WSJ Column: ‘Cool’ Churches are Failing

This column in the Wall Street Journal says everything about the epic failure of “cool churches.” They are not only failing to present the Gospel and the Jesus of Scripture, they are increasingly failing to find consumers in our jaded culture.

‘How can we stop the oil gusher?” may have been the question of the summer for most Americans. Yet for many evangelical pastors and leaders, the leaking well is nothing compared to the threat posed by an ongoing gusher of a different sort: Young people pouring out of their churches, never to return.

As a 27-year-old evangelical myself, I understand the concern. My peers, many of whom grew up in the church, are losing interest in the Christian establishment.

Recent statistics have shown an increasing exodus of young people from churches, especially after they leave home and live on their own. In a 2007 study, Lifeway Research determined that 70% of young Protestant adults between 18-22 stop attending church regularly.

Statistics like these have created something of a mania in recent years, as baby-boomer evangelical leaders frantically assess what they have done wrong (why didn’t megachurches work to attract youth in the long term?) and scramble to figure out a plan to keep young members engaged in the life of the church.

Increasingly, the “plan” has taken the form of a total image overhaul, where efforts are made to rebrand Christianity as hip, countercultural, relevant. As a result, in the early 2000s, we got something called “the emerging church”—a sort of postmodern stab at an evangelical reform movement. Perhaps because it was too “let’s rethink everything” radical, it fizzled quickly. But the impulse behind it—to rehabilitate Christianity’s image and make it “cool”—remains. Read the column here.

Technical Problems Should Be Resolved Soon

Due to hackers, we have lost some of the material on the Crosstalk blog. We hope to have the situation righted soon.

Unfortunately, Arizona Does NOT Have it Right

by Tom DeWeese and Mark Lerner

There is no question that the citizens of Arizona, like the citizens of all of the southern border states, face grave and outrageous dangers from the invasion of illegals rushing across the borders. Private property is being destroyed; crime is skyrocketing; costs for schools and hospitals is forcing bankruptcy on local communities; and violence is becoming a way of life. No American, living in a nation where rights are supposed to be protected and guaranteed, should be forced to live under such conditions.

The problem, of course, is that the federal government refuses to take the actions necessary to stop illegal immigration. It refuses to secure the border either by placing more border patrol agents in place or allowing local police forces to take action when they have a known illegal in their custody. In addition, the federal government refuses to allow local and state agencies to withdraw taxpayer services like schools, healthcare and welfare to illegals.

As a result, the lure of easy money and free housing, health care and schools looming just across an unprotected border draws those now living in the failed socialist Mexican system. The risk is low and the rewards are high. And so they come in ever growing numbers, swamping the systems that were set up to serve American taxpayers.

Desperate Arizonians have had enough and have taken steps to do something about it. As a result, the state has passed and is ready to enforce legislation (SB1070) that has become a national debate on how to best secure our nation against this ever growing invasion. The problem is, in spite of its courageous stand as an example to the rest of the nation, Arizona may not have it right and will do more harm than good to the all-important fight to stop illegal immigration. Worse, it may stand as a direct threat to the liberties of all Americans, which the law was actually intended to protect.

To understand the potential threat to Americans liberties posed by SB1070, it must be put in the proper context of what the federal government is driving towards – a total surveillance society, seeking any and all information about each and every American citizen.

In that vein, it is important to note that information is power and currently, only the federal government is collecting such information. SB1070 could change that, not only in Arizona, but in states that are now considering enacting similar laws. Moreover, the information the federal government is collecting is your information and it is being shared with international law enforcement agencies and foreign governments at the discretion of the federal government.

Unintended Consequences

There is no question that our country must deal with the problem of illegal immigration. The purpose of SB1070 is to identify people in our country illegally, specifically Arizona, and insure those people are sent back to their country of origin. But how is that to be accomplished, according the SB1070?

1) The following is the wording contained in the legislation:

E. Except as provided in federal law, officials or agencies of this state and counties, cities, towns and other political subdivisions of this state may not be prohibited or in any way be restricted from sending, receiving or maintaining information relating to the immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual or exchanging that information with any other federal, state or local governmental entity for the following official purposes:

1. Determining eligibility for any public benefit, service or license provided by any federal, state, local or other political subdivision of this state.

2. Verifying any claim of residence or domicile if determination of residence or domicile is required under the laws of this state or a judicial order issued pursuant to a civil or criminal proceeding in this state.

2) SB1070 is and will be used as a“tool”allowing the federal government to have at its disposal more information about U.S. citizens. This is an example of unintended consequences.

The wording of the bill (see above) calls for the personal information of all Arizona citizens to be sent to DHS/federal government whether the person is seeking any public benefit or applying for any type of license (can be a fishing license, driver’s license, business license, hunting license or even a permit for a weapon). Although there is a minimum amount of information that will be provided to the federal government the legislation does not set any limit on just how much information can or should be provided the federal government.

3) The domicile issue must and should be handled by those responsible for the issuance of driver’s licenses and not every other state agency and/or department. Many women do not want their physical address shared with potentially many people because of domestic violence issues. Many Americans were concerned about the census this year. It is one thing for the government to have a count of the population but another to have the exact location (GPS) of every person’s residence.

4) The federal government has a number of pieces of proposed legislation that will result in what some refer to as a “national ID”. These various ID’s all incorporate biometrics (measurements of the body). The standards for the biometrics (facial recognition) are the adopted standards of the ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization) an agency of the United Nations. U.S. citizens are not just being enrolled into a national identification system but an international system of identification that applies to all people of the world. This “system” directly links your body to a system of financial control.

5) Currently the Real ID Act 2005 is federal law. Congress is considering repealing Title II of the Real ID Act and passing the PASS ID Act. This would NOT change U.S. citizens being enrolled into a single global system of identification that directly links that identification to a person’s ability to buy, sell or travel. Also, Congress is considering a new biometric social security card and as part of the Immigration Reform legislation, a biometric “National Worker’s Identification” card. The recently passed Obama Healthcare Reform bill will result in some type of national medical identification card. The details on that card will become more apparent as the rulemaking process plays out for the legislation.

6) At what point will the states stop relying on the federal government to accomplish what the states can do for the most part without the reliance on the federal government? The federal government has made no secret of its intention to compile as much information about each citizen as possible. This includes your biometric samples and data.

6A) The federal government wants the personal information of Americans either through direct electronic access or indirect access. Currently the “federal government”

has much of our personal information already. The fact is “that information” is spread out over many departments and agencies of the federal government. DHS wants a more centralized system and thus we have witnessed the Real ID Act 2005 and now the PASS ID Act.

Because the standards for both Real ID and PASS ID are the adopted standards of two international organizations, AAMVA (American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators-An international organization by their own admission that currently includes the provinces of Canada and the states and territories of the United States and the ICAO, the driver’s license would become not simply a national ID but more accurately an international ID. International standards are only used to facilitate global information sharing.

U.S. citizens should know that their federal tax dollars were used to provide states with grant money in order to assure that the districts of Mexico are added to AAMVA’s jurisdiction. AAMVA wants a single jurisdiction of the United States, Canada and Mexico. It was no accident this single jurisdiction concept began in 1994 when the NAFTA treaty was signed.

The Fed’s “free pass” – Exemption

The following comes from a February 2006 GCN (Government Computer News) article: (Mocny/DHS) said, ‘We have a responsibility to make a Global Security Envelope that would coordinate information policies and technical standards.’

Robert Mocny, of the Department of Homeland Security, conceded that each of the 10 privacy laws currently in effect in the United States has an exemption clause for national- security purposes. He added that the department only resorts to its essentially unlimited authority under those clauses when officials decide that there are compelling reasons to do so.

In a 2007 article in the same publication Mocny stated “We’re starting the process of biometrifying [sic] a good proportion of the world population.” Robert Mocny also stated that “information sharing is appropriate around the world, and DHS plans to create a “Global Security Envelope of internationally shared biometric data that would permanently link individuals with biometric ID, personal information held by governments and corporations.”

Mocny’s Department of Homeland Security is the same government agency that has stated nearly all

Americans are potentially domestic terrorists. Under Real ID, the Secretary of DHS is given the authority in the “Official Purposes” section to add restrictions at his or hers own discretion. Real ID currently restricts entrance to a federal facility, flying on a commercial airliner or entering a nuclear facility. Tomorrow we could see restrictions on purchasing weapons, ammunition or even prescription drugs. This kind of unfettered authority is unacceptable.

In Mocny’s statement we see that DHS can decide when to ignore our privacy laws. He never mentions consulting with Congress or even the President for that matter.

SB1070 does not create a national ID card but it does embolden the federal government. States should not and must not depend or rely on the federal government when the states themselves can go a long way towards resolving the issue of citizenship.

There would be times when the federal government might be needed but first every state has a responsibility to only involve the federal government when all other means have been exhausted. We cannot comprehend why a state would offer up/volunteer their own citizen’s personal information to a department of the federal government that has made their intentions clear. Let us not forget DHS had made it clear that it believes domestic terrorism is a much threat as terrorism initiated outside our borders. If they felt you were a potential terrorist would they share your personal information with other governments and/or corporations?

Do you belong to a third party or support a third party candidate? Are you an anti-war activist or environmentalist? Are you an Evangelical Christian? Do you believe the militias are constitutional? If you answered yes to any of the proceeding questions you are under the eye of DHS.

A real solution – the Hub System

The Real ID Act and the PASS ID Act breeder documents (documents needed to obtain a driver’s license) must be authenticated. Nearly all citizens of the United States have birth certificates or an acceptable alternative. We suggest a “hub” system be put in place that is solely controlled by the states. The hub itself would not retain any information, only act as a conduit. All DMV’s would have the capability to communicate with the state issuing agencies or departments of birth certificates. Not everyone has what is called a birth certificate. Certificates of Birth and other similar documents can be authenticated just as birth certificates can.

The federal government wants birth certificates

digitized and we agree. We go one step further and believe all birth certificates must be numbered starting with the two letter abbreviation for each state. Once a birth certificate is presented to acquire a driver’s license or other form of identification the birth certificate number would go into databases as active. If anyone else attempted to use that same numbered birth certificate the “system” would show that birth certificate had been used previously to obtain an ID document or driver’s license. At that point it would be very simple to determine if someone was attempting to use another person’s birth certificate or if a person was using a birth certificate that was not in the “system”.

SB1070 is enabling DHS to gather much more personal information of citizens. Domicile information is not the business of DHS. We would ask that Arizona legislators work with the legislators of the other states and agree to create the hub system described above. Telecommunications companies tell us that the network could be in place in a short period of time. A focused and coordinated effort must take place to digitize and number birth certificates.

It’s easy to beat the biometric net

We, as a country do not have the biometric data of most Islamic extremists or for that matter many of the people entering our country illegally through Mexico or Canada. If a person comes into our country and we do not have their biometric data there is nothing right now to stop that person from “beating” the “system”. That person can obtain counterfeit breeder documents including a birth certificate and social security card for a couple of hundred dollars.

Yet, our government is insisting all Americans be enrolled into a single global biometric identification system (facial recognition). There is a reason facial recognition is not used to see if a person has a driver’s license in other states. The technology does not work when hundreds of millions of images are compared. (Source: 2003 AAMVA sponsored report conducted by the IBG (International Biometric Group).

Recently the talk of all forms of a “national/international ID has sparked debate over the cost of such an ambitious effort. Estimates run in the hundreds of billions of dollars. The cost of putting in place a hub system that would allow for the issuing agency at the state level of state driver’s licenses to authenticate a birth certificate with the issuing state agency that is responsible for birth certificates would be far, far less and the states would control the hub – not

the federal government. The hub would simply be a secure telecommunication system that would require multiple “super computers” to crack. The hub would be far more secure than DMV offices are currently.

The only reason the Real ID Act and PASS ID do not violate the 1974 Privacy Act is that the states that are collecting the personal information of citizens that DHS wants. The states are being used as surrogates. SB1070 is tantamount to giving a child a free pass in a candy store. In this case Arizona is feeding DHS citizen’s information.

The DHS drive for total surveillance is a threat to liberty

Keep in mind it is each citizen’s foremost responsibility to pass on to future generations, the rights, liberty and freedom they inherited at such great sacrifice from previous generations. SB1070 does not meet that test.

Ben Franklin is attributed with the quote“Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.” Unfortunately, in its frustration, Arizona and other supporters around the nation are willing to help build a surveillance society in the name of “doing something.”

Another proposed “solution” to the illegal immigration problem has been the E-Verify system. It is not only included in Arizona’s SB1070, but in other tough imigration laws touted in states like Oklahoma. It must be understood that the SSN database is riddled with errors with estimates running as high as 13 million errors. Admittedly most are not serious errors but that being said there is a problem causing E-Verify to correctly identify those in our country illegally less than 50% of the time.

The following comes from an AP story:

The online tool E-Verify, now used voluntarily by employers, wrongly clears illegal workers about 54 percent of the time, according to Westat, a research company that evaluated the system for the Homeland Security Department. E-Verify missed so many illegal workers mainly because it can’t detect identity fraud, Westat said.

A recent report verified that DHS has conducted three programs, each of which involved spying on American citizens. The programs — Pantheon, Pathfinder and Organizational Shared Space — used a variety of software tools to gather and analyze information about Americans, according to documents obtained by the Center for

Investigative Reporting. DHS turned over the papers in response to a December 2008 Freedom of Information Act request.

Another part of the equation is a company named L-1 Identity Solutions. L-1 and the World Bank have reached an agreement to insure all people in the world, including third world countries, are enrolled into a single global system of identification that translates into a single system of control.

Why is L-1 significant? L-1 is the largest biometric company in the United States and arguably the world. L-1 provides nearly 95% all state driver’s licenses. It is involved in the production of all passports and passport cards. It is a global company that has had or does have the former Directors of the CIA, FBI, TSA and others on its Board of Directors. L-1 also has an intelligence division that has contracts with nearly every intelligence agency of the federal government. In addition to losing a contract for misleading the client and being accused by the SEC for insiders selling stock in advance of adverse financial news (settled suit) L-1, under its previous name Viisage Technology overstated the capability of its biometric technology many documented times.

Why should a citizen care that L-1 is a global company and what does it mean to individuals? L-1 also provided their facial recognition technology knowing that technology was going to be tested by the Red Chinese government. Naturally the Chinese wanted to use the technology to identify dissidents. That proves the power of the system and the danger to individuals when in the hands of dangerous dictatorships.

Today thousands of surveillance cameras on nearly every street corner are pointed at you. It does not matter if you are in your hometown or Paris, France. You can be identified through the use of facial recognition technology, biometric and CCTV technology.

This is nothing new and has been going on for some time. Viisage Technology, now called L-1 Identity Solutions used facial recognition technology to capture the digital facial images of people who entered the Super Bowl in 2001, before the attacks on 9/11.

The company claimed huge success in assisting law enforcement to capture people who were wanted by law enforcement. The technology has been used many times since. We should all face the fact we live in a surveillance

society. Government does spy on our emails, phone calls and monitor our financial transactions. A free society and a surveillance society cannot coexist.

Under the provisions of the Patriot Act, the FBI has been given legal authority beyond what they previously had. The result has been abuses of NSL’s (National Security Letters) The FBI can issue an NSL to L-1 Identity Solutions requesting information such as, but not limited to, citizens biometric samples/data/templates and you would know nothing about it. States have archived databases for their DMV’s that L-1 controls. State DMV’s would not know the information was provided to the FBI. NSL’s require that the company not discuss the NSL with anyone. There are no search warrants or other legal instruments needed before the FBI issues NSL’s.

This is a violation of the Constitution in so many ways. Congress must address the issue of L-1 and insure if L-1 is to remain the primary vendor for identification documents that there are strict laws put in place to protect citizens from L-1 sharing any information unless a court order exist.

CONCLUSION

State lawmakers and yes, some citizens are willing to sacrifice liberty towards what they falsely will address issues such as illegal immigration and terrorism.

It is incredible to know that almost 9 years after 9/11 our borders are still wide open. More incredible still to know that DHS has a goal of only stopping 29% of the illegal people and goods entering our country through authorized Custom Border Patrol checkpoints.

One should realize just how much of our borders do not have authorized Custom Border Patrol checkpoints. What percentage of illegal goods and people are entering in those areas? Understand that if the goal is to only prevent 29% that means 71% will get through.

The problem continues to be the failure of the Federal government to secure our nation’s borders. Arizona has tried to address the problem with SB1070 and now other states are looking at the law as a possible model. People are desperate to save their country.

In reality, SB1070 has been packed with models for

federal law, such as E-Verify and the SAVE Act (the “Secure America Though Verification And Enforcement” Act). These very bad laws have not been able to pass Congress and so supporters are now seeking success on a state by state basis. The bottom line is SB1070 has become the Trojan Horse in the drive to create an International ID system that will track our every move. It is not freedom and it is not security.

It is refreshing that there are elected officials like Arizona’s governor who are willing to stand against massive pressure, even federal lawsuits, to try to do what is right. And it is exciting to see that leasers in other states are willing to do the same. It is part of the new and growing revolution against federal tyranny. But these leaders must also be careful to watch for the pitfalls that may result in their actions.

There is most certainly a need for strong legislation to stop the largest invasion our nation has ever experienced. But such legislation must focus on prohibiting illegals from coming here, rather than forcing the rest of us in a surveillance straight jacket. Toward that end, unfortunately, Arizona’s SB1070 accomplishes very little except sacrificing the liberty of U.S. citizens.

Urban Outfitters Drop Condom Sales

American Life League releases the following from Sodom’s retail sector. Memo to Urban Outfitters: Get out of the gutter.

Washington, DC (13 August 2010) – American Life League’s Stop Planned Parenthood International (STOPP) project is pleased to announce that, one day after parents were asked to contact Urban Outfitters and object to its sale of Planned Parenthood condoms, the youth-oriented retailer has ceased its online sale of condoms.

A very brief message on the web site, confirmed by an Urban Outfitters representative, explained that the product “is no longer available.”

“Thank you to all the parents who took the time to contact Urban Outfitters and to the folks at Urban Outfitters who took immediate action to discontinue selling the condoms,” said Rita Diller, STOPP’s national director.

Condoms have a typical-use failure rate as high as 36 percent among teens, and Planned Parenthood’s condoms scored at the very bottom in a 2005 Consumer Reports trial of condom effectiveness.

A recent CDC study shows that most teens are sexually abstinent. The rise in the number of sexually abstinent teens and the downturn in teen pregnancy rates coincide with the availability and popularity of abstinence speakers and educational material.

“Parents and consumers can make a difference when they let their voices be heard,” Diller said.

American Life League was cofounded in 1979 by Judie Brown.

FOR MORE INFORMATION:

Urban Outfitters: Keith Haring for Proper Attire – Condom 3-pack
http://www.urbanoutfitters.com/urban/catalog/productdetail.jsp?id=18606921&_dyncharset=ISO-8859-1&color=000&parentid=SEARCH+RESULTS&isProduct=true&preference=NorthAmerica&navAction=jump&cm_mmc=NorthAmerica-_-NorthAmerica-_-NorthAmerica-_-NorthAmerica&search=true&availableOptions=availableOptions

American Life League: Parents Asked to Oppose Urban Outfitters Condom Sales (11 August 2010)
http://www.all.org/article.php?id=12948

LifeSiteNews: Pro-Life Group Urges Boycott of Urban Outfitters Condom Sales (11 August 2010)
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/aug/10081109.html

Michael Youssef Speaks Out on Proposed Mosque in Manhattan

ATLANTA, Aug. 10 /Christian Newswire/ — Michael Youssef, Founder and President of Leading The Way, says the effort by political Islamic leaders to build a Mosque and Islamic Center just yards away from Ground Zero is not only insensitive, it is also part of Islam’s overall goal to dominate the world.

“Most Westerners do not understand that Islam is not a religion in their true understanding of what the word means,” stated Michael Youssef, PhD. “Islam is a political and social ideology that will never submit to a secular form of government. Islamists will wait until such time as they are able to transform societies into Sharia-dominated ones, giving citizens a Taliban-type government.”

Polls suggest that a majority of Americans do not want the Mosque built at the Twin Tower’s former site. However, Muslim leaders are using western language of “tolerance” and “freedom of religion” to gain approval for placing the mosque by the site of the infamous terrorist attack.

“Islamic and Arabic media outlets are triumphantly, if not blatantly, saying that Islam is a superior religion, therefore it can build a mosque anywhere in the world, and the infidels need to shut up and accept it,” added Youssef. “When you realize that in Saudi Arabia, the most likely bank rollers of the $100 million project, forbids even Christian foreigners to worship in their own homes, you will soon realize the contempt they hold for the West in general and Christians in particular.”

The administration in Washington naively believes if America is nice to the Islamists they will be nice to America. The assassination of Egypt’s President Anwar Sadat nearly 30 years ago should instantly put an end to that fallacy.

“He tried to be nice to the Islamists and set them free from prison,” stated Youssef. “But in ‘thanksgiving’ for what he did, they pulled the trigger and killed him on that fateful day of October 6, 1981.”

Islam continues its march around the world. There were 50,000 Muslims in Western Europe in the early 1900s. By 2008, as many as 25 million were living there.

-Forty percent of Rotterdam’s current population is Muslim.

-In Brussels, one in three citizens (33%) follow Islam.

-In Marseille, one in four people (25%) is Muslim.

-Twenty percent of inner London’s population “claims allegiance to Islam.”

“Socialists and leftists in the media play down Muslim ideology and present Islamists and Jihadists as peace lovers,” commented Youssef. “This naivety and ignorance on the part of the Left is like Christmas in July for Muslim leaders. The Islamists and Jihadists are laughing in their sleeves at such stupidity, but they will soon laugh aloud if Muslims become the majority in these countries. Ironically, the Jihadists first victims will be the leftists, the socialists and the godless.”

About Michael Youssef
Michael Youssef, Ph.D., is the Founder and President of Leading The Way with Dr. Michael Youssef. His weekly television programs and daily radio programs are broadcast in 20 languages and available in more than 200 countries – airing 3,800 times per week. He recently launched MichaelYoussef.com, a new personal blog, that offers readers a unique perspective on cultural, political and religious issues and the consequences that result from decisions being made around the world ( www.michaelyoussef.com).

Dr. Youssef was born in Egypt, lived in Lebanon and Australia before coming to the United States. In 1984, he fulfilled a childhood dream of becoming an American citizen. He holds degrees from Moore College in Sydney, Australia, and from Fuller in California. In 1984, he earned a Ph.D. in social anthropology from Emory University. He has authored more than 20 books, including the most recent – The Greatest Lie. He and his wife reside in Atlanta and have four grown children, three grandchildren.

Christian Newswire

Senate Confirms Elena Kagan as 112th Justice of the United States Supreme Court

WASHINGTON, Aug. 5 /Christian Newswire/ — Moments ago, the United States Senate confirmed Elena Kagan to be the 112th Justice of the Supreme Court by a vote of 63-37. Wendy Wright, President of Concerned Women for America (CWA), said:

“We expect that Elena Kagan will continue her life-long practice of using her position to place her opinion as the final authority over the law, treat the Constitution as optional, and re-write the facts to fit her agenda, all to the detriment of our country. Miss Kagan’s presence at the Supreme Court will be a constant reminder to conservatives of the clear and present danger we face if we are not engaged in the political process to ensure only qualified people of character are in key positions.

“As a White House official, Miss Kagan re-wrote the statement of a medical organization regarding partial-birth abortion in order to manipulate legislators and the courts. As the dean of Harvard Law School, she made International/Comparative Law a required first-year course, but ignored Constitutional Law as a requirement altogether. She violated federal law in order to maliciously harm military recruiters on an issue she characterized as being of the “highest moral order” — embracing homosexuality — yet welcomed the money of a Saudi donor to establish a Center for Islamic Studies that promotes Sharia law. Sharia endorses the stoning of homosexuals.

“Miss Kagan has demonstrated utter disrespect for the Constitution, federal law, and facts. And she has abandoned her principles when large sums of money are involved.

“Yet, the 500,000 members of CWA believe that with God anything is possible. We will pray that God will inspire Justice Kagan to be an impartial and just justice.”

Mario Diaz, Esq., CWA’s Policy Director for Legal Issues said:

“CWA will make sure Americans remember those senators who, while calling themselves conservatives, voted for Miss Kagan, despite her troubling record. They will not be able to play this down.

“Those who love and respect the law can only cringe at the idea of Justice Kagan injecting her activism into the highest court of the land. We have already seen the extent to which she will go to promote her liberal ideology, even to the point of manipulating scientific findings!

“But we pray that Justice Kagan will take the opportunity she has been given to leave the old political games behind and approach the law with humility. We pray she no longer sees the Constitution as a tool to be manipulated to advance a particular agenda, but as an instrument to guard liberty and freedom.

“CWA will remain in constant prayer and will be diligent in holding Justice Kagan accountable for her actions in every way possible.”

Concerned Women for America is the nation’s largest public policy women’s organization.

Christian Newswire

AFA, Family Groups Condemn Prop. 8 Marriage Ruling

The following are statements released today regarding a California Federal District Court judge who overruled the will of California residents.

Statement from Tim Wildmon, president of the American Family Association, in response to Judge Vaughn Walker’s ruling overturning California’s marriage amendment, also known as Prop 8:

“This is a tyrannical, abusive and utterly unconstitutional display of judicial arrogance. Judge Walker has turned ‘We the People’ into ‘I the Judge.’

“It’s inexcusable for him to deprive the citizens of California of their right to govern themselves, and cavalierly trash the will of over seven million voters. This case never should even have entered his courtroom. The federal constitution nowhere establishes marriage policy, which means under the 10th Amendment that issue is reserved for the states.

“It’s also extremely problematic that Judge Walker is a practicing homosexual himself. He should have recused himself from this case, because his judgment is clearly compromised by his own sexual proclivity. The fundamental issue here is whether homosexual conduct, with all its physical and psychological risks, should be promoted and endorsed by society. That’s why the people and elected officials accountable to the people should be setting marriage policy, not a black-robed tyrant whose own lifestyle choices make it impossible to believe he could be impartial.

“His situation is no different than a judge who owns a porn studio being asked to rule on an anti-pornography statute. He’d have to recuse himself on conflict of interest grounds, and Judge Walker should have done that.

“The Constitution says judges hold office ‘during good Behavior.’ Well, this ruling is bad behavior – in fact, it’s very, very bad behavior – and we call on all members of the House of Representatives who respect the Constitution to launch impeachment proceedings against this judge.”

###

Aug. 4 /Christian Newswire/ — Proposition 8, the 2008 California Constitutional amendment defining and recognizing marriage between a man and a woman, suffered a severe blow. Judge Walker ruled against the voters who approved Proposition 8 by 52 percent of the vote.

After California’s Supreme Court overturned proposition 22, the statute approved by voters defining marriage, the voters took to the polls in reaction to the court’s judicial activism.

“Today’s ruling is indicative of an out-of-control judiciary willing to circumvent California’s direct democracy by imposing their point of view,” said Karen England Executive Director of Capitol Resource Institute (CRI). “Family values are under constant assault now more then ever. CRI was instrumental in passing proposition 22 in 2000 and we fought to get proposition 8 on the ballot and subsequently in California’s Constitution. We will continue to battle interest groups who wish to redefine one of our oldest institutions; the institution of marriage. We will continue to represent the 7 million Californians who took to the polls in favor of marriage.”

The case will head to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, a court popularly known for its left-of-center rulings.

Christian Newswire

###

Washington, DC and San Diego, CA – Today, U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker handed down his much expected decision on Prop. 8 (Perry v. Schwarzenegger) declaring unconstitutional California’s constitutional provision defining marriage as the union between one man and one woman.

Wendy Wright, President of Concerned Women for America (CWA), said:

“Judge Walker’s decision goes far beyond homosexual ‘marriage’ to strike at the heart of our representative democracy. Judge Walker has declared, in effect, that his opinion is supreme and ‘We the People’ are no longer free to govern ourselves. The ruling should be appealed and overturned immediately.
“Marriage is not a political toy. It is too important to treat as a means for already powerful people to gain preferred status or acceptance. Marriage between one man and one woman undergirds a stable society and cannot be replaced by any other living arrangement.

“Citizens of California voted to uphold marriage because they understood the sacred nature of marriage and that homosexual activists use same-sex ‘marriage’ as a political juggernaut to indoctrinate young children in schools to reject their parent’s values and to harass, sue and punish people who disagree.

“CWA stands in prayer for our nation as we continue to defend marriage as the holy union God created between one man and one woman.”
CWA of California State Director Phyllis Nemeth said:

“Today Judge Vaughn Walker has chosen to side with political activism over the will of the people. His ruling is slap in the face to the more than seven million Californians who voted to uphold the definition of marriage as it has been understood for millennia.
“While Judge Walker’s decision is disappointing it is not the end of this battle. Far from it. The broad coalition of support for Proposition 8 remains strong, and we will support the appeal by ProtectMarriage.com, the official proponent of Proposition 8.

“We are confident that Judge Walker’s decision will ultimately be reversed. No combination of judicial gymnastics can negate the basic truth that marriage unites the complementary physical and emotional characteristics of a man and a woman to create a oneness that forms the basis for the family unit allowing a child to be raised by his or her father and mother. Any other combination is a counterfeit that fails to provide the best environment for healthy child rearing and a secure foundation for the family. It is this foundation upon which society is – and must be – built for a healthy and sustained existence.”

Concerned Women for America is the nation’s largest public policy women’s organization.

–30–

Robert Knight on the Kagan Trainwreck

When history is written for this age (presuming that anyone can read it), Republicans will clearly be fingered as equally culpable in the destruction of the American nation as the Democrats. Robert Knight writes in his latest Townhall.com column:

As we watch in disbelief, the United States Senate is about to take the Fifth on a Supreme Court nominee who has no business being near a courtroom except as a defendant.

The word from Capitol Hill is that the GOP won’t even bother with a filibuster despite evidence from Elena Kagan’s Judiciary Committee hearing that she falsified evidence used in a Supreme Court case and committed what might be perjury before that committee.

One wonders what it would take for the Senate to deny this nomination? A daytime bank robbery, guns drawn? No, that could be chalked up to youthful exuberance or perhaps research in pursuit of insight into the criminal mind. When the Gang of 14 Democrats and Republicans agreed to clear the path for some Bush Administration nominees, that arrogant group’s presumption was that a president is entitled to his pick unless there are “exceptional circumstances.”

If Elena Kagan’s malfeasance does not fit “exceptional circumstances,” the term has no meaning. Read Knight’s column at Townhall.com

Sears Puts Final Nail in Its Coffin

Commentary by Ingrid Schlueter

If you want to find lots of parking at our local mall, head to the end where the ugly dinosaur of a Sears store sits, and you will find plenty. Once a place that was bustling with customers, it often feels like a warehouse for ghosts of the past.  If you want customer service, forget about it. The entire second floor of the store is sometimes completely vacant of clerks or customers, and that’s at Christmas.

The identity crisis for Sears retailing in recent years is confusing enough for potential customers. (Why are they selling upscale Land’s End products as a store within a store? Who in the world thought that putting shopping carts ala Wal-Mart in a department store would make the place more appealing? But then, that’s another post.)

Now, after sending their customers elsewhere to shop by their clueless retailing, they now are apparently attempting to make up the shortfall by offering…no joke…p*rn. The American Family Association is blowing the whistle after attempting to handle their concerns quietly before going public. The arrogance of Sears leadership has now led to what I believe may be the final nail in their coffin. With back-to-school shoppers hitting the stores, those with an intact moral compass will go elsewhere to spend their money. Our family certainly will. If you have to go to the gutter to generate revenue and drag the once honorable name of Sears through the depths, it’s time to shut the lights off and call it quits. There are still millions of American families that are not going to knowingly support this kind of merchandising of filth.

Memo to Sears: Clean up your act or get the For Sale signs ready.

200 Military Doctors Protest Using Their Hospitals to Kill the Preborn

WASHINGTON, Aug. 3 /Christian Newswire/ — Over 200 physicians who have served U.S. soldiers have signed a letter to U.S. senators protesting a Senate bill amendment that would use U.S. military medical facilities as abortion clinics. The 16,000-member Christian Medical Association organized the letter and today sent it to the senators urging them to vote no on a National Defense Authorization Act amendment by Sen. Roland Burris that would remove restrictions on performing abortions in military facilities.

CMA Senior Vice President Gene Rudd, MD, who received the Gorgas Award for distinguished service in the American military, said, “If enacted, requiring military physicians to perform abortions threatens military readiness. Morale will suffer among those already serving. Morale is a key component of military effectiveness. Furthermore, just as we have seen a marked decrease in young doctors entering OB/Gyn training for fear of being forced to do abortions, this requirement will discourage young doctors from joining the military.”

“In addition to facilitating further destruction of unborn life, the provision will place military physicians with life-honoring convictions in the unenviable position of either disobeying orders, abandoning their conscience, or seeking objector status.”

Current law in effect since 1996 prohibits the performance of abortion by Department of Defense (DoD) medical personnel or in DoD medical facilities (except when the life of the mother is at risk or when the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest). A separate provision prohibits the use of DoD funds for abortion except to save the life of the mother. In 2006, the House rejected by a vote of 191-237 an amendment similar to the Burris amendment. The Burris amendment, which would allow abortion on both domestic and overseas military bases, is even more expansive than the rejected 2006 amendment. The letter from military physicians urges senators to “vote NO on the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (DoD) (S.3280) because it contains Sen. Roland Burris’ amendment to strike Section 1093(b) of Title 10 of the US Code.”

CMA Director of Global Health Outreach Col. Donald Thompson, MD, who recently retired from the Air Force, said, “This provision would put conscientious military medics on the losing side of the Uniformed Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) in key areas crucial to good order and discipline in the military. Chain of command, avoidance of fraternization and carrying out lawful orders are key to an effective combat force, yet this provision would require military physicians, nurses and support staff to leave their ethical convictions at the door when they join the military. When a senior officer in the chain of command ‘thinks that this should be done,’ then that is the same as a direct order to the subordinate. Favors and perks go to those who ‘feel’ the same as the boss.

“Our military exists to fight our nation’s wars, not to be a ideological playground. If this provision stays in the NDAA, it will drive out of the military those who are most likely to serve their nation by going in harm’s way.”

Christian Newswire