Obama Declares War
Obama Declares War | Dr. David R. Reagan
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
http://www.lamblion.us/2009/01/obama-declares-war.html
The Obama Administration has wasted no time in declaring war on Evangelical Christians.
Within minutes after the new President took his oath of office, his staff posted his agendas concerning homosexuality and abortion on the White House website.
Sexual Perversion
With regard to sexual perversion, the President's policy goals are spelled out as follows:
1) Defeat all state and federal constitutional efforts to defend the definition of biblical marriage as being a union between one man and one woman.
2) Repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) signed by Bill Clinton. (This is currently the only line of defense keeping all 50 states from being forced to recognize so-called "same-sex marriages" from extremely liberal states like Massachusetts and Connecticut.)
3) Repeal the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy.
4) Pass "hate crimes" legislation granting homosexuals and cross dressers special rights denied to other Americans. (This legislation, depending on how it is drafted, could even attempt to muzzle any criticism of homosexuality as being unbiblical and unnatural perversion.)
5) Pass the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) which would force business owners (religious and otherwise) to abandon traditional values relative to sexual morality under penalty of law.
6) Create intentionally motherless and fatherless homes by expanding "gay adoption." To see it for yourself, go
towww.whitehouse.gov/agenda/civil_rights/ and scroll down the page to "Support for the LGBT Community." (LGBT is an acronym for "Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgendered.")
Abortion
With regard to abortion, The President's agenda is:
1) Opposition to any constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme Court's abortion decision in Roe v Wade.
2) Support of the Prevention First Act which would provide access to contraception and "preventive services to help reduce unintended pregnancies" (a euphemism for abortion).
You will find these proposals on the White House website atwww.whitehouse.gov/agenda/women.
Although it is not mentioned on the website, the President has made it clear that he will support the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA). In fact, he promised Planned Parenthood that signing the FOCA would be "the first thing I'd do as President." FOCA is by far the most radical piece of abortion legislation ever introduced into the Congress.
According to pro-choice advocates:
FOCA would overturn the ban on the barbaric procedure called "partial-birth abortion."
FOCA would invalidate scores of pro-life laws passed by dozens of states.
FOCA would eliminate existing laws against taxpayer-funded abortions.
Consequences to the Nation
This outrageous attack on biblical morals should come as no surprise to anyone. The American voters were warned time and time again during the presidential campaign that Obama would push the most radical homosexual and abortion agenda in American history. But millions voted for charisma and eloquence rather than paying attention to the issues.
I cannot overemphasize how critical a situation we are facing in this country. We are in the midst of a great financial crisis and we have enemies worldwide who desire to destroy us. I want to see President Obama succeed in solving our financial crisis and defending this nation against Islamic terrorism. But he has literally no hope of succeeding as long as he thumbs his nose at God and God's Word.
In addition to pushing homosexuality, same-sex marriage, and abortion, he has also made it clear that he will demand a division of the land of Israel as part of a "two-state solution." These policies are national suicide.
God cannot be mock, nor can He be deceived (Galatians 6:7). He will not sit idly by and allow our nation to turn its back on Him and do what we please. We have been blessed more mightily than any other nation in history, and to those to whom much is given, much is expected (Luke 12:47-4.
read the rest here.
http://www.thetreeofliberty.com/vb/showthread.php?t=45838
Here is something to consider...
Many don't realize this but the United States, up until the mid-nineteenth century, recognized common-law marriages as a valid union between two consenting people. However after the "War for Secession" more and more states began to invalidate this union calling for mandatory government intervention- via licensing. Presently only eleven states, plus the District of Columbia, still recognize our inherent right to determine for ourselves who we can or can't marry. In those states common-law marriages are considered legal and their validity rightfully goes unchallenged, even though government consent through licensing is not present.
Black's Law defines "license" as, "The permission by competent authority to do an act which without such permission [...] would be illegal." To give authority to the government to issue license, would also yields the authority to prohibit. So what is a license? By definition it "confers a privilege". So is it not yours or my own personal right to dictate who we personally can and can't marry? Is that not our own sovereign privilege?
..............................
Here is a bump because this is extremely relevant.
And I don't want to start conflict but here is my view on abortion. Until we have an actual defined scientific statement as to when conscious life begins the Federal government should have no right what-so-ever to dictate unto the states in this issue. The states should be left to vote individually whether they are for or opposed to the act. If your state's majority opinion is to allow, then I would suggest voting with your your feet or becoming a activist which struggles to change your fellow citizens minds. Then once you have acquired enough backing then you could push for another vote to be made.
As I am against abortion I would of course vote against it, but that does not mean I would yield my state's right over to the Federal government in order to see my opinion enforced.
My opinion...
When I was younger I thought abortion was acceptable. As I grew older ( I have 4 children ) I came to think that it was no longer acceptable to me at a personal level. Personally I disagree ( with a few exceptions that some may disagree with ) with abortion BUT I would never presume to make a decision on another person's behalf. I believe it is up to the persons involved. In the end it is between them and God.
"to a person chained in a cave, the shadows on the wall are reality"
to a person chained in a cave, the shadows on the wall are reality
Not going to comment on the abortion thing...
I'm not going to comment on the abortion thing because I'm male, and it doesn't matter to me. That's a woman's issue.
But gay marriage? C'mon.... seriously... who cares? Of all the people who should be tolerant of this, it *should* be libertarians. If your life is yours to live, and there is no such thing as a victimless crime, and the state should be as far away from marriage as possible, then let people marry whoever the hell they want.
Trust me.... Being gay is not a choice. If it were, I'd have gone gay years ago, because females my age are eff'ing dumb. They're fickle and honorless. Dating the same sex would at least give a mutual correspondence in sexual tastes and drives.
One of the worst thing about bible-humpers is that they can't resist telling other people what they can and can't do in their own beds. And when it's a libertarian christian, this attitude of legislating their morality onto others has the additional repugnance of hypocrisy.
I work with lots of gay people. I am friends with them as well (both sexes). They're just people who happen to like people of the same sex. Now pity or revile them, but leave their personal lives the fuck alone.
See.... this is the problem with religion in general: This idea of a static and prescribed moral code for people that aren't comfortable developing their own.
SIERRAHPBT, whoever you're sleeping with these days, don't. I'm sure that the person is terrible sinner and a pervert.
That's sarcasm of course. But it should've pissed you off anyway.
I have no remorse.
My Shelfari page
Do you suppose
man to be the highest form of intelligence. Do we all just come up with a moral code out of thin air for us to follow? Everyone who makes a moral code for themselves is going to make it from the influences in their lives! If I was raised by a mafia family and learned that murder was normal, and that became my code of ethics that I was comfortable with, would that be ok? Religion aside, if you don't get your morals and ethics from a code of a higher power, where do you get it from? A consensus of people you deem to be 'good'?
I get my moral code from....
I get my moral code from biology. There is a book called The Blank Slate by Steven Pinker that lays out the underpinnings of moral behavior in the context of evolutionary psychology. There is also a book (which I haven't yet read) called The Moral Animal that is dedicated to the topic.
There are variations in moral sentiment across individuals. But there are real invariant patterns that cross all time and culture. For example....
Care of offspring.
Social systems that attempt to regulate sex.
The reliable failure of such systems.
Serial monogamy peppered by clandestine affairs.
Preference for kin over strangers.
Revenge.
Altruism.
Guilt.
Codes regarding the application of violence.
The golden rule.
Etc....
All this despite the variations in ideas of "God" and culture.
Taboo is instilled by culture.
The process by which a child learns and observes taboo is rooted in biology.
Human moral sentiment isn't a reflection of God. God is a reflection of Man's moral sentiment as it is instilled by his biology.
So why have God? It's an illusion. Better to confront the problems and evidence directly. Unless you are a sociopath, your conclusions about moral behavior will fall more-or-less into line with the majority of the rest of humanity (again, with variation).
The more aware you are of the forces that give rise to moral sentiment, the less likely you are to unintentionally violate those sentiments.
My Shelfari page
But you have to
ask the question. Do we know all that there is to know about Biology? Is there things that change in biology after a consensus of scientists? If so are we not limiting ourselves to their consensus? Do you consider biology to be a "higher power"?
If God is an illusion, are all of the witnesses of a "God" in scripture just playing an illusion game with us? Are writers of biology books to be more trusted than a group of twelve men who traveled with Jesus, and continued to teach even after his death, of "God" and his commandments?
I am not a believer that religion should be forced on anyone, but I am curios of how you view these questions! And I feel it is interesting to know what others believe, christian, non christian, atheist, whatever!
Obama may be really far to the left on these issues
but the author of this post seems to be really far to the right.
I like Ron Paul for his Libertarian beliefs....
To all those below who dont believe in
a "Supreme Being" or "God" if you will..! When the Constitution was written, Benjamin Franklin is supposed to have said, "we have given you a republic, lets see if you can keep it," or words to that effect. There was in those days, a big distinction made between democracy and repulicanism. This distinction was taught in schools until the early 1900's. Then the influence of John Dewey totally permeated public education. Deweys philosophy was based on the enthronement of democracy. He believed all truth- social and scientific- was to be determined by a consensus. Now Americans are very confused about the whole subject.
In a democracy, the voice of the people is sovereign(all powerful), while in a "Christian" Constitutional Republic, God is sovereign. His sovereignty is expressed mostly through his law.
The colonists were not inclined to accept the constitution, because they were mostly protestant, and the English influence was very strong. They were steeped in the tradition of the Magna Carta and the bill of rights. This philosophy is based on the idea that the government (king) is sovereign and that it (he) grants rights to the people. The Constitution was framed on the assumpion that "God" (supreme being, creator, higher power, or whatever) is sovereign, but he grants sovereignty to the people collectively. Therefore the government only has such rights as the people grant it. That is the opposite of English tradition! According to R.J. Rushdoony, in his book, THIS INDEPENDENT REPUBLIC, a major reason why colonists finally ratified the Constitution was that protestant clergy stumped for it on the grounds that it was based on biblical law, or "Gods' law. However, they had to add a bill of rights to get approval of the colonists. This was done in the form of amendments so that the basic philosophy of the Constitution could be preserved.
There is no universally accepted definition of what constitutes a republic or what differences exist between democracy and republicanism. But among many Christians who honor the Constitution, there is some consensus: (1) the sovereignty of "God" and (2) a limited franchise. These 2 principles are essentially the basic principle of our Republic!
The citizens of the United States have abandoned the idea of "Gods" sovereignty. It is only to the extent that we are governed by the Constitution that we recognize "God's" sovereignty. Sometimes people unconsciously recognize "Gods" sovereignty, because they believe that the Constitution was based on biblical law. If it wasn't based on biblical law, it at the very least was influenced by biblical law. In the early days of our Republic the bible, or at least the influence of the bible, was the last resort used by judges in determining their final decisions. But now we are reduced to a democracy where the people are sovereign in every aspect of their lives. Even our moral values are determined by consensus.
We have to remember that if "God" doesn't rule, then men rule. If "Gods' law is abandoned, the laws of men will be embraced.
The 2nd principle mentioned above is "limited franchise". That should not mean a limit as to who can vote, but it must limit what people can vote on!
To preserve a republic, people cannot be allowed to vote to repeal sovereign law. And they must not be allowed to repeal physical, chemical, economic, or social laws. Think of how many laws our Fedgov has passed to repeal the laws of economics! All these laws have done is complicate commerce, and increase the poverty they are trying to stop!
The only legitimate use of the franchise is to vote on wether candidate A or B should hold whichever office they are running for. The main standard we can judge them by is how well we perceive they will defend, support and execute the Constitutional law.
If we don't believe in some type of "Supreme Creator" or "Sovereign Being" then we allow Totalitarian beliefs to enter our thought. Totalitarians believe in democracy and that nothing is sovereign and all things can be changed by the voice of the majority.
Would we rather subject ourselves to a "God" who is unchangable, whose influence, like it or not is in the Constitution, or to the whims of the Totalitarians who would have us vote ourselves into bondage. If you don't believe in "God", you must believe in something. I guess you could say the Constitution is your "God." But history proves that "God" had influence in the Constitution which you hold so dear. If you look at it this way, maybe it isn't so bad to subject yourself to a "God." Many people as imperfect beings have done things wrong and even done things wrong in the name of "God", but that doesn't make it "Gods" fault, or his will, or idea! God gave all of us our free agency to choose right or wrong, and he will not stop us in this life, but when the day comes, we will all be judged according to the good or evil we performed on this earth. That is what I choose to believe, based on research and prayer. May we all find the peace and freedom we are looking for. Sorry for the rant but I just wanted to give my 2 cents!
LB2
I didn't see that as a rant. It was a well said,well informed, point of thought. Makes a lot of sense and should be seriously pondered. Nice!
Thanks.
I hope it made sense. Everyone doesn't have to believe this way, but I feel it is worth looking at.
biblical marriage - one man and one woman
does the bible define marriage somewhere?
I pledge, do you?
yes...
Genesis 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.
Matthew 19:4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
Mat 19:5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?
Mat 19:6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
Leviticus 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.
Lev 18:23 Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: it is confusion.
Lev 18:24 Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you:
Lev 18:25 And the land is defiled: therefore I do visit the iniquity thereof upon it, and the land itself vomiteth out her inhabitants.
2Chronicles 7:14 If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.
polygamy
is there polygamy in the bible?
I pledge, do you?
yes...
it was permitted...but was it expedient?
2Chronicles 7:14 If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.
This is a very negative way to spend your energy.
Live and let live.
~Your perception becomes your reality~
~Your perception becomes your reality~
Correct me if I am wrong -
Didn't I hear Ron Paul say, "I don't want to tell other people what to do" ?
How come everybody here wants too ?
Good question
I wish I had an answer for you.
My Shelfari page
We don't pay him
to address these issues. He is wasting our money in oh so many ways.
thats exactly right.. so we
thats exactly right.. so we have to sit here and let obama tell us what to do!
"When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny."
-Thomas Jefferson
I am more concerned about the return of my money than the return on my money. --Mark Twain
“A prudent man foreseeth the evil, and hideth himself: but the simple pass on, and are punished.” (Prov. 22:3; 27:12 KJV)
Hey McCain-----┌П┐(◣_◢)┌П┐
Again with the religion wars.
Oy vey...
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
Reading all this just
makes me wanna yell out my window!! Enough is Enough !! Too many posts disregarding God's Law !! Abortion IS killing babies inside the womb!! Marriage between a woman and a man IS all that there should be!! Homosexuality is a disgrace in God's eyes !!! Whether you want the TRUTH or not it IS the TRUTH!! Bill of Rights does not mean we can disregard God's Laws. God First Country second and I say * F * this Country because it's no longer America. It's become Sodom and Gomorrah all over again. Wait and see you will get what's coming to you. I could go on and on about much stuff here but to heck with it. Go back to your liberal beliefs .It will only bring more destruction to this Country. It's doomed anyways in case you haven't noticed!!!
The Bill of Rights DOES...
...mean people can disregard God's laws, if they so choose. I don't know what Bill of Rights you're referring to. I choose to obey God's laws to the best of my ability, but if people choose to disobey, then they will be judged by God, not me, you, or any government.
YEP I second that! well
YEP I second that! well said!
"When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny."
-Thomas Jefferson
I am more concerned about the return of my money than the return on my money. --Mark Twain
“A prudent man foreseeth the evil, and hideth himself: but the simple pass on, and are punished.” (Prov. 22:3; 27:12 KJV)
Hey McCain-----┌П┐(◣_◢)┌П┐
wtf? I agree with you on
wtf?
I agree with you on abortion, that it should be illegal... but from a constitutional perspective, I only say that because to me an unborn baby is a person with rights, which should be protected....
But where you pulled the homophobia from, I have no clue... I personally don't want the government making any decisions on any form of marriage.... If someone had to make a decision I'd rather it be people at the local/state level.... Marriage is a religious, cultural, spiritual issue... not a political one. That said, I don't think there should be such a thing as "state" marriage/marriage through the state.... not for gays, not for straights, not for anyone.
arrrggggg
I'll tell you what.
You keep your religion out of my politics and I will keep my politics out of your religion. The separation works both ways.
There should be NO legislation regarding any of the aforementioned subjects.(abortion, gender, sexual orientation, marriage, adoption) All persons deserve equal rights under the law period.
The whole premise of the bill of rights is: You respect my rights and I will respect yours.
Therefore, the Bill of rights already allows for same sex marriages and adoptions etc. The amendments since made regarding them are unnecessary and often unconstitutional in themselves.
excuse me
the whole premises of the bill of rights is to chain the federal government so that it will not interfere with your rights.
arrgggg don't you understand
arrgggg don't you understand that the bill of rights and the constitution were written on the parameters of the bible! you are right thee should be no law regarding abortion, gender, sexual orientatation, marriage, adoption and yes all persons deserve equall rights.. BUT they should not use my tax dollars to support those things.. just like what obama is trying to do! he already allowed for the lifting of the ban of of using US taxpayer money to be used for Abortions world wide... so I'm just supposed to sit here and let him do that? arrgggg wake up!
"When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny."
-Thomas Jefferson
I am more concerned about the return of my money than the return on my money. --Mark Twain
“A prudent man foreseeth the evil, and hideth himself: but the simple pass on, and are punished.” (Prov. 22:3; 27:12 KJV)
Hey McCain-----┌П┐(◣_◢)┌П┐
sierra alot of neocons use
sierra
alot of neocons use the notion that the nation was based on certain "christian values" to justify foreign intervention (iraq, etc)
the declaration cites that ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL
surely the story of the good samaritan preaches assistance to all
does this mean the bible is pro war according to the constitution?
i'm not anti-god and i'm not anti-gay as neither ron paul is
i however am extremely against abortion ...
and anyway ... the state should not be involved in marriage and no priveledges should be given to couples over singles
I agree with you however..
I agree with you however.. Ron Paul is anti gay you cannot be a christian and approve of homosexuality.. he is against the government setting it up as giving those people rights above the rights you or I have.. He says No one should get more rights then anyone else.. and yes there should not be a anti gay marriage law.. the problem is that is a states rights isse not a federal one! So what is the obamanation doing? giving the federal government the authoruity to give gays extra rights that they are not permitted to give! that is my point.. that battle should be fought at the ballot box in the state where you live!
"When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny."
-Thomas Jefferson
I am more concerned about the return of my money than the return on my money. --Mark Twain
“A prudent man foreseeth the evil, and hideth himself: but the simple pass on, and are punished.” (Prov. 22:3; 27:12 KJV)
Hey McCain-----┌П┐(◣_◢)┌П┐