, the editors of The Other Side sacrifice the revealed truth of the Scriptures.
I get tired of being told I have to choose between conservatism's emphasis on truth and liberalism's emphasis on compassion. Why can't we oppose injustice to minorities and to the unborn? Why can't we embrace biblical stewardship of creation and the primacy of human beings over the rest of creation? Why can't we oppose the greedy destruction of the environment by some businesses and the anti-industry excesses of New Age environmentalism?
Why can't we affirm the biblical right to the ownership of property (along with the command "thou shalt not steal") and emphasize God's call to his people to voluntarily and sacrificially share their wealth with the truly needy?
Why can't we uphold the truth of God's condemnation of sexual immorality, including homosexual practices, and reach out in love and compassion to those imprisoned in this degrading lifestyle, as well as those dying from AIDS?
The answer is, we cannot do all these things if we are first and foremost either liberals or conservatives. We can do all these things only if we are first and foremost followers of Christ. We can do them if and only if we are governed not by temporal political affiliations, but by eternal allegiance to Almighty God. Our governing document must be neither the Humanist Manifesto nor the Contract with America nor even the U.S. Constitution (great a document as it is), but by the authoritative Word of God.
Neither the judicial, legislative nor executive branches of our government is the ultimate solution to America's problems. Isaiah 33:22 tells us the solution--" For the LORD is our judge (judicial), the LORD is our lawgiver (legislative), the LORD is our king (executive), it is he who will save us."
May God preserve us from a liberalism hell-bent on liberating us from what is good. And may He preserve us from a conservatism hell-bent on conserving for us what is bad.
Let's change the bad and preserve the good. In doing so we will sometimes look like conservatives, sometimes liberals. But what we look like to men shouldn't matter. What we look like to God, the Audience of One, should. (He is neither Republican nor Democrat. He rides neither on elephants or donkeys. He is the ultimate independent.)
God doesn't care about conservative and liberal, he cares about what is true and right and just and compassionate and biblical. (He does therefore care about political party beliefs, platforms, moral positions and policies. Before standing behind any party we better be sure these harmonize with his Word. That's part of being a Christian first.)
So, when the status quo is right, let's conserve it. When the status quo is wrong, let's get liberated from it.
Is Jesse Jackson right about some things? Sure. About everything? No way. So if you defend Jesse Jackson, you better qualify your defense. If you attack him you better qualify your attack.
"Rush is right" cries out for clarification. Right about what? Some things? Sure. (Keep this in mind if you're a Rush basher. Better qualify your attack.) Most things? Maybe. All things? No way. So if you defend Rush Limbaugh, you better qualify your defense. After all, Rush is no more God than he is the devil.
I happen to believe that despite its limitations, conservatism is right more often than it is wrong. Still, it is sometimes wrong, it often does not resonate with the compassionate heart of God, and it never saves the soul.
"Rush is Right" is only true sometimes. "Jesus is Lord" is true always. "Rush is Right" requires qualification. "Jesus is Lord" does not.
RELATED ARTICLE:
Glen Beck's Bogus Beliefs (Xanga.com)
THE TIME IS NOW FOR EXODUS FROM GOVERNMENT SCHOOLS
By Debbie O'Hara (June 9, 2004)
All Rights Reserved. Used With Permission.
Article originally posted at InPlainSite.org
Please Note: Each coloured link within the article will lead you to a related topic on a different page of this site. However while the text is part of the original article, the links are not. The author of this article may or may not agree with the views expressed on those pages, or anything else on this site..
***************************** ****************************
Why would Christian parents send their children to government schools? Not realizing the extent of the risks involved to their well being, my children at one time attended these schools. To our shame, it was a non-Christian that asked how we as Christians could send our children to schools that denigrate all that we hold dear. It is tough today for parents to claim ignorance as the slightest research into their local school will show they heavily promote hedonism, socialism, immorality and an anti-family agenda.
Like many families, my husband and I both worked outside the home and in a sense were grateful that our children were taken care of during the day through the schools and as a bonus they were getting a "good education". In fact we felt truly fortunate that our children were in one of the top government schools in the country. We bought into an expensive home thinking we were doing it for our children. Unfortunately it only assured that Mom would have to continue working outside the home in order to make house payments. But we were in a top school district. What more could we ask for?
Busy with daily routines, we didn't realize how the world had changed since we were youngsters. Neither the academic nor the moral climate in the U.S. was anything like it was when we were growing up. (Even our own education wasn't close to the caliber of a century ago. See 8th grade test from 1895. www.goodschools.com/test.htm) We were in for a rude awakening. Our illusions were shattered when our children started hitting their teens and we realized we didn't know them. Old enough now to begin communicating their thoughts and experiences more clearly, we could see that much of their worldview was different from ours. They were looking at the world through a totally different set of lenses. How could this have happened? [Also See Mind Control in Schools]
Unbeknownst to us, our children were taught a belief system foreign to ours, in fact foreign to most U.S. parents. Instead of being educated with the proper tools necessary to become future leaders and citizens in the American system of self-government, they are being brainwashed into a diabolical, socialist system that is both anti-God and anti-American. Since the days of Nimrod and his infamous tower, people have been working hard toward creating an anti-God socialist world government. We have given these enemies of God the perfect opportunity to accomplish their goal through our children. Unwitting parents, along with the church, have allowed this dangerous agenda of a godless world government to come ever closer through our neglect in instructing future generations. We now see why the divine mandate was given to parents, not government, to properly instruct children. We are reaping the results of our sinful neglect. America's children are being used to build a "new world community" without God.
"When an opponent declares, 'I will not come over to your side,' I calmly say, 'Your child belongs to us already
What are you? You will pass on. Your descendants, however, now stand in the new camp. In a short time they will know nothing else but this new community." --Adolph Hitler
"Let me control the textbooks and I will control the state." -- Adolph Hitler
Hitler knew the way to his "new community" was through the children. Every despot throughout history realized that to gain control over their citizens they needed to control the textbooks. They don't care what we "old folks" think as long as they can mold the minds of the young.
On October 30, 2003, while announcing his pleasure at the return of the United States to membership in UNESCO, our global school board, U.S. Secretary of Education, Rod Paige, stated "Our governments have entrusted us with the responsibility of preparing our children to become citizens of the world."
How are educators preparing our children to become world citizens? By deliberately dumbing them down so they will not have the knowledge to be a self-governing people. After 13 years of government school many children graduate basically illiterate. With the billions of dollars we are spending on education, this is not any accident. I acknowledge that most teachers and school administrators want what is best for children and do not themselves understand what's wrong with education. They have been duped like the rest. This dumbed-down curriculum is coming from the top levels of government. For a well documented, clear chronology of events in the restructuring of education, read "The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America" by Charlotte Iserbyt.
Charlotte Iserbyte
Iserbyt served as Senior Policy Advisor in the Office of Education Research and Improvement, U.S. Dept. of Education, during the first Reagan Administration. Her unimpeachable evidence shows that for decades children have been dumbed down intentionally to prepare them for world government. Her extensive documentation comes from the education community's own sources. International, national, regional, state and local plans for the transformation of American society through the education system is carefully detailed. You will see that a dumbed-down global workforce is the goal.
Worse than the dumbing down of academics is the moral side of this equation. Teaching the great lie, evolution, has stripped children of any significance or purpose in life.
Charles Darwin: the father of Evolutionary theology.
As creatures of chance with no higher authority than man, should we be surprised when our kids act like the animals we tell them they are? Should we be surprised in the steady increase in rebellion against authority, unwillingness to work, homosexuality, divorce, pornography, suicide, and lawlessness, just to name a few? Many Christians have fallen for this lie thinking they can square evolution with the Bible, but it is impossible. If God doesn't mean what he says in Genesis, how can we believe anything in Scripture? If any falsity is found, the Bible is a worthless book not worthy of our trust.
A much greater leap of faith is necessary to believe in evolution than in creation, yet evolution is taught as fact in government schools. There is no evidence for life being created from non-life or for the miracle of DNA to come about by itself. While we see variety among "kinds", there is no evidence that one "kind" changes to another "kind". "And God said, 'Let the land produce living creatures according to their kind
" (Genesis 1:24). Kinds are limited by their gene pool. Where could new information come from except by a designer? (For a plethora of lies in the textbooks check out http://www.drdino.com/) Unfortunately the myth of evolution must be perpetuated because a Designer is anathema to the plans for a "new society".
If evolution was even a workable theory, why would known lies be in the textbooks? Because there is NO scientific evidence for upward evolution. Evolution is our state religion and so must be taught as fact. That is why there is no contradictory teaching allowed. Teachers cannot even mention any problems with this theory. Students who question it will be silenced. It can't be admitted that evolution is faith just like creation. In true science someone has to be there to test and observe. Evolutionists talk about millions and billions of years ago. Were they there? We have a Book written by Someone who says He was there. True science has never contradicted Scripture. But to have students believe the Bible does not fit into the "new" plans.
No debate of evolution can take place by students in the classroom because its fatal flaws must remain hidden. We're told our children are taught "critical thinking" but in fact they are getting Soviet-style indoctrination. The teaching of evolution is critical to the "New World Order" crowd because it is the foundation on which our "new world" is being built. The slightest hint of God is directly opposed to the Marxist theology running rampant on school campuses. With God there is an absolute, never- changing morality. Evolution is the foundation of Socialist/Communist ideology where there is nothing outside their code of morality if it is for the good of their cause, which is of course a Socialist/Communist community. When structuring a "new society", stealing, lying, raping, and killing are all moral values when working toward this goal. We have seen the evolutionist morality in action in Communist China, Cuba, Cambodia, Ukraine, etc. We have also seen the results of this morality at work here in America as we become an increasingly violent society. Our children are being brainwashed into an anti-God philosophy where everything is moral in the struggle for getting rid of the "old morality" in order to bring about the "new society".
Karl Marx: the father of The State (Marxism)
Is this the kind of education we desire for our children? Isn't it time Christians take a mass exodus from these government schools? I was thrilled when I heard about a resolution that supporters hope will make it to the floor of the annual meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) scheduled June 13-15. This resolution encourages members of the Convention and officers and members of their associated churches to remove their children from government schools. Churches are called upon to counsel parents regarding their obligation to provide a Christian education for their children.
A resolution co-sponsor stated "the government schools are killing our children morally, spiritually and academically." He calls it "spiritual blindness" that 85 percent of Christians send their children to government schools. The resolution is full of Scriptural references as to why this measure is necessary. (Read the resolution after this article). I encourage those of you who read this resolution to get it into the hands of your Christian friends, pastors, and other religious leaders. This battle does not just belong to the Baptists. Whether this is won or lost at the Baptist Convention, this resolve should be made by Christians everywhere. Please support this resolution by diligent prayer and by sending its message far and wide.
And by all means, get your children out of these hedonistic, socialist training camps called government schools!
© 2004 Debbie O'Hara - All Rights Reserved
InPlainSite.org Note. Sadly the Southern Baptist Convention failed to make history. The Resolution was introduced on the floor on June 16 but failed to pass. Details Below:
***************************** ***************************** ****
SOUTHERN BAPTISTS DECIDE NOT TO MAKE HISTORY
By Samuel Blumenfeld. (July 14, 2004)
Used with permission
The Southern Baptist Convention could have made history at their meeting last June in Indianapolis if they had voted in favor of the Christian Education Resolution submitted by T.C. Pinckney and Bruce Shortt. The purpose of the Resolution was to get Baptists to remove their children from the public schools and either educate them at home or in good Christian schools. It would have required Southern Baptists to create schools of their own in which their children could be educated in the love and admonition of the Lord.
The atheist, anti-Christian public schools would have been dealt a tremendous blow if millions of Christian children were removed from the public schools, causing a virtual revolution in American education. The acceptance of that Resolution would have given Christian education in America a tremendous boost.
The Resolution was introduced on the floor on June 16 but failed to pass. Pinckney and Shortt made an effort to amend another resolution decrying the secularization of American culture. The debate lasted about 15 minutes, and the majority of the 8,500 attendees rejected the Resolution. However, the very fact that the Resolution was submitted and gained a tremendous amount of media publicity is considered something of a partial victory by its sponsors.
Actually, between twenty and thirty percent of the delegates favored the Resolution. But apparently too many Southern Baptist ministers didn't want to rock the public education boat because there are so many teachers and administrators in their congregations, particularly in small towns.
And that is why the humanists and atheists continue to win more and more Christian children over to their side. Too many Baptists are willing to sacrifice their own children on the altar of secular government education rather than take the more difficult stand on principle.
Despite this setback, the movement to separate Christian children from the public schools continues to grow. E. Ray Moore, director of the Exodus Mandate Project, sees the Resolution as just the first attempt to influence the Southern Baptist Convention. The sponsors plan to submit similar resolutions at future conventions until it is finally accepted.
Marshall Fritz, president of the Alliance for the Separation of School & State, recently announced the creation of a new division of his organization, GetTheKidsOut.org. Its purpose is to alert Christian parents "of the staggering loss of faith in children who attend public schools."
According to Fritz, "Studies by George Barna, the Nehemiah Institute, and the Southern Baptist Convention show that 70 to 88 percent of children from Christian families will leave the faith after graduation."
It was the outpouring of media coverage and popular interest in the Resolution that persuaded Fritz that the much-needed national dialogue on the subject has just begun and had to be continued vigorously. His organization plans to produce a study kit for churches informing them of how serious the loss of faith by youth has been in their communities and how to address the problem.
Although the Southern Baptists chose not to make history, history does provide us with some important lessons. Back in 1849, when the Protestants of Massachusetts were debating whether or not to support the secular public-school movement, they decided in favor of support, but with some very strong reservations. They wrote in their Committee Report:
'The benefits of this system, in offering instruction to all, are so many and so great that its religious deficiencies,--especially since they can be otherwise supplied, do not seem to be a sufficient reason for abandoning it, and adopting in place of it, a system of denominational parochial schools
.'
If after a full and faithful experiment, it should at last be seen that fidelity to the religious interests of our children forbids a further patronage of the system, we can unite with the Evangelical Christians in the establishment of private schools, in which more full doctrinal religious instruction may be possible.
No Christian can deny that a "full and faithful experiment" has taken place and has turned out to be a colossal disaster for the "religious interests" of Christian children. As a result, millions of Christian parents are now educating their children at home, creating a vibrant Christian home-school movement. By now the Southern Baptist Convention should have seen the handwriting on the wall. It is time for Christians to acknowledge the failure of the public-school experiment and do what must be done.
© 2004 Samuel Blumenfeld - All Rights Reserved
Websites: www.alpha-phonics.com.
www.howtotutor.com
ALSO SEE:
GetTheKidsOut.org ..Mission: Assist Christians to work within their own denominations to alert parents of the staggering loss of faith and morals in children who attend the officially neutral public schools, and help them find ways to move children into Christian education, whether in campus schools or homeschooling.
AND:
Christian Education Awareness Network (CEANet) The Christian Education Awareness Network (CEANet) is an E-mail list and web site which provide members with articles, essays, and other related sources which demonstrate a need to restore education as a parental/Church ministry.
Hope, Change, and Early Death for Many
By Donna Garner, Education Policy Commentator
Posted May 22, 2012
(from Crossroad.to)
Note from Berit: This is an unpleasant topic! But as parents, we must recognize today's spreading evil in order to warn and prepare our children. To follow God's way, they need to discern and resist the dark forces that are corrupting our nation. These scriptures illustrate the two options:
...they have bent their tongues for lies. They are not valiant for the truth.... They proceed from evil to evil, and they do not know Me,' says the Lord." Jeremiah 9:3
The Lord is my rock and my fortress and my deliverer... I will call upon the Lord, who is worthy to be praised; so shall I be saved from my enemies." Psalm 18:1-3
----------------------------- ----------------------------- ----------------------------- ----------
WARNING: ADULT CONTENT
On one hand, we have the Obama administration (Presidential Executive Order 13583) bullying government agencies to hire more lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered (LGBT) employees by stating,
"In order to cultivate high performing organizations for the 21st century, the federal government must tap into the rich resources of our global community and ensure fairness and justice in the workplace."
However on the other hand, we have a different government agency, the Centers for Disease Control, documenting the disastrous consequences that come to the LGBT community because of their unhealthy sexual practices (excerpts from the CDC posted below).
OBAMAS CHILDHOOD
Why does Obama have such a propensity toward the LGBT community? For one thing, they are part of his lucrative voter base; and he is definitely in campaign mode. However, I believe there is much more behind his obvious support for anything related to LGBT.
Much of Obamas life has been shrouded in secrecy; but some facts are known, many of them found in Obamas autobiography Dreams from my Father and from other sources such as:
1.27.11 - AmericanThinker.com "Stanley Ann Dunham and the Left's Exploitation of Women"
8.22.08 - Telegraph.co.uk "Frank Marshall Davis, alleged Communist, was early influence on Barack Obama"
Obamas mother was Stanley Ann; her father was Stanley Dunham who was a violent drunkard and whose own mother committed suicide.
Stanley Dunham was evidently the one who decided that Frank Marshall Davis (an Afro-American, Communist, pedophile, bisexual) would be Obamas mentor during the most formative years of Obamas life from ages 10 18. (Obama was born in 1961 and lived in Hawaii from 1971-79.)
Obama said in his book that Frank [Davis] was almost like a father to him. Not only was Obama left alone with Davis but Dunham and Davis would booze it up, smoke pot, and tell dirty jokes in Obamas presence.
In 1970 Frank Davis wrote a hardcore pornography book named Sex Rebel: Black in which he described himself as " a voyeur and an exhibitionist who had an interest in group sex, sadomasochism, simulated rape, and bondage.
Frank Davis said he wrote the book based upon his own actual experiences and then added, I have often wished I had two penises to enjoy simultaneously the double but different sensations of oral and genital copulation. One chapter in his book tells about how Davis and his first wife seduced a 13-year old girl named Anne and had bisexual/group sex with her.
What a horrible influence Frank Davis must have been on young Obama; and it is well known that risky behaviors such as alcohol, drugs, and sex (of all types) tend to go together.
Who knows what Obama experienced as a young boy; but looking at his policies and views as implemented during his administration, it is not hard to figure out why he has surrounded himself with LGBT proponents (e.g., Obamas LGBT appointments: Link to The Presidential Appointments Project, led by the Gay & Lesbian Victory Institute
Barrack Hussein Obama
Please read the 12.11.11 article published in World Net Daily-- (wnd.com/2011/12/375601/) "Is What You Do in the Bedroom Private?" -- in which we are told about Obamas latest horrendous policies working in conjunction with Bill and Hillary Clinton to force the LGBT agenda upon every U. S. government agency.
William Jefferson Clinton
Hillary Clinton
Excerpt from the World Net Daily article: Who knew when Reagan was talking about being a shining city on the hill [that] the city would turn out to be Sodom, said Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for Truth (americansfortruth.org), an Illinois organization active in revealing the truth of homosexuality.
After you read the WND article (see link above), then please read the next section that contains very disturbing quotes from the Centers for Disease Control that indicate how unhealthy the LGBT lifestyle is.
I cannot imagine how the Obama administration can justify such statements as, The United States is at its strongest when we embrace all of our talents, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity
The concerted efforts by Obama to advance the LGBT movement are evident throughout the federal government that promised to bring change to America.
The fact is that if our country keeps pushing the LGBT agenda and pressuring more young people to participate in unhealthy LGBT activities, we will become a weaker and more sickly nation [and punishing them if they criticize such unhealthy behavior]. This is indeed the hope and change that Obama has brought to our country. Terrible elections bring terrible consequences.
***************************** ****************************
DISTURBING QUOTES FROM THE CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL
10.23.11 From a CDC Article: (Gay and Bisexual Men's Health) "For Your Health" (January 21, 2011)
"For all men, the leading causes of death are heart disease and cancer. However, among men who have sex with men (MSM), there are higher rates of HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), tobacco and drug use, and depression compared to other men.
"
For gay and bisexual men, HIV, hepatitis, and other STDs are of particular concern. For example, the rate of new HIV diagnoses among MSM is more than 44 times that of other men, while the rate of primary and secondary syphilis among MSM is more than 46 times that of other men.
"Many factors contribute to the higher rates of HIV and STDs among gay and bisexual men compared to the general population of men. These factors include high prevalence of HIV and other STDs among MSM, which increases the risk of disease exposure, and limits access to prevention services. Other factors are complacency about HIV risk, particularly among young gay and bisexual men; difficulty of consistently maintaining safe behaviors with every sexual encounter over the course of a lifetime; and lack of awareness of syphilis symptoms and how it can be transmitted (e.g., oral sex)
"
You may want to get tested more oftenevery three to six monthsif you have multiple or anonymous partners, have sex in conjunction with drug use, use methamphetamine, or have sex partners that participate in these activities
"Use a condom every time you have anal, vaginal, or oral sex. Consistent and correct use of the male latex condom reduces the risk of STD and HIV transmission. It is especially important to always use a condom during anal sex, since anal sex carries a much higher risk of HIV transmission.
***************************** ***********************
Centers for Disease Control -- (8.20.11) from a CDC Article: "HIV Among Transgender People" (August 12, 2011)
"Transgender communities in the United States (US) are among the groups at highest risk for HIV infection."Data collected by local health departments and scientists studying transgender people show high HIV positivity
"
"Data from CDC-funded HIV testing programs show high percentages of newly identified HIV infections among transgender people. In 2009, about 4,100 of 2.6 million HIV testing events were conducted with someone who identified as transgender
"In New York City, from 20052009, there were 206 new diagnoses of HIV infection among transgender people, 95% of which were among transgender women. Approximately 90% of MtF and FtM people newly diagnosed with HIV infection were black or Hispanic.
"
among newly diagnosed people, 50% of transgender women had documentation in their medical records of substance use, commercial sex work, homelessness, incarceration, and/or sexual abuse as compared with 31% of other people who were not transgender.
"Findings from a meta-analysis of 29 published studies showed that 27.7% of transgender women tested positive for HIV infection (4 studies), but when testing was not part of the study, only 11.8% of transgender women self-reported having HIV (18 studies).
In one study, 73% of the transgender women who tested HIV-positive were unaware of their status.
"Studies also indicate that black transgender women are more likely to become newly infected with HIV...
"High levels of HIV risk behaviors have been reported among transgender people. HIV infection among transgender women is associated with having multiple sex partners and unprotected receptive or insertive anal intercourse
"High rates of depression, emotional distress, loneliness, and social isolation have been linked to suicidal thoughts and suicide attempts by transgender people."
***************************** ****************************
Donna Garner
Wgarner1@hot.rr.com
...as for me, I trust in You, O Lord;
I say, You are my God. My times are in Your hand."
Psalm 31:14-15
Most Bible-believing Evangelical Christians who pay attention to current events and have a heart for their persecuted brethren are aware of what is going on in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East.
What I want to focus on is the content found in the latter part of this articlewhich details the growing hostility towards Christianity (and Christians who refuse to give up their religious convictions and principles) in the public square; including the Media, the Government, the State-run Educational System, the Courts, and the Workplace.
[ Click here to read more ]
|
|
|
Add Comments
Read More
Comment by Sean, son of John
on Touched By Dad's Boss
ONE WAY
Feather and Ink
Perhaps one of the few times I have actually chosen the deliberate act of foresight over my foolish voice so forthright.