Last week, Al Gore went on "Meet the Press" to rant and rave about, what else, "global warming" or what he now calls it, "global climate change".
To hear Al Gore rant about how awful life will be unless we stop emitting carbons, you would think that in 10 years the USA will all be under water or some ridiculous thing.
One word to Al Gore.
CARBONS ARE NOT BAD GREENHOUSE GASES. CARBONS ARE GOOD, NOT BAD.
What? Some of you are saying. "I thought Carbons were Bad" "I thought Carbons will kill us"?
"I thought the Polar Ice Caps at the North Pole were melting fast"?
Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, Wrong!
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Carbon Dioxide is emitted by US Humans when we exhale. Plants then take it and use it for growth. So Carbon Dioxide is actually good for the environment.
A review of the research literature concerning the environmental consequences of increased levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide leads to the conclusion that increases during the 20th Century have produced no deleterious effects upon global weather, climate, or temperature. Increased carbon dioxide has, however, markedly increased plant growth rates. Predictions of harmful climatic effects due to future increases in minor greenhouse gases like CO2 are in error and do not conform to current experimental knowledge.
The fact of the matter is that the climate is always changing and has always changed since back in the Bible after the Great Flood during Noah's time.
There are Sunspots that cause different areas of the Earth to warm while other areas cool. Hurricanes, Tornadoes, Floods, Drought, Snow, Ice, Wind, you name it. All have happened and will continue to happen.
BUT NOT BECAUSE OF MANKIND. These things happen because of God. That's right. God made the Sun and the Earth. Natural disasters happen because of Sin. Remember the Garden of Eden. There was no Natural disasters in the Garden of Eden. But then Sin came and now there are natural disasters. But it has NOTHING to do with us burning coal or drilling for oil or emitting a few extra carbons into the atmosphere.
Fact: In 1989, the UN "warned" us that unless we stopped "global warming", we would all starve, and face horrific natural disasters here in the USA. Well 1989 has come and gone (almost 20 yrs later) and we are still here, doing just fine.
There are over 32,000 scientists who have signed a petition, stating basically that man-made global warming is a hoax and carbon emission is not harmful to the environment. That's right, 32,000 scientists and growing. Take a look at the Oregon petition.
The global warming dissenting scientists now outnumber the environmentalists that attended the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio that actually kicked off the global warming craze.
Here is a transcript of Al Gore on Meet the Press, July 20, 2008.
MR. BROKAW: Let me ask you about your personal lifestyle, because it's been the subject of a lot of dialogue on the blogs, as you know. You and Tipper have bought a big home outside of Nashville, and you had it retrofitted. But for a time there was a comparison between what the president has in Texas at his home as being more environmentally correct than your home. The Building Green Council gave you its second highest award. But Stephen Smith, who is with the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, is troubled by the scale of your home. He said, "We all need to evaluate what we ... need in square footage." Present company included. We all have to look at scale, don't we? Why was it necessary for you to have a 10,000 square foot home? Because that is going to be more energy intensive than a smaller home for just the two of you.
VICE PRES. GORE: Well, there--I don't claim to be perfect, and all of us who care about this issue are, are trying to do our part, but I, I will say this. We buy green energy. The issue is carbon. The issue is carbon, and we have, essentially, a carbon-free home. We buy from wind energy and solar energy. Our roof is covered with solar electric panels, a geothermal system with all these deep wells, and we cut our natural gas bill by 90 percent, and I'm, I'm--we're, we're walking the walk and not just talking the talk. There are always people who are going to try to aim at the messenger if they don't like the message, and I don't claim to be perfect, but we are walking the walk.
MR. BROKAW: How often do you fly on a private jet?
VICE PRES. GORE: I've--much more frequently on public transportation. I'm flying on Southwest Airlines again today. But sometimes the schedule requires that, and sometimes I do that.
MR. BROKAW: Should there be a surcharge on jet fuel, cost for private aviation, which is expanding exponentially in this country, and it leaves a very large carbon footprint.
VICE PRES. GORE: Fine by me. Sounds like a good idea.
It all sounds like a load of crap to me.
Gore got one thing right: He's not perfect.
Jimbo
Saturday, July 26, 2008
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
My Week as a Juror in a First Degree Murder Trial.
I have not posted for a while because I have been soooo busy.
My 8 yr. old son finished his baseball season 8-6. I was the head coach of his team. Being the Head Coach of my Son's baseball team was the highlight of my summer until just this past week (July 14-16).
On Monday July 14, I went to criminal court for jury duty. Now I know that most people do ANYTHING to get out of jury duty. Plus the fact that they only pay $17.20/day further exacerbates the public's unwillingness to serve on the jury. However, if you are called to serve, you must go. Now, actually getting picked on a jury is a toss up. Some get picked, others don't.
I was actually praying that I got picked to serve on a jury. Why you ask. Because I think it is one of the MOST important unique jobs us as Americans can do. Other countries have Legal systems that have only judges decide the defendant's fate. We have a great Legal system that uses the common citizen, the average Joe, to decide whether a person is guilty or not guilty.
Here are the facts of the case: 5 yrs. ago, 3 young men ages 18 (S.K.), 19(N.Z.), and 19(H.G.) drove downtown and the rear passenger (H.G.) opened his window and shot 4 bullets into J.S. age 24, killing him.
The defendant in our 1rst degree Murder trial was NOT the shooter (H.G.); but the driver (S.K.).
The State's Attorney basically said that all 3 masterminded this plan to go downtown in the early hours of April 20, 2003 and kill J.S. According to the State, all 4 were in the Latin Kings and there was a rift between one sect of the Latin Kings and another area's Latin Kings and an S.O.S. (shoot on sight) order went out on J.S.
The State's Attorney said, even though S.K. was NOT the actual shooter of J.S. (remember, H.G. was), since he was driving the car and IF he had prior knowledge what was going to happen, he is JUST as guilty of murder as H.G. is.
In fact the State's STAR witness was in fact the shooter H.G. That's right, the State made a sweetheart deal with H.G. and basically said that if H.G. would testify against S.K. (that he knew about the S.O.S)that H.G.'s 45yrs-Life sentence would be reduced to 25yrs. So that is exactly what H.G. did. He testified in court on day 2 of the trial that S.K. knew about the S.O.S and that S.K. was in fact a member of the Latin Kings, and that S.K. knew that H.G. had gotten a gun for the purpose of killing J.S.
The State had to prove to us the jury that S.K. had this prior knowledge.
On day 3 of the trial S.K. testified saying that he knew NOTHING of the S.O.S and did not know that H.G. even had a gun or that he was planning on killing J.S. He in fact stated that he drove downtown with his cousin N.Z. and H.G. to "look for girls". At 3-4am on Sat. nights, downtown, bars are getting out with loads of girls", according to S.K.
2-3 other witnesses also testified that yes in fact at this location (the location of the killing), there are many girls getting out of bars.
After the shots rang out, S.K. stepped on the gas and got on the Expressway where shortly thereafter, an unmarked police car with detectives pulled S.K. over and arrested all 3 in the car.
S.K. testified that when he heard the shots that he did not know exactly where they came from and hit the gas to get out of there, scared. As he was speeding away, he saw a gun get thrown into the passenger seat from the back and then he realized that either H.G. or N.Z. had fired the shots. Later on the Expressway, either N.Z. or H.G. threw the gun out the window, but police quickly recovered the gun on the road.
I had trouble believing H.G. as I knew that he would say anything since he was getting this deal from the State. Plus, he was the SHOOTER. He was Cold blooded. And he was the Only one who said that S.K. had prior knowledge of the murder.
At deliberations, I was elected foreman of the Jury.
After 1 hr. I took an informal vote. 10-Not Guilty, 2-Guilty. I was one of the Not Guilty votes.
That's right, I believed S.K.'s version and not H.G.'s (the Shooter) version.
I had More than a reasonable doubt that S.K. was even a Latin King, let alone that he had prior knowledge of the murder.
After 2 hrs. of deliberation, the 2 Guilty people changed their vote to Not Guilty after conceding that there was NOT enough evidence to convict S.K. of 1rst Degree Murder.
After I read the Not Guilty Verdict, the Defendant (S.K.) sobbed and sobbed and his family sobbed and sobbed too. I felt that we had done the right thing.
We received a Police escort out of the Courthouse to our Cars since the whole case was Gang related (Latin Kings).
I asked the Lord to lead me to the right decision before I made my decision and I believe we as a jury made the right decision.
This was the highlight of my Summer. This was a once in a lifetime activity where I was able to apply justice to a situation and prevent an injustice from happening (if S.K. had been convicted).
I felt proud as I left the Courthouse on July 16th, 2008.
It feels good to do the right thing.
So please I implore all of you out there, do not neglect or take lightly your jury duty.
It could be a once in a lifetime opportunity for you to exact justice one way or another.
Jimbo
My 8 yr. old son finished his baseball season 8-6. I was the head coach of his team. Being the Head Coach of my Son's baseball team was the highlight of my summer until just this past week (July 14-16).
On Monday July 14, I went to criminal court for jury duty. Now I know that most people do ANYTHING to get out of jury duty. Plus the fact that they only pay $17.20/day further exacerbates the public's unwillingness to serve on the jury. However, if you are called to serve, you must go. Now, actually getting picked on a jury is a toss up. Some get picked, others don't.
I was actually praying that I got picked to serve on a jury. Why you ask. Because I think it is one of the MOST important unique jobs us as Americans can do. Other countries have Legal systems that have only judges decide the defendant's fate. We have a great Legal system that uses the common citizen, the average Joe, to decide whether a person is guilty or not guilty.
Here are the facts of the case: 5 yrs. ago, 3 young men ages 18 (S.K.), 19(N.Z.), and 19(H.G.) drove downtown and the rear passenger (H.G.) opened his window and shot 4 bullets into J.S. age 24, killing him.
The defendant in our 1rst degree Murder trial was NOT the shooter (H.G.); but the driver (S.K.).
The State's Attorney basically said that all 3 masterminded this plan to go downtown in the early hours of April 20, 2003 and kill J.S. According to the State, all 4 were in the Latin Kings and there was a rift between one sect of the Latin Kings and another area's Latin Kings and an S.O.S. (shoot on sight) order went out on J.S.
The State's Attorney said, even though S.K. was NOT the actual shooter of J.S. (remember, H.G. was), since he was driving the car and IF he had prior knowledge what was going to happen, he is JUST as guilty of murder as H.G. is.
In fact the State's STAR witness was in fact the shooter H.G. That's right, the State made a sweetheart deal with H.G. and basically said that if H.G. would testify against S.K. (that he knew about the S.O.S)that H.G.'s 45yrs-Life sentence would be reduced to 25yrs. So that is exactly what H.G. did. He testified in court on day 2 of the trial that S.K. knew about the S.O.S and that S.K. was in fact a member of the Latin Kings, and that S.K. knew that H.G. had gotten a gun for the purpose of killing J.S.
The State had to prove to us the jury that S.K. had this prior knowledge.
On day 3 of the trial S.K. testified saying that he knew NOTHING of the S.O.S and did not know that H.G. even had a gun or that he was planning on killing J.S. He in fact stated that he drove downtown with his cousin N.Z. and H.G. to "look for girls". At 3-4am on Sat. nights, downtown, bars are getting out with loads of girls", according to S.K.
2-3 other witnesses also testified that yes in fact at this location (the location of the killing), there are many girls getting out of bars.
After the shots rang out, S.K. stepped on the gas and got on the Expressway where shortly thereafter, an unmarked police car with detectives pulled S.K. over and arrested all 3 in the car.
S.K. testified that when he heard the shots that he did not know exactly where they came from and hit the gas to get out of there, scared. As he was speeding away, he saw a gun get thrown into the passenger seat from the back and then he realized that either H.G. or N.Z. had fired the shots. Later on the Expressway, either N.Z. or H.G. threw the gun out the window, but police quickly recovered the gun on the road.
I had trouble believing H.G. as I knew that he would say anything since he was getting this deal from the State. Plus, he was the SHOOTER. He was Cold blooded. And he was the Only one who said that S.K. had prior knowledge of the murder.
At deliberations, I was elected foreman of the Jury.
After 1 hr. I took an informal vote. 10-Not Guilty, 2-Guilty. I was one of the Not Guilty votes.
That's right, I believed S.K.'s version and not H.G.'s (the Shooter) version.
I had More than a reasonable doubt that S.K. was even a Latin King, let alone that he had prior knowledge of the murder.
After 2 hrs. of deliberation, the 2 Guilty people changed their vote to Not Guilty after conceding that there was NOT enough evidence to convict S.K. of 1rst Degree Murder.
After I read the Not Guilty Verdict, the Defendant (S.K.) sobbed and sobbed and his family sobbed and sobbed too. I felt that we had done the right thing.
We received a Police escort out of the Courthouse to our Cars since the whole case was Gang related (Latin Kings).
I asked the Lord to lead me to the right decision before I made my decision and I believe we as a jury made the right decision.
This was the highlight of my Summer. This was a once in a lifetime activity where I was able to apply justice to a situation and prevent an injustice from happening (if S.K. had been convicted).
I felt proud as I left the Courthouse on July 16th, 2008.
It feels good to do the right thing.
So please I implore all of you out there, do not neglect or take lightly your jury duty.
It could be a once in a lifetime opportunity for you to exact justice one way or another.
Jimbo
Friday, July 11, 2008
Jesse Helms- A Real Man and Senator
Independence day, July 4th 2008, Senator Jesse Helms went to be with Jesus. He fought the good fight. He was a Real Man.
Jesse Helms was, indeed, unique.
He stood like a rock in a time when most men in public life tended to sway like reeds in whatever direction the political and social winds happened to blow. As he once said, "I did not come to Washington to win a popularity contest.” He came to Washington to wage war for what he knew to be the truth, and he fought for nothing less than absolute victory.
He believed that killing babies in their mother’s wombs was simply cold-blooded murder. He accepted without question the ordained distinction between the sexes.
Jesse Helms refused to join the globalists’ worship of an imperfect United Nations -- and came close to forcing reforms in an otherwise unreformable institution dominated by forces who hated his country.
He worked to prevent the National Endowment for the Arts from funding work he disapproved of.
Helms was known as "Senator No" for his staunch opposition to an array of liberal causes, including arts funding and gay rights.
In later years, Helms worked with Clinton's secretary of state, Madeleine Albright, and U2 singer Bono to fight AIDS in Africa.
Helms was one of only a few rock solid conservative Senators that voted "No" to Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
He was a "Blue-collar", Nationalistic, Conservative.
Oh how I pray that we get more of the Jesse Helms type of Conservatives in Congress.
Senators that will say "No" to smut, gay rights, abortion, globalism, global warming freaks, atheists, God haters, and all those who support such perverted issues.
Jesse Helms was a major influence on American conservatism, but his career provides a blueprint for anyone who represents an embattled minority viewpoint. You can, with persistence and unflinching determination, change the political odds in your favor.
In this and in every other battle he chose to fight, Jesse Helms struck to his guns. He was one of a kind. Dear God find us more like him.
Jimbo
Jesse Helms was, indeed, unique.
He stood like a rock in a time when most men in public life tended to sway like reeds in whatever direction the political and social winds happened to blow. As he once said, "I did not come to Washington to win a popularity contest.” He came to Washington to wage war for what he knew to be the truth, and he fought for nothing less than absolute victory.
He believed that killing babies in their mother’s wombs was simply cold-blooded murder. He accepted without question the ordained distinction between the sexes.
Jesse Helms refused to join the globalists’ worship of an imperfect United Nations -- and came close to forcing reforms in an otherwise unreformable institution dominated by forces who hated his country.
He worked to prevent the National Endowment for the Arts from funding work he disapproved of.
Helms was known as "Senator No" for his staunch opposition to an array of liberal causes, including arts funding and gay rights.
In later years, Helms worked with Clinton's secretary of state, Madeleine Albright, and U2 singer Bono to fight AIDS in Africa.
Helms was one of only a few rock solid conservative Senators that voted "No" to Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
He was a "Blue-collar", Nationalistic, Conservative.
Oh how I pray that we get more of the Jesse Helms type of Conservatives in Congress.
Senators that will say "No" to smut, gay rights, abortion, globalism, global warming freaks, atheists, God haters, and all those who support such perverted issues.
Jesse Helms was a major influence on American conservatism, but his career provides a blueprint for anyone who represents an embattled minority viewpoint. You can, with persistence and unflinching determination, change the political odds in your favor.
In this and in every other battle he chose to fight, Jesse Helms struck to his guns. He was one of a kind. Dear God find us more like him.
Jimbo
Thursday, July 3, 2008
Obama says Sermon on the Mount by Jesus justifies same-sex unions. What is Obama smoking??
Obama is ALL FOR Same-Sex unions and Gay Marriage. He continually lies about not being for Gay Marriage to a centrist crowd, but then tells a liberal crowd that he is for Gay Marriage.
Obama, showing his utter ignorance claimed (back in March 2008) that the Sermon on the Mount by Jesus justifies same-sex unions. What, you don't believe me?
Hear him for yourself.
http://www.cnsnews.com/cns/audio/2008/030308Obama1.wav
Never mind that the Sermon on the Mount does not contradict biblical teaching about marriage. In fact, in that Bible passage Jesus actually strengthens His instructions regarding marriage as a union between a man and a woman.
However, again, Obama disrespected a portion of the Word of God simply because it does not fit his worldview. The text he dismissed, Romans 1:24-32 states that homosexuality is sin (along with greed, envy, murder, strife, deceit, etc.) and condemns people who "give hearty approval to those who practice" such things. To say the least, it's not very reassuring that someone who describes himself as a person of faith would reject God's warning about those who facilitate others' sin.
Recently, in late June 2008, Obama makes another speech where he distorts the Bible again.
In my opinion, he mocks the Bible and the Sermon on the Mount here. Listen once again.
Call to Renewal Keynote - June 28, 2006 40:04 U.S. Senator Barack Obama http://obama.senate.gov Podcast (Listen specifically from 27-29 min. into the speech.)
For those who don't want to listen to the podcast, this is what Obama says,
"Which passages of Scripture should guide our public policy? Should we go with Leviticus, which suggests slavery is OK and that eating shellfish is abomination? How about Deuteronomy, which suggests stoning your child if he strays from the faith? Or should we just stick to the Sermon on the Mount -- a passage that is so radical that it's doubtful that our own Defense Department would survive its application". ha ha ha (Obama laughs along with the liberal crowd).
It's not that Obama simply misunderstands the Bible. His questions about Leviticus and Deuteronomy aren't merely rhetorical, but were posed to create doubts about the sufficiency of Scripture.
Without doubt, the Old Testament is relevant today and teaches us moral truths and principles God used to shape Israel to be His nation. However, it is disingenuous at best for Obama to suggest the dietary laws God delivered specifically to Israel somehow are in play today; nor is it right to imply there is serious discussion on any scale that such laws apply to the New Testament church (Peter's experience in Acts 10:9-16 put this issue to rest).
The same is true about Obama's suggestions regarding the stoning of a child and slavery. For the record:
-- 1 Timothy 1:8-11 condemns slave traders, and the book of Philemon is Paul's passionate appeal to secure the freedom of the runaway slave Onesimus.
-- The story of the prodigal son (Luke 15:11-32) gives insights about the New Testament teaching about how to deal with children who stray from the faith.
Christians who are considering supporting Obama; I have this message for you.
Obama, showing his utter ignorance claimed (back in March 2008) that the Sermon on the Mount by Jesus justifies same-sex unions. What, you don't believe me?
Hear him for yourself.
http://www.cnsnews.com/cns/audio/2008/030308Obama1.wav
Never mind that the Sermon on the Mount does not contradict biblical teaching about marriage. In fact, in that Bible passage Jesus actually strengthens His instructions regarding marriage as a union between a man and a woman.
However, again, Obama disrespected a portion of the Word of God simply because it does not fit his worldview. The text he dismissed, Romans 1:24-32 states that homosexuality is sin (along with greed, envy, murder, strife, deceit, etc.) and condemns people who "give hearty approval to those who practice" such things. To say the least, it's not very reassuring that someone who describes himself as a person of faith would reject God's warning about those who facilitate others' sin.
Recently, in late June 2008, Obama makes another speech where he distorts the Bible again.
In my opinion, he mocks the Bible and the Sermon on the Mount here. Listen once again.
Call to Renewal Keynote - June 28, 2006 40:04 U.S. Senator Barack Obama http://obama.senate.gov Podcast (Listen specifically from 27-29 min. into the speech.)
For those who don't want to listen to the podcast, this is what Obama says,
"Which passages of Scripture should guide our public policy? Should we go with Leviticus, which suggests slavery is OK and that eating shellfish is abomination? How about Deuteronomy, which suggests stoning your child if he strays from the faith? Or should we just stick to the Sermon on the Mount -- a passage that is so radical that it's doubtful that our own Defense Department would survive its application". ha ha ha (Obama laughs along with the liberal crowd).
It's not that Obama simply misunderstands the Bible. His questions about Leviticus and Deuteronomy aren't merely rhetorical, but were posed to create doubts about the sufficiency of Scripture.
Without doubt, the Old Testament is relevant today and teaches us moral truths and principles God used to shape Israel to be His nation. However, it is disingenuous at best for Obama to suggest the dietary laws God delivered specifically to Israel somehow are in play today; nor is it right to imply there is serious discussion on any scale that such laws apply to the New Testament church (Peter's experience in Acts 10:9-16 put this issue to rest).
The same is true about Obama's suggestions regarding the stoning of a child and slavery. For the record:
-- 1 Timothy 1:8-11 condemns slave traders, and the book of Philemon is Paul's passionate appeal to secure the freedom of the runaway slave Onesimus.
-- The story of the prodigal son (Luke 15:11-32) gives insights about the New Testament teaching about how to deal with children who stray from the faith.
Christians who are considering supporting Obama; I have this message for you.
WAKE UP AND READ YOUR BIBLE!
Obama makes a mockery of the Bible when he calls the book of Romans obscure.
The only thing obscure is Obama's knowledge of the Bible. Obama jokingly says, "folks need to read their Bibles". The biggest Folk that needs to read his Bible is Barak Obama himself.
Obama wants to FORCE your Public School Children to learn about the "goodness" of Homosexuality. Make no mistake about it. When you are away at work, Obama's operatives in the Public School system are gonna be SHOVING the HOMOCRAP down your 8 and 9 yr. old's throats.
Obama will be the most pro-gay President EVER. Bill Clinton looks conservative compared to Obama.
When Christians are given the opportunity to vote their values, they should consider the social and political impact of Obama's biblical views as well as how his beliefs affect his spiritual fitness to lead. However, Obama's misappropriation of Scripture to fit his political perspective is more grave than its implications for a presidential election. Indeed, the potential consequences of his scriptural misapplications far exceed the realm of politics -- the repercussions truly could be biblical in proportion.
Jimbo
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
The ACLU HATES YOU and wants you JAILED: IF YOU LOVE JESUS
That's right, the ACLU ( so-called American civil liberties union), Hates Christians.
The ACLU Hates the Bible
The ACLU Hates Jesus and those who profess faith in Him.
In fact, the statement has been made by ACLU attorneys that, "those who profess Jesus should be Jailed".
For more than 50 years, the ACLU and other radical activist groups have attempted to eliminate public expression of our nation's faith and heritage. They have done this through fear, intimidation, disinformation, and the filing of lawsuits (or threats of lawsuits) that would:
Through attacks like these, the ACLU and its allies have sought to limit the spread and influence of the Gospel in the United States.
The Alliance Defense Fund aims to keep that door open by providing case funding, strategy and coordination, attorney training, and litigation to defend religious freedom.
By God's grace, they are succeeding.
They have helped win numerous court victories that:
The ACLU Hates the Bible
The ACLU Hates Jesus and those who profess faith in Him.
In fact, the statement has been made by ACLU attorneys that, "those who profess Jesus should be Jailed".
For more than 50 years, the ACLU and other radical activist groups have attempted to eliminate public expression of our nation's faith and heritage. They have done this through fear, intimidation, disinformation, and the filing of lawsuits (or threats of lawsuits) that would:
- Eliminate Christian and historic faith symbols from government documents, buildings, and monuments
- Ban public prayer in schools and at school functions
- Deny Christians the right to use public facilities that are open to other groups
- Prevent Christians from expressing their faith in the workplace
Through attacks like these, the ACLU and its allies have sought to limit the spread and influence of the Gospel in the United States.
The Alliance Defense Fund aims to keep that door open by providing case funding, strategy and coordination, attorney training, and litigation to defend religious freedom.
By God's grace, they are succeeding.
They have helped win numerous court victories that:
- Stopped discrimination against Christian employees
- Enabled Christian groups to use public facilities on the same terms as other organizations
- Preserved historic and Christian acknowledgement in public places
ADF is a legal alliance defending the right to hear and speak the Truth through strategy, training, funding, and litigation. ADF President Alan Sears is co-author with Craig Osten of the book The ACLU vs. America (www.acluvsamerica.com).
WILMINGTON, N.C. — Attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund have offered free legal representation to a North Carolina school district that, after being threatened by the ACLU, has barred Gideons International members from distributing Bibles on elementary school campuses.
Hartnett County School District officials recently banned the practice, a long-standing tradition, after the ACLU claimed that it violated the Constitution.
"A religious organization such as the Gideons is not second class to other groups that are allowed to distribute literature for voluntary reading at public schools," said ADF Senior Legal Counsel David Cortman. "The ACLU’s claim that the district has somehow broken the law by honoring those equal access rights is not supported by current Supreme Court precedent."
Representatives from the ACLU contacted school district officials after receiving a complaint. As a result, Harnett officials made the decision to ban the distribution, rather than face possible legal action.
A copy of the letter sent Friday by ADF attorneys to Harnett County Superintendent of Schools Dan Honeycutt is available at www.telladf.org/UserDocs/HarnettLetter.pdf.
In a similar situation, ADF also offered legal representation to Cumberland County Schools, located in Fayetteville, N.C. In that situation, the ACLU claimed that the district’s policy of allowing outside groups to leave Bibles on elementary school campuses violated the U.S. Constitution (www.telladf.org/news/story.aspx?cid=4308).
"At no time did the school officials or the Gideons violate anyone’s constitutional rights," said Cortman. "The ACLU’s continued use of scare tactics to impose its agenda on public schools must be stopped. ADF is prepared to defend the school district free of charge should it choose to once again allow the distribution of Bibles by members of the Gideons and then be sued by the ACLU or any other group."
ADF is a legal alliance defending the right to hear and speak the Truth through strategy, training, funding, and litigation.
The ACLU proclaims itself to be the nation's "guardian of liberty," but their actions speak of a much more sinister purpose. From attacking religious expression to protecting child pornographers and pedophiles, the ACLU has worked for decades to destroy the America our Founding Fathers established. But by God's grace, we are now meeting these attacks in courtroom across America and winning! By supporting this vital effort and obtaining your copy of The ACLU vs. America, you not only help us expose the ACLU and its agenda, you also gain the tools to stand and defend your religious freedoms.
NEW ORLEANS — Attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund filed their response in federal court to what is at least the sixth lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union against the Tangipahoa Parish School Board regarding religious expression issues. The latest lawsuit is a direct challenge to the board’s practice of opening public meetings with prayer.
"A prayer shouldn’t be banned just because someone may be offended by it," said ADF Senior Legal Counsel Mike Johnson. "Just because the ACLU claims it is offended by public invocations does not mean the invocations must be silenced. Through their campaign of fear, intimidation, and disinformation, the ACLU and its allies continue their threats against hometown governments that they consider to be easy prey."
On Feb. 29, the ACLU filed a new lawsuit against the Tangipahoa Parish School Board for opening its meetings with prayer, after the school board adopted a model invocations policy prepared by ADF attorneys (www.telladf.org/news/story.aspx?cid=4210). Last July, the full panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit dismissed a previous lawsuit brought by the ACLU, stating that the ACLU’s "offended observer" claim lacked standing (www.telladf.org/news/story.aspx?cid=4188).
"The Constitution protects public officials who choose to invoke divine guidance and blessings upon their work," said Johnson. "Public officials throughout the country need to be encouraged and reminded that they can and should resist the increasingly radical demands of secularist groups, such as the ACLU."
The ACLU is Against School Choice too.
PHOENIX — Attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund filed a friend-of-the-court brief with the Arizona Court of Appeals to defend the state’s corporate tax credit tuition program on behalf of School Choice America, a non-profit student tuition organization. Earlier last year, an Arizona trial court dismissed a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union and its allies seeking to declare the tax credit program unconstitutional.
The ACLU and its allies filed suit to stop the state program for corporate taxpayers because it allows tuition scholarships to be used at private religious schools. An Arizona trial court dismissed the case before, following an earlier Arizona Supreme Court decision which found that donations made by individuals to non-profit student tuition organizations did not violate the so-called "separation of church and state."
"The ruling issued by the trial court was clear: The tax credit program is constitutional and does not violate the law," McCaleb said.
Last year in New Orleans, the ACLU tried to get a painting of Jesus removed from the Slidell city courthouse.
Fortunately, the court recognized that the First Amendment allows public officials, and not the ACLU, to determine what is appropriate for acknowledging our nation’s legal and cultural heritage.
It’s sad that we’ve reached a point where such images have to be defended. This ruling is believed to be the first-ever federal court decision to specifically review and uphold as constitutional an image of an adult Jesus on public display. While such images and other religious symbols are common in public buildings throughout the U.S., none have been challenged in this manner before.
But people, this type of lawsuit is what happens when Liberals like Obama Rule.
Obama and his ACLU co-horts are chomping at the bit to place more Fascist Liberals on the Supreme Court and other Judicial benches.
Despite these and many other successes, a great deal of work remains. By supporting the Alliance Defense Fund, you can help win the battle for religious liberty.
The ACLU has over 200 million dollars in their war chest to destroy America.
Talk to your friends and family. Explain to them that a vote for Obama means a vote for the ACLU and a vote AGAINST Religious Freedoms.
Jimbo
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)