Homosexual Hijackers: The Hypersexualization of Cultural Hostages

When the celebration of a godly Catholic Saint becomes a flashpoint for the homosexual agenda, it’s just another sure sign that things have really spiraled out of control in America. How is it that the St. Patrick’s Day parades in Boston and New York have become the latest pawn in the homosexual hijacking of this country?

In the current cultural clash between morality and decadence, apparently nothing is considered sacred or beyond the tainting touch of the “gay lobby.”

As the militant homosexual activists aggressively sweep through our society in their hostage-taking enterprise, they trample on religious rights — and numerous other freedoms — leaving only debauchery in their wake. Through their shameless “gay” gangland style thuggery, they defile and hypersexualize everything that they come into contact with. And the “Big Beer” brouhaha is just their latest attempt to distort a holiday observance, which is supposed to be about commemorating a heroic, holy man, into more perversity on parade. The homosexual wrecking ball has “come out” in full vengeance mode with corporate sponsors, professional sports organizations, elected officials, mainstream media outlets, Hollywood celebrities, and universities all drooling and panting to be the first to ride the “gay” bandwagon on its path to perdition.  

Is it any wonder that the Catholic Church doesn’t want to sully their Saint with the raunchy displays that are typically seen in the annual “gay pride” parades held across America? Why would the organizers want to see homosexuals prancing around in drag, genitalia-revealing clothing, or nearly naked?

And what’s the likelihood that “gay pride” organizers would ever allow Christians to march in their parades and pass out biblical literature about the sinfulness of homosexuality? Or what’s the chance that they would welcome groups such as NOM (National Organization for Marriage), NARTH (National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality) or JONAH (Jews Offering New Alternatives to Homosexuality) to march right alongside the transvestites? Or what about an ex-gay marching band or Mark Regnerus as the grand marshal? Not on your life! The simple fact is that homosexual events are not “open” to everyone. Certain individuals and organizations, that don’t conform to their ideology, are absolutely barred from participating in their parades. Of course, they wouldn’t want any religious or moral principles “raining on their parade.” Homosexual extremists march along a one-way street when it comes to so-called “tolerance.”

At “gay pride” events and parades in places such as San Francisco, Atlanta, Charlotte, and New Orleans, it is not uncommon to see drag queens, phalluses, public nudity, actual and simulated sex acts, offensive signs/music, pornographic images, NAMBLA (pedophilia) representatives, S&M paraphernalia, and public spankings to raise money for AIDS efforts. So, why would the Catholic Church – and any morally sane individual – want to associate St. Patrick with those kinds of debauched displays?

In some places, the homosexual hijackers’ reign of terror is basically complete. For instance, in San Francisco, public decency ordinances are consistently and systematically overlooked during their homosexual, perversity-promoting events. Nudity and public sex acts are the norm during the annual Folsom Street Fair and other “gay pride” parades and festivals held in the city. Police officers, on foot and bicycle, congregate nearby and observe, making no attempt to enforce the law for fear of being labeled homophobic or worse.

And where is the mainstream media while all of this crude and vulgar behavior is so blatantly on display? They’re engaged in a homosexual-friendly, collaborative cover-up via a media blackout because they know that these sex-crazed, pornified sin-fests don’t fit the nice, neat little narrative of the happy, “normal gay family” that’s just minding their own business in relative suburban obscurity. Although not all homosexuals are militantly involved in the hostile takeover of the American culture, we can’t ignore the intimidating and morally corrosive efforts of the aggressive “gay” activists.

In advance of the September 15, 2013 “gay pride” parade in Dallas, Texas, the city officials made it clear that they had had enough of this type of outrageous behavior. They pledged to crack down on the lewdness and nudity that had become widespread at their annual gay pride parade. While past marches had featured bare-breasted women and men in tight, wet underwear with visible genitalia, Dallas law enforcement said the city would no longer turn a blind eye to such violations of city and state law. The rules now state: “In accordance with the city of Dallas public nudity ordinance, parade participants must not expose genitalia, buttocks, or female breasts.” Additionally, the new parade restrictions prohibit other vile exhibitions: “In accordance with state of Texas obscenity law, sexual paraphernalia, real or simulated sex acts and genital or phallic representations are prohibited from the parade.” City officials, along with the event’s organizers, said they wanted the pride event to be more “family friendly.”

The reaction, however, from the “gay” community and activists to this policy change was quite eye-opening. It shockingly revealed the true darkness that lurks at the heart of America’s homosexual movement. They expressed great outraged at the newly-implemented common sense changes. On the social media website Twitter, incensed homosexuals vowed to wear  – or not wear – whatever they wanted to the pride parade. Activist Daniel Cates wrote on his Facebook page, “The ‘queer’ is effectively being erased from our Pride celebration in favor of the most polished, heteronormative representation of our community as possible. It should be noted that the rioters at the Stonewall Inn fought to break OUT of the d*mn closet! Our movement was built of sex positivity and our desire to BE WHO WE ARE! I urge you ALL to openly DEFY the Tavern Guild!” (Evidently, the word “restraint” is nowhere to be found in the homosexual dictionary.)

Based on Mr. Cates’ own words, here are a just a few thoughts:

If they “can’t be themselves” without being mostly naked, raunchy, and highly sexualized, doesn’t that contradict the whole “It’s not about sex, it’s about love” mantra? It sounds much more to me like a crotch-centric fixation than anything to do with love. 

If they’re so adamantly against “heteronormative” behavior, then why are homosexual activists also fighting so hard to get “married?” Marriage, after all, is the most heteronormative institution there is! There is obviously no method to their madness.

And homosexuals claim that they want equal treatment under the law, but as soon as they are told that they will be treated like any other citizen who breaks public decency laws, they throw a hissy fit. Apparently, they don’t really want equal treatment; what they demand is special treatment. They think that they are entitled to some sort of “protected class,” above-the-law status that allows them to brazenly break the law with impunity, and sadly, in most places and in many ways, that’s exactly what were witnessing as public officials cower in fear and cave to their every terrorist-like tactic!

Therefore, the “coexist” meme is a falsehood of epic proportions; it’s really “Leftist code” for the legal authorization of the anti-Christian forces – of which the virulent homosexual hijackers have become the worst offenders – to run roughshod over anyone with whom they disagree. In their twisted idea of coexistence, Christians and conservatives must live under the heel of the homofascists.

What the St. Patrick’s Day Parade organizers and every other religious group, cultural edifice or icon of morality need to do is implement a “we don’t negotiate with ‘queer’ terrorists” policy. Or else all will be lost to the homosexual hijackers.

Source:  http://bit.ly/1ozcBWe

Read More

The Danger of Militant Atheism

Read More

Media Bias Against Faith Reporting

Last month 43 Catholic institutions across America joined together to defend the First Amendment and filed a total of 12 lawsuits against the Administration in order to protect the right to freedom of religion on behalf of all Americans.

This is the most significant religious lawsuit in U.S. history and Christian leaders all across America have joined in support of the Catholic institutions. This lawsuit is not a single action by a few “out of touch religious leaders,” as the liberal national media would like to portray it.

In addition to 12 various lawsuits against the mandate with a total of 43 plaintiffs from religious hospitals, colleges and universities, and dioceses, the U.S. Catholic Bishops are preparing for the largest campaign of civil disobedience since the 1960’s during the civil rights movement.

Despite the unprecedented and historic nature of this event, the media have largely ignored it. Bias by omission has been a repetitive theme among the liberal national media and this obvious showing of bias is almost as scary as the Obama administration’s battle against religious freedom.

The print media have buried it in the back pages of the newspapers. The Washington Post, USA Today, and New York Times hardly gave the story coverage, with a few paragraphs in the back of the first section. The TV networks also swept the lawsuit under the rug. NBC and ABC completely omitted the newsworthy suit impacting almost all Americans directly. NBC did find time to air a story on comedian Kristin Wiig leaving the show Saturday Night Live and on the death of Eugene Polley, the inventor of the remote control. CBS shared the news of the lawsuit with their audience for roughly 20 seconds.

If the lawsuit is mentioned in the media at all, it is framed as an issue of a woman’s right to contraception. Despite what the liberal national media may believe, the American people are smart enough to figure out the truth. This is an issue much larger than birth control; it is about the fundamental right of all Americans to religious freedom and all the First Amendment Rights.

The Catholic institutions filed the lawsuit due to new Obamacare regulations that force religious institutions to pay for coverage of anti-abortion drugs, regardless of the employers’ religious and moral objections. The new regulation mandating that all religious employers must provide health care insurance plans that include sterilizations and all Food and Drug Administration-approved contraceptives (including those that can induce abortions) is an attack on the Constitution itself and the constitutional rights of all Americans.

How can the liberal media ignore 12 different lawsuits being filed in federal courts that each charge the Administration with violating the Church’s First Amendment right? The silence is deafening and seems to be deliberate.

The liberal national media continue to show their bias by their lack of coverage of this historical event.

Source

Read More

Student Tebowed at Graduation, Diploma Withheld by Mother

By Daniel Distant

A teen Tebowing during his graduation ceremony Saturday caused his diploma to be withheld by Florida school officials, who didn't want the high school senior's actions to be an "inspiration" for other antics.

Chuck Shriner, 17, of Bishop Verot's Catholic school, was bet $5 by his friends that he wouldn't go on stage and imitate the popular pose of the New York Jets' Christian quarterback. They underestimated him; he Tebowed on stage- dropping to one knee to pray- while parents and students erupted in laughter.

"I just thought it was fun," the teen told Naples News. "I was just doing it to make graduation memorable."

School administrators took the prank more seriously, however, thinking the act could lead to more shenanigans during ceremonies.

"They said what I did would give underclassmen inspiration to do something else, that it might lead to something else," Shriner explained. They then punished the football player to "set an example."

After the incident, Shriner was told that he would be cleaning up the gymnasium where the graduation was held as penance for his actions. In addition, his mother- a mathematics teacher at the school- had pushed for the graduate to have his diploma withheld.

Like us on Facebook

"She's a math teacher there," said the student. "It was all her idea."

Apparently, she suggested the punishment to "teach him a lesson"- seniors were specifically instructed not to deviate from the normal walk across stage, but Shriner did it anyway.

"We were told not to mess around during [graduation]," said the senior.

While his diploma was withheld for a short time, eventually it was released to his mother. She also admitted to the senior what she had done, and how she had influenced school administrators to exacerbate the original penalty.

"She was really mad," said Shriner. "But I think it was worth it."

The senior's mom has at least one reason to be proud: her son is attending the University of Central Florida in the fall to study mechanical engineering. Shriner was similarly proud of his stunt, and posted it on Facebook for all to see.

"Moment in my life I'll never forget, getting my diploma taken away for doing the Tebow on stage in front of (Principal John) Cavell. So worth it," he wrote.

Read More

Evangelical Pastor and Followers Violently Attacked by Hindu Mob

Seems like militant atheists and muslims are not alone in their drive to kill Christians

An Evangelical Pastor and Christian church goers were attacked by a violent Hindu mob, in what critics have identified as religious hate crimes.

According to sources, the Pastor, identified only as Pastor Kiran, was accompanied by a group of evangelical Christians while visiting a fellow church member in Nalgonda district, South East India's Andhra Pradesh state.

According to witnesses, an unidentified group of Hindu fundamentalists became outraged after they spotted Kiran and his group carrying some Christian literature, according to All India Christian Council (AICC).

The mob accused the evangelicals of plotting to conduct forced conversions, suggesting that Kiran and his group were seeking to convert non-Christians to Christianity whether or not the non-Christians were willing.

Although Kiran has vigorously denied the allegations, he and the church members were reportedly severely beaten although sources deny that there were any serious injuries.

It is believed that the pastor was taken to a local police station, by the angry Hindu mob, where law enforcement failed to file any charges against him which critics attribute to Kiran's innocence.

Hindu extremism appears to be on the rise in India, with an increase in attacks against Christian pastors becoming more prevalent.

On Wednesday, Protestant Pastor Pabita Mohan Kota's Kandhamal district home was attacked by what sources confirm was Hindu extremists, according to BosNewsLife.

Kota's wife, whose name is being withheld for security purposes, said that her family was attacked in a religious hate crime.

One of the extremists was, "...in an inebriated state due to consumption of liquor and came shouting towards our house...He pushed my daughters, shouting 'You Christians must not live here. It is not your permanent owned or legal land,'" Kota's wife told BosNewsLife.

Kota, who is an already frail old man, has seen his health worsen since the attack and one missionary described the toll which the attacks have had on the pastor and his family.

"Though damage to the house is not much, the mental torture, tension and fear is much and irreparable," Missionary K J Markose of the Catholic Montfort Missionaries group said.

Markose also said that the pastor is on trial vigorously denying "false claims" that critic argue have stemmed from heightened religious tensions.

Hinduism is the dominant religion in India with over 80 percent of the population identifying themselves as Hindu. Christians are still overwhelming minority, accounting for roughly 2 percent of the population.

The Evangelical Fellowship of India (EFI) are urging Christians to write to the Chief Minister and demand security for Christians and their churches.

Benge Nsenduluka
Christian Post Contributor

Read More

Atheism and Liberal, Missouri

by	Eric Lyons, M.Min.

In the summer of 1880, George H. Walser founded the town of Liberal in southwest Missouri. Named after the Liberal League in Lamar, Missouri (to which the town’s organizer belonged), Walser’s objective was “to found a town without a church, [w]here unbelievers could bring up their children without religious training,” and where Christians were not allowed (Thompson, 1895; Becker, 1895).

“His idea was to build up a town that should exclusively be the home of Infidels...a town that should have neither God, Hell, Church, nor Saloon” (Brand, 1895). Some of the early inhabitants of Liberal even encouraged other infidels to move to their town by publishing an advertisement which boasted that Liberal “is the only town of its size in the United States without a priest, preacher, church, saloon, God, Jesus, hell or devil” (Keller, 1885, p. 5).

Walser and his “freethinking” associates were openly optimistic about their new town. Excitement was in the air, and atheism was at its core. They believed that their godless town of “sober, trustworthy and industrious” individuals would thrive for years on end. But, as one young resident of that town, Bessie Thompson, wrote about Liberal in 1895, “...like all other unworthy causes, it had its day and passed away.” Bessie did not mean that the actual town of Liberal ceased to exist, but that the idea of having a “good, godless” city is a contradiction in terms.

A town built upon “trustworthy” atheistic ideals eventually will reek of the rotten, immoral fruits of infidelity. Such fruits were witnessed and reported firsthand by Clark Braden in 1885.

St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Saturday, May 2, 1885

Braden was an experienced preacher, debater, and author. In his lifetime, he presented more than 3,000 lectures, and held more than 130 regular debates—eighteen of which were with the Mormons (Carpenter, 1909, pp. 324-325).

In 1872, Braden even challenged the renowned agnostic Robert Ingersoll to debate, to which Ingersoll reportedly responded, “I am not such a fool as to debate. He would wear me out” (Haynes, 1915, pp. 481-482). Although Braden was despised by some, his skills in writing and public speaking were widely known and acknowledged.

In February 1885, Clark Braden introduced himself to the townspeople of Liberal (Keller, 1885, p. 5; Moore, 1963, p. 38), and soon thereafter he wrote about what he had seen.

In an article that appeared in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch on May 2, 1885, titled “An Infidel Experiment,” Braden reported the following.

The boast about the sobriety of the town is false. But few of the infidels are total abstainers. Liquor can be obtained at three different places in this town of 300 inhabitants. More drunken infidels can be seen in a year in Liberal than drunken Christians among one hundred times as many church members during the same time.

Swearing is the common form of speech in Liberal, and nearly every inhabitant, old and young, swears habitually. Girls and boys swear on the streets, playground, and at home. Fully half of the females will swear, and a large number swear habitually.... Lack of reverence for parents and of obedience to them is the rule.

There are more grass widows, grass widowers and people living together, who have former companions living, than in any other town of ten times the population.... A good portion of the few books that are read are of the class that decency keeps under lock and key....

These infidels...can spend for dances and shows ten times as much as they spend on their liberalism. These dances are corrupting the youth of the surrounding country with infidelity and immorality. There is no lack of loose women at these dances.

Since Liberal was started there has not been an average of one birth per year of infidel parents. Feticide is universal. The physicians of the place say that a large portion of their practice has been trying to save females from consequences of feticide.

In no town is slander more prevalent, or the charges more vile. If one were to accept what the inhabitants say of each other, he would conclude that there is a hell, including all Liberal, and that its inhabitants are the devils (as quoted in Keller, 1885, p. 5).

According to Braden, “[s]uch are the facts concerning this infidel paradise.... Every one who has visited Liberal, and knows the facts, knows that such is the case” (p. 5).

As one can imagine, Braden’s comments did not sit well with some of the townspeople of Liberal. In fact, a few days after Braden’s observations appeared in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, he was arrested for criminal libel and tried on May 18, 1885. According to Braden, “After the prosecution had presented their evidence, the case was submitted to the jury without any rebutting evidence by the defence (sic), and the jury speedily brought in a verdict of ‘No cause for action’ ” (as quoted in Mouton, n.d., pp. 36-37).

Unfortunately for Braden, however, the controversy was not over. On the following day (May 19, 1885), a civil suit was filed by one of the townsmen—S.C. Thayer, a hotel operator in Liberal. The petition for damages of $25,000 alleged that Clark Braden and the St. Louis Post-Dispatch published an article in which they had made false, malicious, and libelous statements against the National Hotel in Liberal, managed by Mr. Thayer.

He claimed that Braden’s remarks, published in the St. Louise Post-Dispatch on May 2, 1885, “greatly and irreparably injured and ruined” his business (Thayer v. Braden). However, when the prosecution learned that the defense was thoroughly prepared to prove that Liberal was a den of infamy, and that its hotels were little more than houses of prostitution, the suit was dismissed on September 17, 1886 by the plaintiff at his own cost (Thayer v. Braden).

Braden was exonerated in everything he had written. Indeed, the details Braden originally reported about Liberal, Missouri, on May 2, 1885 were found to be completely factual.

It took only a few short years for Liberal’s unattractiveness and inconsistency to be exposed. People cannot exclude God from the equation, and expect to remain a “sober, trustworthy” town. Godlessness equals unruliness, which in turn makes a repugnant, immoral people. The town of Liberal was a failure.

Only five years after its establishment, Braden indicated that “[n]ine-tenths of those now in town would leave if they could sell their property. More property has been lost by locating in the town than has been made in it.... Hundreds have been deceived and injured and ruined financially” (Keller, p. 5). Apparently, “doing business with the devil” did not pay the kind of dividends George Walser (the town’s founder) and the early inhabitants of Liberal desired. It appears that even committed atheists found living in Liberal in the early days intolerable.

Truly, as has been observed in the past, “An infidel surrounded by Christians may spout his infidelity and be able to endure it, but a whole town of atheists is too horrible to contemplate.” It is one thing to espouse a desire to live in a place where there is no God, but it is an entirely different thing for such a place actually to exist. For it to become a reality is more than the atheist can handle.

Adolf Hitler took atheism to its logical conclusion in Nazi Germany, and created a world that even most atheists detested. Although atheists want no part of living according to the standards set out by Jesus and His apostles in the New Testament, the real fruits of evolutionary atheism also are too horrible for them to contemplate.

Although the town of Liberal still exists today (with a population of about 800 people), and although vestiges of its atheistic heritage are readily apparent, it is not the same town it was in 1895.

At present, at least seven religious groups associated with Christianity exist within this city that once banned Christianity and all that it represents. Numerous other churches meet in the surrounding areas.

According to one of the religious leaders in the town, “a survey of Liberal recently indicated that 50% of the people are actively involved with some church” (Abbott, 2003)—a far cry from where Liberal began.

There is no doubt that the moral, legal, and educational systems of Liberal, Missouri, in the twenty-first century are the fruits of biblical teaching, not atheism. When Christianity and all of the ideals that the New Testament teaches are effectively put into action, people will value human life, honor their parents, respect their neighbors, and live within the moral guidelines given by God in the Bible.

A city comprised of faithful Christians would be mostly void of such horrors as sexually transmitted diseases, murder, drunken fathers who beat their wives and children, drunk drivers who turn automobiles into lethal weapons, and heartache caused by such things as divorce, adultery, and covetousness. (Only those who broke God’s commandments intended for man’s benefit would cause undesirable fruit to be reaped.)

On the other hand, when atheism and all of its tenets are taken to their logical conclusion, people will reap some of the same miserable fruit once harvested by the early citizens of Liberal, Missouri (and sadly, some of the same fruit being reaped by many cities in the world today).

Men and women will attempt to cover up sexual sins by aborting babies, children will disrespect their parents, students will “run wild” at home and in school because of the lack of discipline, and “sexual freedom” (which leads to sexually transmitted diseases) will be valued, whereas human life will be devalued.

Such are the fruits of atheism: a society in which everyone does that which is right in his own eyes (Judges 17:6)—a society in which no sensible person wants to live.

Fonte

REFERENCES

Abbott, Phil (2003), Christian Church, Liberal, Missouri, telephone conversation, April 7.

Barnes, Pamela (2003), St. Louis Post-Dispatch, telephone conversation, March 12.

Becker, Hathe (1895), “Liberal,” Liberal Enterprise, December 5,12, [On-line], URL: http://lyndonirwin.com/libhist1.htm.

Brand, Ida (1895), “Liberal,” Liberal Enterprise, December 5,12, [On-line], URL: http://lyndonirwin.com/libhist1.htm.

Carpenter, L.L. (1909), “The President’s Address,” in Centennial Convention Report, ed. W.R. Warren, (Cincinnati, OH: Standard Publishing Company), pp. 317-332. [On-line], URL: http://www.mun.ca/rels/restmov/texts/wwarren/ccr/CCR15B.HTM.

Haynes, Nathaniel S. (1915), History of the Disciples of Christ in Illinois 1819-1914 (Cincinnati, OH: Standard Publishing Company), [On-line], URL: http://www.mun.ca/rels/restmov/texts/nhaynes/hdcib/braden01.htm, 1996.

Keller, Samuel (1885), “An Infidel Experiment,” St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Special Correspondence with Clark Braden, May 2, p. 5.

Moore, J.P. (1963), This Strange Town—Liberal, Missouri (Liberal, MO: The Liberal News).

Mouton, Boyce (no date), George H. Walser and Liberal, Missouri: An Historical Overview.

Thayer, S.C. v. Clark Braden, et. al. Filed on May 19, 1885 in Barton County Missouri. Dismissed September 10, 1886.

Thompson, Bessie (1895), “Liberal,” Liberal Enterprise, December 5,12, [On-line], URL: http://lyndonirwin.com/libhist1.htm.

Read More

Hating Tim Tebow

January 13, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) - I grew up in Denver and am admittedly biased. I’m a Denver Broncos fanatic. In the Mile High City, the Broncos are more than just a football team; they’re an institution.

Everybody loves a comeback. Former Broncos quarterback John Elway — one of the greatest QBs in NFL history — had comebacks in his DNA. Since he retired in 1999 after back-to-back Super Bowl wins, Denver fans have been jonesing for that regular shot of adrenaline Elway provided week in, week out.

Enter Tim Tebow. In the category of, “Holy cow, can he actually do it?” no Broncos QB since Elway has delivered like Tebow has. He feels familiar. This is what Broncos fans expect. We don’t do steady. We prefer up and down, high and low until that improbable rocket launch to victory in the final seconds of the game.

Tebow’s very existence is somehow controversial. He’s a walking pro-life testimonial.

Will Tebow end up an NFL great like John Elway? That remains to be seen. Opinions are all over the place. But what is certain is that Tim Tebow is more than just a sports phenomenon. He’s a cultural phenomenon.

For starters, Tebow’s very existence is somehow controversial. He’s a walking pro-life testimonial. He’s been pulling off comebacks since before he was born. Pam Tebow, Tim’s mother, courageously chose to carry baby Tim to term despite doctors’ recommendations that she abort him.

You may recall that before Tim went pro, the Christian group, Focus on the Family, commissioned an innocuous TV ad that ran during the 2010 Saints-Colts Super Bowl game. It briefly told the story of the Tebows’ pre-natal struggle. The word “abortion” was never even uttered, but a positive portrayal of childbearing was all it took.

And so began the left’s hate affair with Tim Tebow. Radical feminist groups, media-types and liberal pundits alike lost their collective noodle even before the ad ran.

Erin Mattson, vice president of The National Organization for Women (NOW), told ABC News that Tim’s story of survival was “really quite offensive. … This ad is hate masquerading as love!” she barked. Tim wasn’t dismembered alive and scraped in pieces from his mother’s womb, you see.

The New York-based Women’s Media Center launched a failed censorship petition drive to pull the ad, framing it as an “attack on choice.” Get it? Pam Tebow chose alright; she just happened to make the wrong “choice,” and dared to share about it publicly.

But as a Denver Bronco, Tim Tebow’s profile has grown exponentially. So too has the left’s hatred for him.

This is due in large part to his very open Christian faith. After each game, Tim begins by thanking God: “First and foremost, I’d like to thank my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.”

And who hasn’t heard of “Tebowing,” wherein one drops to a knee in prayer?

Then there’s Tim’s favorite Bible verse, John 3:16, which he’s known to wear painted in black swaths under each eye. After the Broncos’ recent electrifying playoff win against the Pittsburgh Steelers in overtime, John 3:16 was reportedly the most popular search term on the Internet.

Remarkably, during the game Tebow passed for precisely 316 yards and averaged 31.6 yards per completed pass. The television viewing audience for the last 15 minutes of the game was 31.6 percent. This only added to the mystique.

So big was the story, in fact, that major news outlets like CNN ran the text of John 3:16 in its entirety: “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.”

The attention that Tebow’s bold Christian faith has drawn to the Gospel message has secular “progressives” and other God-deniers tied in knots.

American Atheists, a New Jersey-based group that promotes religious cleansing from the public sphere, says that Tebow is “full of cr*p.”

“Tebow takes religion and injects it into the mix and divides the fan base,” complained David Silverman, the group’s president.

“[Religion] injects the divisive force into football,” he continued (because, absent religion, football is just a touchy-feely snuggle fest). “Why in the world are we talking about religion when we are talking about football?” he demanded.

Of course, Tim Tebow is merely doing what Jesus asks of his followers: “Whoever acknowledges me before men, I will also acknowledge him before my Father in heaven.” (Matthew 10:32)

The problem is that secular “progressives” don’t want Christ acknowledged before anyone, period; and they endeavor to shut down or mock anybody who tries.

During the Broncos’ regular season loss to the Buffalo Bills, for instance, “progressive” troglodyte and pseudo-intellectual funnyman Bill Maher tweeted about the game, encapsulating the left’s visceral hatred for Tim Tebow in 140 characters or less: “Wow, Jesus just [expletive deleted] #TimTebow bad! And on Xmas Eve! Somewhere in hell Satan is tebowing, saying to Hitler ‘Hey, Buffalo’s killing them.’”

Jesus addressed the Bill Mahers of the world — past, present and future — on more than one occasion. In John 15:18-20, for instance, He reminds His followers: “If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first. If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you.”

Those who belong to the world do indeed hate Tim Tebow. He stands for much of what our postmodern popular culture despises: sexual purity within the bonds of natural marriage, the sanctity of human life, selflessness, personal charity, humility and much, much more.

I mean, Tim Tebow has never even been arrested for drug possession or sexual assault, for crying out loud. We simply can’t allow children this kind of role model.

So, does God care about who wins NFL football games? Probably not. Does he care about those who play, watch and love football? Unquestionably.

Win or lose, no matter what happens with the rest of the Denver Broncos football season, one thing is for sure: people will keep talking about Tim Tebow. And when people are talking about Tim Tebow, they can’t help but talk about the profound faith that drives him both on and off the field.

In the meantime: Go Broncos!

Source

Read More

Pastor is Denied Charter School Applications Because of His Faith

Descriminating against Christians is OK.

Source

---

School officials in Compton, Calif., have denied two applications filed by Pastor Charles Patrick of Sunago Christian Fellowship Church to start a charter school because he is a church leader.

"A Pastor is entitled to as much right under the First Amendment as any individual is. Especially when they're going to be using the funds, in this case, for secular purposes," Robert Tyler of Advocates for Faith & Freedom argued on Patrick’s behalf, according to onenewsnow.com.

"I think that what we're seeing here is a move toward trying to prevent any person of faith from really being involved," Tyler added.

Although Patrick did not apply on any religious grounds and did not plan to teach religion in the school, the Compton Unified School District denied his applications.

Pastor Patrick, who wanted to start the school in Los Angeles, said he simply wanted to create a charter school "in a safe location," according to OneNewsNow.

Frontier Legal Foundation has filed a lawsuit against California in response to the denial of Patrick’s application on the grounds that the State is violating the pastor’s First Amendment rights.

“There is a culture war that’s ongoing that is attempting to remove God from any public arena. It shouldn’t matter that they (Patrick and his church) are a Christian organization if they are using the school for secular purposes,” Tyler told The Christian Post.

“I have not yet communicated with the Lawyers from Frontier, but I will call them to see if they would like to use our services,” Tyler added.

Frontier Legal Foundation’s lawsuit cites Patrick’s protection under the “Establishment Clause,” which protects all citizens against discrimination.

Tyler also told The Christian Post, he is unsure if Patrick was told explicitly that his applications were being denied based on his religion, but it would appear that Patrick’s first amendment rights have been violated.

Kris Coombs
Christian Post Contributor

Read More

Feds' War on Religion

Chuck Norris

Anyone who knows me knows that for my whole life, I've been a huge supporter of our U.S. military personnel, whom I congratulate about their victory in Iraq. But when our president and officials in the U.S. Department of Defense exchange a war abroad for a religious war at home, can't we see that something else is seriously awry in this administration?

It's one thing to watch "merry Christmas" be omitted from signs in your favorite department store but quite another to see Bibles withheld from wounded warriors at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center.

It's true! On Dec. 2, the Family Research Council reported that it had discovered a memo released in September at the esteemed military hospital, in which Navy officials announced that "no religious items (including Bibles, reading material, and/or artifacts) are allowed to be given away or used during a visit."

Thank God for those in the FRC, as well as Rep. Randy Forbes and other members of the Congressional Prayer Caucus, who demanded to meet with officials at Walter Reed and in the Navy about the matter. Just a few days ago, Vice Adm. John Mateczun confessed that the memo had not been properly evaluated and was being rescinded, and Walter Reed posted a public apology on its website.

But imagine if the FRC had not found this memo. Imagine how many others like it aren't found and are circulated around the federal government.

If you think this is an isolated incident, consider the following dozen-plus examples reported in the past six months alone by the FRC and Rep. Forbes' office and a few of my own I found, which document how religious freedom and Christian liberty in particular have been limited, quarantined, omitted or outright obliterated.

--The Air Force Academy apologized for merely announcing Operation Christmas Child --a Christian-based charity and relief program designed to send holiday gifts to impoverished children around the world.

--Yet the Air Force is building an $80,000 Stonehenge-like worship site for "earth-based" religions, including "pagans, Wiccans, druids, witches and followers of Native American faiths."

--The Marine Corps considered tearing down a Camp Pendleton cross meant to honor fallen heroes.

--Air Force officials stripped religious curriculum from a 20-year-old course on "just war theory."

--The Department of Veterans Affairs censored references to God and Jesus during prayers at Houston National Cemetery.

--The Democratic-controlled U.S. Senate passed the $662 billion National Defense Authorization Act of 2012, which included a repeal of Article 125 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which states: "Any person subject to this chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy."

--The Department of Health and Human Services unveiled new health care rules that ignore basic conscience protections for medical workers with faith-based objections to abortion and contraception.

--Officials at HHS denied funding for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops' successful program for sex trafficking victims because of the church's teaching on human life.

--Administration officials refused to intervene in the closing of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom.

--President Barack Obama has lobbied for the passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which would trample on the faith of employers in hiring, firing and promotion decisions.

--The Pentagon released new regulations that force chaplains to perform same-sex "weddings" despite their religious objections.

--Secretary of State Hillary Clinton demonized other countries' religious beliefs as an obstacle to radical homosexual rights.

--Just this past week, the Military Religious Freedom Foundation sent a letter to officials at Travis Air Force Base, demanding the removal or transfer of a Nativity scene and a menorah that are part of a larger holiday display on the base.

What is going on in the U.S. military? Why is it so difficult for the feds to understand the free exercise clause of the First Amendment, which says they "shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"?

And how many of these restrictions of our religious liberties are direct results of President Obama's being in office? And if these occurred in just the past six months, imagine what would happen in another four years if Obama were to be re-elected. Our service members, as well as our devoted military Christian chaplains, deserve better.

Gone are the days when the commander in chief rallied the troops and nation with a religious presidential call as Ronald Reagan and Franklin D. Roosevelt did. FDR declared in his Christmas address to the nation Dec. 24, 1944 (the first Christmas after D-Day):

"Here, at home, we will celebrate this Christmas Day in our traditional American way because of its deep spiritual meaning to us; because the teachings of Christ are fundamental in our lives; and because we want our youngest generation to grow up knowing the significance of this tradition and the story of the coming of the immortal Prince of Peace and Good Will. ...

We pray that with victory will come a new day of peace on earth, in which all the nations of the earth will join together for all time. That is the spirit of Christmas, the holy day. May that spirit live and grow throughout the world in all the years to come."

SOURCE

Read More

ebow Super Bowl Win Could Lead to Mosque Burnings, Gay Bashing and Mass Deportations

(Jammie Wearing Fool)

Hmm, let’s see. None if this happened after 9/11, but what the heck, with Tebow-mania sweeping the nation, who knows how rowdy those Broncos fans could become?

I admit I’ve been tempted to bust some things up when my New York Giants lose tough games, and I was perilously close to calling for mass deportation after that DeSean Jackson fiasco last December. But really, is a man who causes such inspiration capable of unknowingly inciting mass violence?

For all the Tebow analysis from non-football types, this may be the dumbest.

People are always looking for signs of God’s beneficence, and a victory by the Orange Crush over the blue-clad Patriots, from the bluest of blue states, will give fodder to a Christian revivalism that has already turned the Republican presidential race into a pander-thon to social conservatives, rekindling memories of those cultural icons of the ‘80s, the Moral Majority and “Hee Haw.”

The culture wars are alive and well, and, if the current climate in Washington is any indicator, the motors are being revved up for what will undoubtedly be the most cantankerous Presidential campaign ever.

When supposedly well-educated candidates publicly question overwhelming scientific evidence on climate change and evolution and then gain electoral traction by fabricating conspiracies about a war on Christmas, these are not rational times.

Into the middle of it all rides Tebow. Absolutely confident that God is on his side, he comes across as a humbler version of the biblical Joseph, who, in this week’s Torah portion, audaciously lays claim to being the Chosen One, and then goes out and proves it. Tebow’s sanctimonious God-talk has led even pious peers like Kurt Warner to suggest that he cool it. Joseph could have used the same coaching.

If Tebow wins the Super Bowl, against all odds, it will buoy his faithful, and emboldened faithful can do insane things, like burning mosques, bashing gays and indiscriminately banishing immigrants. While America has become more inclusive since Jerry Falwell’s first political forays, a Tebow triumph could set those efforts back considerably.

Little of this insanity, mind you, has to do with Tebow himself. I admire much of what he stands for. His mom’s decision to risk her own life rather than abort her fetus flies against my own – and Judaism’s – values, but neither am I pro-choice in all cases.

His story is so improbable that if he were to win it all, a part of me would be wondering whether there is a Purpose behind it, just as I saw a divine hand in the equally unbelievable Red Sox victory of 2004.

And it makes me wonder whether other Jews, the ones who don’t happen to have advanced degrees in religion and a few decades of rabbinic experience, might be even more seduced by this unfolding drama. Will legions of Southern Baptist missionaries hit the college campuses the very next day, spreading this new gospel of Tim? Already there is a “Jews for Tebow” Facebook page.

No, this wasn’t some deranged satire from a Daily Kos post, but it’s execrable nonetheless. Sad to see it’s authored by a rabbi, who should know better. Such ugliness and bigotry should not be coming from such quarters. Sadly, this jerk seems to be infected with the disease known as liberalism.

Shameful.

Via Ben D.

Thanks to Hot Air for the link.

Read More

Debbie Schlussel can't take it anymore

Deborah is tired of liberal double-standard.

I’m getting sick and tired of the attacks on Tim Tebow from the religiously intolerant. Even though I am not a Christian, as a religious Jew I see the attacks on him as attacks on me and all religious Jews and Christians. Later on that night, I received the e-mail below from the radio host, who invoked his barely-there Judaism, as if that has anything to do with the price of tea in China.

You should note that there are many Jewish fans of Tim Tebow, including Jared Kleinstein, the man who founded and runs Tebowing.com and several rabbis, as detailed in a recent Wall Street Journal article.

But the message on the air was very clear: Islamic terrorists and their enablers–good, VERY GOOD! Devout Christian NFL players who are successful on the field–Just plain TERRIBLE!

Read More

Ofensive

Read More

Street preachers arrested for preaching against sodomy . . IN THE USA!

Cultural marxism getting closer and closer to its goal of criminalizing political viewpoints that don't fit their agenda.

Read More

Navy Chaplain Sues After Being Dismissed for Praying 'In Jesus' Name'

Christian persecution.

---

Former Navy Chaplain Gordon James Klingenschmitt has filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Navy in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, insisting his religious rights were violated when he was dismissed from his position for praying "in Jesus' name."

The chaplain claims in the lawsuit that the federal government violated his rights when his ship'' commanding officer punished him in 2004 by downgrading his evaluation because he quoted "exclusive" Bible verses during an optional Saturday Christian memorial service. In addition, Klingenschmitt is seeking restitution because he was subsequently punished with another downgraded evaluation by his shore commanding officer in 2005 when he wrote to Congress and the president claiming that the Navy violated the Constitution when it forbid public prayers in Jesus' name.

The lawsuit also claims Klingenschmitt was unlawfully punished for wearing his uniform while worshipping in public and praying in Jesus' name outside the White House. The judge enforced the religious policy SECNAVINST 1730.7C, the chaplain claims, which required non-Jesus prayers in public, and although Klingenschmitt had written permission to wear his uniform during any religious service or activity, the judge ruled that he was not engaged in a public worship service, though he was worshipping in public. Congress later rescinded the law, but the chaplain was still dismissed.

"As a chaplain I took a stand for the right to pray in Jesus' name, and was I vindicated by Congress, who restored that right for other chaplains, but it was not grandfathered back to my case," said Klingenschmitt in a statement. "Now I'm filing this lawsuit to establish case-law precedent that will, hopefully, stop the domestic enemies of the Constitution from censoring chaplains prayers, or punishing their sermons or whistleblower speech, ever again in the future."

Klingenschmitt is seeking the reinstatement of his position in the Navy as military chaplain with four years of back pay and lost pension benefits.

Allison Summers
Christian Post Contributor

Read More

The world was not worthy of them

In the time that it takes you to watch this video 2 Christians will have been killed for their belief in Jesus.

Please pray for our brothers and sisters enduring tribulation around the world. Words can neither describe nor do justice to these images.

May God and Christ be glorfied in their sacrifice.

"Some faced jeers and flogging, while still others were chained and put in prison. They were stoned; they were sawed in two; they were put to death by the sword. They went about in sheepskins and goatskins, destitute, persecuted and mistreated. The world was not worthy of them." - Hebrews 11:36-38

Read More

Rhode Island Atheist Student, School Clash Over Prayer Mural Lawsuit

A 16-year-old atheist said Thursday she is confident the law is on her side in her fight over a prayer mural that she wants removed from the auditorium of her high school. Jessica Ahlquist said her side is "very strong" after attorneys for her and the city of Cranston made their case to Senior Judge Ronald R. Lagueux in U.S. District Court in Providence. Ahlquist believes the mural should be taken down.

Ahlquist sued in federal court in April, saying the mural is offensive to non-Christians. Ahlquist has been an atheist since age 10. She is represented by the Rhode Island chapter of the
American Civil Liberties Union.

Attorney Joseph Cavanagh Jr., who is defending the city, says the mural is a historical artifact from the school's early days in the 1960s and serves no religious purpose.

He said the prayer is displayed in a secular, not a religious, setting. "It's not forced upon anyone. It's a historical document as a tradition of the school," Cavanagh said.

The prayer encourages students to strive academically and begins with the words "Our Heavenly Father" and ends with "Amen."

The school committee voted in March to keep the mural on display and fight litigation.

Source

Read More

Anti-Christian school principal crumbles when faced with lawsuit

Source

You've got to confront these types. They'll make their own laws if you let them.

"It’s the same old song, out in California – a Christian child being discouraged from participating in a school talent show because the lyrics he wants to share celebrate Jesus Christ.

The show was held at Superior Street Elementary School in Los Angeles, and scheduled in the evening, outside school hours. No students were required to attend, and no restrictions were placed on the content of whatever songs those participating might elect to perform.

Several days after the January auditions, though, Superior Street Principal Jerilyn Schubert notified the 5th-grader’s mother that her son would not be allowed perform to the song, “We Shine” because of its religious message – a message the principal said she considered to be “offensive” and a violation of the “separation of church and state.”

The boy’s mother pointed out that audiences would understand that the song was her child’s choice, not the school’s … adding that he had personally selected the song and had been practicing it for months. She reminded the principal that no restrictions had been placed on musical content.

The principal, in turn, explained that other students who had selected songs with profane and vulgar lyrics had been told to select different material … the implication being that lyrics celebrating God were somehow equivalent to profanity and vulgarity. Finally, the true problem emerged: “Couldn’t he pick a song that doesn’t say ‘Jesus’ so many times?” the principal asked.

Of course he could – but he shouldn’t have to do so. Which was exactly the point made in a lawsuit filed against the Los Angeles Unified School District on January 28 by the Alliance Defense Fund, along with allied attorney Daniel R. Watkins, and reaffirmed in a request for a temporary restraining order filed on February 2.

After being served with the TRO, district officials suddenly changed their tune, announcing that the student would be allowed to perform to “We Shine” at the February 4 talent show after all.

Source

Read More

California School Drops Prohition Against Christian Song

Source

Christianity is not quite illegal yet, not even in California public schools:

Los Angeles Unified School District officials announced Tuesday that they will no longer prohibit a 5th-grade student from performing to a Christian song at a Feb. 4 elementary school talent show. Alliance Defense Fund attorneys had filed a request for a temporary restraining order earlier in the day against the district, following their filing of a lawsuit against district officials on Friday.

The principal of Superior Street Elementary School had told the student's mother that the song "We Shine" was "offensive," allegedly violated the so-called "separation of church and state," and suggested that her child pick a song that "does not say 'Jesus' so many times."

Offensive can be defined as "targeted for repression by liberals." When an educrat like SSES Principal Jerilyn Schubert blathers piously about the "separation of church and state," she is probably attempting to refer to the First Amendment — which ironically upholds the very freedom of religion she was trying to squash.

Fortunately, the mother didn't take it lying down:

The concerned parent replied to Schubert by explaining that the song represents her child — who personally selected the song and practiced for months — and not the school, and that there were no restrictions on what students could perform in the show. Schubert then asserted that other students performing songs with profane and vulgar lyrics were also told to select different songs, in essence equating religious lyrics with profanity and vulgarity.

In the end the educrats backed down, muttering as they slunk back to their holes that they would let it go this time because talent show attendance isn't mandatory.

Finally a kid has learned something in a public school. When they push you, push back. It works.

Read More

EU Foreign Minister Just Can't Quite Bring Herself to Admit that Christians Were Attacked

Via Ace of Spades

—Gabriel Malor

I bring this up only because it echoes President Obama's statement, wherein he had to make up fictitious Muslim victims because he couldn't just admit that the New Years attacks were against Christians.

As I wrote then, it doesn't fit within the warped worldview of leftists to admit that Christians are being murdered by members of the Religion of Peace^TM.

Talks ended angrily when Italy accused Lady Ashton, the EU's foreign minister, of "excessive" political correctness because she refused to name any specific religious group as a victim of attacks.

Franco Frattini, the Italian foreign minister, demanded an EU response on the persecution of Christians after a New Year suicide bombing at a Coptic church in northern Egypt in which 23 people were killed.

The Egyptian bombing followed attacks in Baghdad and fears, expressed by the Vatican, of persecution leading to a Christian exodus from the Middle East.

Mr Frattini, backed by France, said it pointless to issue statements defending religious tolerance without any references to the specific minority, Christians, that was under attack.

I can hardly believe it; Italy and France are the bulwarks of Western Civilization in the EU, defenders of Christendom? Maybe Western Europe is actually waking up after all.

The EU foreign minister's response:

The EU high representative said she would have to "reflect" further about how to "make sure we recognise individual communities of whatever religion who find themselves being harassed or worse."

"Harassed"? They were blown up while celebrating midnight vigil Mass before a holy day. This dhimmi would simply lay down for the sword.

Posted by Gabriel Malor

Read More

Several Links

1. Catholics Discriminated Against UFO Cult


..............
2. Al-Qaeda in Iraq vows more Christian attacks

..............

3. Judges rule cross at Calif. park unconstitutional

Read More