British policy advisor says Gore is in 'panic' mode
Jim Brown - OneNewsNow - 4/1/2008 12:00:00 PM
British environmental analyst Christopher Monckton says Al Gore's latest attack on global warming skeptics shows the former vice president and other climate alarmists are "panicking."
On Sunday, CBS News correspondent Leslie Stahl asked Al Gore on the television show 60 Minutes what he thinks of people like Vice President Dick Cheney who doubt that global warming is caused by human activity.
"I think that those people are in such a tiny, tiny minority now with their point of view, they're almost like the ones who still believe that the moon landing was staged in a movie lot in Arizona, and those who believe the earth is flat," replied Gore. "That demeans them a little bit, but it's not that far off."
However, Lord Christopher Monckton, a policy advisor for former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher during the 1980s, says the former vice president can enjoy his "flat earth fantasies" for a few months, but in the end, the world will be laughing at him.
"The alarmists are alarmed, the panic mongers are panicking, the scare mongers are scared; the Gores are gored. Why? Because global warming stopped ten years ago; it hasn't got warmer since 1998," he points out. "And in fact in the last seven years, there has been a downturn in global temperatures equivalent on average to about [or] very close to one degree Fahrenheit per decade. We're actually in a period ... of global cooling."
Monckton contends Gore is now "panicking" because he has staked his reputation as a former American VP on "telling the world that we're all doomed unless we shut down 90 percent of the Western economies." He also contends that Gore is the largest "global-warming profiteer."
Gore's group The Alliance for Climate Protection is currently launching a new $300 million ad campaign that demands reforms in environmental law to help reduce the supposed "climate crisis." But Monckton points out that in the U.K., Gore is not allowed to speak in public about his "green investment company" because to do so would violate racketeering laws by "peddling a false prospectus." He says that fact came about after a British high court found Gore's movie, An Inconvenient Truth, riddled with errors.
Monckton challenged Gore to an internationally televised debate on climate change last year.
Tuesday, April 1, 2008
Friday, March 28, 2008
Oprah Preaches False Gospel
Oprah labeled 'false prophet' and 'conduit ... to Hell'
Jeff Johnson - OneNewsNow - 3/27/2008 8:00:00 AM
A Christian author who was saved out of the new age movement says media icon Oprah Winfrey has become a false prophet for a false Jesus.
Oprah Winfrey identifies herself as a Christian. But she says that, when she was a young woman, she was disturbed by a pastor's declaration that the God of the Bible is a jealous God. "And something about that didn't feel right in my spirit because I believe that God is love and that God is in all things," she told her television audience. "And, so, that's when the, the, the search for something more than doctrine started to stir within me."
Warren Smith, author of Reinventing Jesus Christ: The New Gospel, is a Christian who was saved from the new age movement. He says Oprah's search led her to Marianne Williamson and the new age teachings of A Course in Miracles.
"Marianne Williamson was on Oprah back in 1992 with her book about the Course in Miracles," Smith recalled, "and back then, Oprah said, 'I believe that the principles of A Course in Miracles can change the world' -- and she's saying the same thing today."
Williamson is now promoting A Course in Miracles through daily classes on Oprah's XM satellite radio channel. "I will be on Oprah & Friends every single day talking about the ideas in A Course in Miracles," Williamson said during a promotional announcement for the program. "We can have miracles. We can have greater inner peace. We can shift from an experience of fear to an experience of greater love."
Oprah told her audience that she has no problem reconciling the differences between the new age religion she is now promoting and the Christian faith she claims. "I reconciled it because I was able to open my mind about the, um, the absolute, indescribable hugeness of that which we call 'God,'" Oprah said. "I took God out of the box."
But Smith, appearing on the March 11 edition of the AFA Report, said the false teachings of A Course in Miracles should be obvious to any Christian. "Here are some of the lessons: Lesson 29, 'God is in everything I see.' Lesson 186, 'The salvation of the world depends on me.' 253, 'My self is the ruler of the universe.' 337, 'My sinless-ness protects me from all harm,'" Smith said, quoting from the lessons. "This is the Bible upside-down."
Smith also criticized Oprah for the selection of Eckhart Tolle's new age book A New Earth: Awakening to Your Life's Purpose as her book of the month.
"It reminds me of Jeremiah 5 where he says, 'A wonderful and horrible thing is committed in the land, the prophets prophesy falsely and my people love to have it so,'" Smith explained. "What is more wonderful these days than Oprah? A wonderful and horrible thing is happening in the land, the prophets prophesy falsely. Oprah -- by now teaching this class with Eckhart Tolle -- is no longer a pointer to deception. She is a false prophet and part of it herself."
Christians have an obligation, Smith concluded, to point out the error of Oprah's new age "christianity," even if doing so means risking public ridicule.
"Unfortunately, Oprah does so many things that are really good [that] people make the mistake of thinking that she's on to something with this whole spiritual deal," Smith argued. "What she's doing is, she's creating a new worldview. They're calling it a 'shift' that will prepare people for when the next shoe drops.
"And this will be the way that world peace would be achieved," he said, explaining the new age philosophy behind A Course in Miracles, "by everybody adopting this view that 'we're all one because we're all god, we need to come together, we need to be in unity.'
"And the only people who are going to hinder that are the people who are saying, 'No, we're not God. Jesus Christ is our Lord and Savior.'
Internet evangelist Bill Keller, appearing on Fox News Channel's Cavuto Report, echoed Smith's warnings, calling Oprah the queen of the new age gurus. "These new age teachings are really sucking in millions of people to these false philosophies, these false theologies, and they're literally leading people to Hell," Keller said. "Oprah, whether she knows it or not, is really being a conduit to lead people to Hell."
Jeff Johnson - OneNewsNow - 3/27/2008 8:00:00 AM
A Christian author who was saved out of the new age movement says media icon Oprah Winfrey has become a false prophet for a false Jesus.
Oprah Winfrey identifies herself as a Christian. But she says that, when she was a young woman, she was disturbed by a pastor's declaration that the God of the Bible is a jealous God. "And something about that didn't feel right in my spirit because I believe that God is love and that God is in all things," she told her television audience. "And, so, that's when the, the, the search for something more than doctrine started to stir within me."
Warren Smith, author of Reinventing Jesus Christ: The New Gospel, is a Christian who was saved from the new age movement. He says Oprah's search led her to Marianne Williamson and the new age teachings of A Course in Miracles.
"Marianne Williamson was on Oprah back in 1992 with her book about the Course in Miracles," Smith recalled, "and back then, Oprah said, 'I believe that the principles of A Course in Miracles can change the world' -- and she's saying the same thing today."
Williamson is now promoting A Course in Miracles through daily classes on Oprah's XM satellite radio channel. "I will be on Oprah & Friends every single day talking about the ideas in A Course in Miracles," Williamson said during a promotional announcement for the program. "We can have miracles. We can have greater inner peace. We can shift from an experience of fear to an experience of greater love."
Oprah told her audience that she has no problem reconciling the differences between the new age religion she is now promoting and the Christian faith she claims. "I reconciled it because I was able to open my mind about the, um, the absolute, indescribable hugeness of that which we call 'God,'" Oprah said. "I took God out of the box."
But Smith, appearing on the March 11 edition of the AFA Report, said the false teachings of A Course in Miracles should be obvious to any Christian. "Here are some of the lessons: Lesson 29, 'God is in everything I see.' Lesson 186, 'The salvation of the world depends on me.' 253, 'My self is the ruler of the universe.' 337, 'My sinless-ness protects me from all harm,'" Smith said, quoting from the lessons. "This is the Bible upside-down."
Smith also criticized Oprah for the selection of Eckhart Tolle's new age book A New Earth: Awakening to Your Life's Purpose as her book of the month.
"It reminds me of Jeremiah 5 where he says, 'A wonderful and horrible thing is committed in the land, the prophets prophesy falsely and my people love to have it so,'" Smith explained. "What is more wonderful these days than Oprah? A wonderful and horrible thing is happening in the land, the prophets prophesy falsely. Oprah -- by now teaching this class with Eckhart Tolle -- is no longer a pointer to deception. She is a false prophet and part of it herself."
Christians have an obligation, Smith concluded, to point out the error of Oprah's new age "christianity," even if doing so means risking public ridicule.
"Unfortunately, Oprah does so many things that are really good [that] people make the mistake of thinking that she's on to something with this whole spiritual deal," Smith argued. "What she's doing is, she's creating a new worldview. They're calling it a 'shift' that will prepare people for when the next shoe drops.
"And this will be the way that world peace would be achieved," he said, explaining the new age philosophy behind A Course in Miracles, "by everybody adopting this view that 'we're all one because we're all god, we need to come together, we need to be in unity.'
"And the only people who are going to hinder that are the people who are saying, 'No, we're not God. Jesus Christ is our Lord and Savior.'
Internet evangelist Bill Keller, appearing on Fox News Channel's Cavuto Report, echoed Smith's warnings, calling Oprah the queen of the new age gurus. "These new age teachings are really sucking in millions of people to these false philosophies, these false theologies, and they're literally leading people to Hell," Keller said. "Oprah, whether she knows it or not, is really being a conduit to lead people to Hell."
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Feminists Celebrates Baby Killer
Tiller's appearance at NEA-hosted event draws pro-lifers' attention
Jim Brown - OneNewsNow - 3/26/2008 6:00:00 AM
The National Education Association is being denounced for hosting an event honoring infamous abortionist George Tiller who is facing 19 criminal charges for performing illegal late-term abortions.
George Tiller, a man many pro-lifers call "Tiller the baby killer," received a standing ovation at the Feminist Majority Foundation's annual Women's Leadership Conference held recently at the NEA's headquarters in Washington, DC. During his talk, Tiller attempted to justify his work by showing the approving audience pictures of babies he had aborted who had fetal abnormalities. The Feminist Majority Foundation then announced it was launching a new campaign designed to keep Tiller's Wichita, Kansas, abortion mill open.
Two employees with the group Students for Life of America secretly videotaped a conversation they had with Tiller after the event. Executive director Kristan Hawkins, who conducted the interview with the abortionist, says when she questioned Tiller about his views on infanticide, he stated that he was not even aware of the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. [Editor's note: The videotaped interview is available at the group's website.]
"He said that he has done abortions up until the day before delivery -- so that's 36 weeks, 35 weeks [in the womb]," says Hawkins. "He also said [if] you have 15 or 16 [abortions] and one slips out with a heartbeat, that's not a viable fetus." And the pro-life activist claims Tiller stated that if a baby is born alive during an abortion, "that's just sloppy medicine, that's just sloppy technique."
Hawkins says the National Education Association has no legitimate explanation for hosting Tiller. "It's pretty sickening," Hawkins shares. "We've have a lot of pro-life teachers write the NEA since we put the information out."
The activist's husband, who is a teacher, had written the NEA about its hosting of the conference and its guest speaker. According to Hawkins, the NEA responded that it sometimes allows "likeminded groups" to use the building for a small fee or no charge at all. "So they're classifying the Feminist Majority Foundation as a likeminded group," she points out. "Now this is an extreme pro-abortion organization."
Hawkins says although the NEA has a long history of pro-abortion activism, many pro-life teachers viewed the Tiller appearance as the "final straw" and have subsequently chosen to leave the union.
Jim Brown - OneNewsNow - 3/26/2008 6:00:00 AM
The National Education Association is being denounced for hosting an event honoring infamous abortionist George Tiller who is facing 19 criminal charges for performing illegal late-term abortions.
George Tiller, a man many pro-lifers call "Tiller the baby killer," received a standing ovation at the Feminist Majority Foundation's annual Women's Leadership Conference held recently at the NEA's headquarters in Washington, DC. During his talk, Tiller attempted to justify his work by showing the approving audience pictures of babies he had aborted who had fetal abnormalities. The Feminist Majority Foundation then announced it was launching a new campaign designed to keep Tiller's Wichita, Kansas, abortion mill open.
Two employees with the group Students for Life of America secretly videotaped a conversation they had with Tiller after the event. Executive director Kristan Hawkins, who conducted the interview with the abortionist, says when she questioned Tiller about his views on infanticide, he stated that he was not even aware of the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. [Editor's note: The videotaped interview is available at the group's website.]
"He said that he has done abortions up until the day before delivery -- so that's 36 weeks, 35 weeks [in the womb]," says Hawkins. "He also said [if] you have 15 or 16 [abortions] and one slips out with a heartbeat, that's not a viable fetus." And the pro-life activist claims Tiller stated that if a baby is born alive during an abortion, "that's just sloppy medicine, that's just sloppy technique."
Hawkins says the National Education Association has no legitimate explanation for hosting Tiller. "It's pretty sickening," Hawkins shares. "We've have a lot of pro-life teachers write the NEA since we put the information out."
The activist's husband, who is a teacher, had written the NEA about its hosting of the conference and its guest speaker. According to Hawkins, the NEA responded that it sometimes allows "likeminded groups" to use the building for a small fee or no charge at all. "So they're classifying the Feminist Majority Foundation as a likeminded group," she points out. "Now this is an extreme pro-abortion organization."
Hawkins says although the NEA has a long history of pro-abortion activism, many pro-life teachers viewed the Tiller appearance as the "final straw" and have subsequently chosen to leave the union.
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Oxford Scientist Examines the Benefits of Hitler's Breeding Program
by Lawrence Ford
In a supposed “letter to the editor” last week for the Sunday Herald of Scotland titled “Eugenics may not be bad,” Oxford professor Dr. Richard Dawkins, author of The God Delusion and leading evangelist for Darwinian evolution, defended the need to examine the positive benefits of selective human breeding or “eugenics” as Hitler had attempted in Nazi Germany in the 1930s.
Actually, the Sunday Herald had lifted the Dawkins content from the Afterword in a new book by John Brockman titled What is Your Dangerous Idea?
Eugenics is defined as “the study of or belief in the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species or a human population, esp. by such means as discouraging reproduction by persons having genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits (negative eugenics) or encouraging reproduction by persons presumed to have inheritable desirable traits (positive eugenics)."1
Some have called eugenics “racial hygiene,” a cleansing of the races to promote the good and eliminate the bad.
Hitler’s Nazi regime enacted the “Law for the Prevention of Hereditarily Diseased Offspring” in 1933, which effectively gave the Third Reich free reign to forcibly sterilize selected segments of German society as determined in the “Genetic Health Courts.” Other Nazi laws went further, such as Action T4, resulting in the euthanizing (aka murder) of millions by the end of the war, mostly Jews.
Dawkins, who has been called “Darwin’s Rottweiler” because of his aggressive defense of Darwinian evolution and his even more scathing attacks upon people of faith, considers the idea of eugenics natural:
…if you can breed cattle for milk yield, horses for running speed, and dogs for herding skill, why on Earth should it be impossible to breed humans for mathematical, musical or athletic ability?
If there is no difference between cows and horses and dogs and humans, then Dawkins’ logic is rational and humans should expect to live on the Planet of the Apes, where we will eventually be bred for utilitarian purposes by more highly-evolved apes.
The scenario is, of course, ridiculous, but the moral vacuum in Dawkins’ reasoning still pushes him to toy with the possibilities:
I wonder whether, some 60 years after Hitler's death, we might at least venture to ask what the moral difference is between breeding for musical ability and forcing a child to take music lessons. Or why it is acceptable to train fast runners and high jumpers but not to breed them. I can think of some answers, and they are good ones, which would probably end up persuading me. But hasn't the time come when we should stop being frightened even to put the question?
Not surprisingly, Professor Dawkins has also backed a proposal for the United Nations to confer human rights on apes.
The Apostle Paul commented on this Godless logic long ago:
“For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen” (Romans 1:25 NASB).
References
1"eugenics." Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.0.1). Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006. 26 Nov. 2006.
In a supposed “letter to the editor” last week for the Sunday Herald of Scotland titled “Eugenics may not be bad,” Oxford professor Dr. Richard Dawkins, author of The God Delusion and leading evangelist for Darwinian evolution, defended the need to examine the positive benefits of selective human breeding or “eugenics” as Hitler had attempted in Nazi Germany in the 1930s.
Actually, the Sunday Herald had lifted the Dawkins content from the Afterword in a new book by John Brockman titled What is Your Dangerous Idea?
Eugenics is defined as “the study of or belief in the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species or a human population, esp. by such means as discouraging reproduction by persons having genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits (negative eugenics) or encouraging reproduction by persons presumed to have inheritable desirable traits (positive eugenics)."1
Some have called eugenics “racial hygiene,” a cleansing of the races to promote the good and eliminate the bad.
Hitler’s Nazi regime enacted the “Law for the Prevention of Hereditarily Diseased Offspring” in 1933, which effectively gave the Third Reich free reign to forcibly sterilize selected segments of German society as determined in the “Genetic Health Courts.” Other Nazi laws went further, such as Action T4, resulting in the euthanizing (aka murder) of millions by the end of the war, mostly Jews.
Dawkins, who has been called “Darwin’s Rottweiler” because of his aggressive defense of Darwinian evolution and his even more scathing attacks upon people of faith, considers the idea of eugenics natural:
…if you can breed cattle for milk yield, horses for running speed, and dogs for herding skill, why on Earth should it be impossible to breed humans for mathematical, musical or athletic ability?
If there is no difference between cows and horses and dogs and humans, then Dawkins’ logic is rational and humans should expect to live on the Planet of the Apes, where we will eventually be bred for utilitarian purposes by more highly-evolved apes.
The scenario is, of course, ridiculous, but the moral vacuum in Dawkins’ reasoning still pushes him to toy with the possibilities:
I wonder whether, some 60 years after Hitler's death, we might at least venture to ask what the moral difference is between breeding for musical ability and forcing a child to take music lessons. Or why it is acceptable to train fast runners and high jumpers but not to breed them. I can think of some answers, and they are good ones, which would probably end up persuading me. But hasn't the time come when we should stop being frightened even to put the question?
Not surprisingly, Professor Dawkins has also backed a proposal for the United Nations to confer human rights on apes.
The Apostle Paul commented on this Godless logic long ago:
“For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen” (Romans 1:25 NASB).
References
1"eugenics." Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.0.1). Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006. 26 Nov. 2006.
Monday, March 24, 2008
Annual Parade of Nonsense
It never fails. Every year around Easter time the cable channels blow the dust off some pathetic programming about Jesus. I mean this stuff reeks to high heaven. I was just surfing the channels the other day and saw about 30 seconds of a program before the appearance of the resurrected Lord was called an hallucination. That is a bold statement coming from people on the other side of the globe, 2,000 years removed from the events in question. I was immediately infuriated and gave them no more of my viewing time. Such lunacy does not deserve anyone's ratings. Those who watch such drivel are probably already in the same camp with its creators.
You see, it strikes me as odd that these programs will completely ignore the obvious evidence and they focus on some abstract nonsense like psychology to explain the physical appearances of the God-Man Jesus Christ after His very public death. If the post-resurrection appearances of Jesus were done in secret, to, say, 3 people, and the appearance was only once or twice during a few days following the death of our Lord you may be able to excuse this nonsensical conjecture. However, the historical record is clear: Jesus appeared to multiple people on various occasions over a period of 40 days. Some of these people were friends and relatives I suppose, but not all of them had the opportunity to compare notes and share their experiences with one another. They were people from various walks of life, in different environments under different circumstances. This was no trick of lighting, no imagined voice in the wind. Jesus made physical contact. He ate with His followers on more than one occasion in His resurrected state. Even the skeptic Thomas was overwhelmed by the evidence of a living Christ.
And let us not forget the testimony of Paul. As many scholars agree that Paul himself was merely reciting an early creed of the church when he tells that Jesus appears to more than 500 people at one time. Imagine that. Over 500 eye witnesses. If this appearance was an illusion, then something potent must have been in the drinking water of the day. There is no way to explain away the physical, bodily appearances of Christ that the apostles confirmed again and again.
One way to understand the idiotic ramblings of modern day skeptics is to understand the arrogant attitude they have toward people in the ancient world. They discount every testimony of the ancients that does not agree with their world view, believing that everyone that existing over 200 years ago must have been delusional and uneducated. After all, we know that miracles cannot take place, that there is no god and no one can be raised from the dead. With that supposition firmly in place, there is no reasoning with these people.
If they discover many more ancient manuscripts further confirming the testimony of the apostles. If someone uncovers Noah's ark. If miracles happen right in front of their eyes, they will not believe. This faith is a product of the Holy Spirit and not the reason of man. Apart from the Holy Spirit no one will believe and no one can believe. All the testimony of the ancient world will merely fall on deaf ears unless a person has an encounter with God in the person of the Holy Spirit.
God can use evidence or He can draw people to Himself without any evidence. People like Josh McDowell and Lee Strobel came to Christ and they may think that it was the evidence that persuaded them. They are dead wrong. We all are faced with the same evidence. Some pay more attention to it, some study it, some avoid it. But the bottom line is that God draws people to Himself. Everyone knows enough to be without excuse but no one knows enough from the evidence to choose Christ. Those who choose Christ are those who have had their eyes opened. Eye witness testimony can't do that. This faith is a gift from God and it comes to the scholar and the illiterate, the priest and the heathen, the one who thinks he is searching for the truth and the one who is running from the truth.
I want to be so angry at the fools who produce documentaries dismissing the Christ and His power. In the end, however, I feel pity. They have eyes to see but they cannot see. They have ears to hear but they do not hear. They will pay dearly for those they have misled through their endless documentaries that deny the obvious. But it is only obvious to those who have the Holy Spirit.
Evidence or no evidence—what makes the difference is the work of God in the heart of man.
You see, it strikes me as odd that these programs will completely ignore the obvious evidence and they focus on some abstract nonsense like psychology to explain the physical appearances of the God-Man Jesus Christ after His very public death. If the post-resurrection appearances of Jesus were done in secret, to, say, 3 people, and the appearance was only once or twice during a few days following the death of our Lord you may be able to excuse this nonsensical conjecture. However, the historical record is clear: Jesus appeared to multiple people on various occasions over a period of 40 days. Some of these people were friends and relatives I suppose, but not all of them had the opportunity to compare notes and share their experiences with one another. They were people from various walks of life, in different environments under different circumstances. This was no trick of lighting, no imagined voice in the wind. Jesus made physical contact. He ate with His followers on more than one occasion in His resurrected state. Even the skeptic Thomas was overwhelmed by the evidence of a living Christ.
And let us not forget the testimony of Paul. As many scholars agree that Paul himself was merely reciting an early creed of the church when he tells that Jesus appears to more than 500 people at one time. Imagine that. Over 500 eye witnesses. If this appearance was an illusion, then something potent must have been in the drinking water of the day. There is no way to explain away the physical, bodily appearances of Christ that the apostles confirmed again and again.
One way to understand the idiotic ramblings of modern day skeptics is to understand the arrogant attitude they have toward people in the ancient world. They discount every testimony of the ancients that does not agree with their world view, believing that everyone that existing over 200 years ago must have been delusional and uneducated. After all, we know that miracles cannot take place, that there is no god and no one can be raised from the dead. With that supposition firmly in place, there is no reasoning with these people.
If they discover many more ancient manuscripts further confirming the testimony of the apostles. If someone uncovers Noah's ark. If miracles happen right in front of their eyes, they will not believe. This faith is a product of the Holy Spirit and not the reason of man. Apart from the Holy Spirit no one will believe and no one can believe. All the testimony of the ancient world will merely fall on deaf ears unless a person has an encounter with God in the person of the Holy Spirit.
God can use evidence or He can draw people to Himself without any evidence. People like Josh McDowell and Lee Strobel came to Christ and they may think that it was the evidence that persuaded them. They are dead wrong. We all are faced with the same evidence. Some pay more attention to it, some study it, some avoid it. But the bottom line is that God draws people to Himself. Everyone knows enough to be without excuse but no one knows enough from the evidence to choose Christ. Those who choose Christ are those who have had their eyes opened. Eye witness testimony can't do that. This faith is a gift from God and it comes to the scholar and the illiterate, the priest and the heathen, the one who thinks he is searching for the truth and the one who is running from the truth.
I want to be so angry at the fools who produce documentaries dismissing the Christ and His power. In the end, however, I feel pity. They have eyes to see but they cannot see. They have ears to hear but they do not hear. They will pay dearly for those they have misled through their endless documentaries that deny the obvious. But it is only obvious to those who have the Holy Spirit.
Evidence or no evidence—what makes the difference is the work of God in the heart of man.
Saturday, March 22, 2008
Homosexuals Clamp Down on Free Speech
Okla. lawmaker threatened with legal action for practicing free speech
Allie Martin - OneNewsNow - 3/21/2008 6:00:00 AM
Oklahoma state lawmaker Sally Kern has had to obtain legal representation in the wake of a barrage of tens of thousands of hate-filled emails and threatened lawsuits after she spoke publicly about the dangers of the radical homosexual agenda.
During a recent speech at a Republican club meeting, Sooner State Representative Sally Kern said she was concerned that the homosexual agenda would destroy the nation and that the threat the movement poses is as big a threat to the nation as terrorism. She also told how young public school children are being indoctrinated into believing that the homosexual lifestyle is normal.
Reaction to her speech, which was posted on YouTube, was swift from homosexual activists. Kern said she received more than 27,000 emails to her office and home computers, many of them filled with profanity and vulgarity.
Now Kern is being represented by the Thomas More Law Center. Attorney Brian Rooney says his client has been threatened with legal action for expressing her First Amendment right to free speech. He believes homosexual activists will use the incident to push for hate crimes legislation.
"Really [it's] a ploy to try to intimidate Representative Kern in particular, and the state legislature in Oklahoma in general, to try to get these laws passed that favor them and end up criminalizing Christianity," he says.
Rooney explains that in addition to defending Kern's right to free speech, the Law Center wants to deliver a message to those threatening the lawmaker.
"[We're] making sure that these advocacy groups for the radical homosexuals know that a Christian public-interest law firm is involved, and that Representative Kern does not back down one iota from what she said; she stands by that," says the attorney. In addition, he says his firm wants those groups to know that "if there's any ill-conceived or misguided lawsuits against her that we will defend her free of charge."
Rooney says legal action may also be taken against some homosexual advocacy groups who erroneously reported that Kern's son was homosexual. Rooney says many media outlets reported that information, despite the fact that the homosexual groups did not have the correct name of Kern's son.
Four years ago, Oklahoma voters overwhelmingly approved a state constitutional amendment defining marriage as only between one man and one woman.
Allie Martin - OneNewsNow - 3/21/2008 6:00:00 AM
Oklahoma state lawmaker Sally Kern has had to obtain legal representation in the wake of a barrage of tens of thousands of hate-filled emails and threatened lawsuits after she spoke publicly about the dangers of the radical homosexual agenda.
During a recent speech at a Republican club meeting, Sooner State Representative Sally Kern said she was concerned that the homosexual agenda would destroy the nation and that the threat the movement poses is as big a threat to the nation as terrorism. She also told how young public school children are being indoctrinated into believing that the homosexual lifestyle is normal.
Reaction to her speech, which was posted on YouTube, was swift from homosexual activists. Kern said she received more than 27,000 emails to her office and home computers, many of them filled with profanity and vulgarity.
Now Kern is being represented by the Thomas More Law Center. Attorney Brian Rooney says his client has been threatened with legal action for expressing her First Amendment right to free speech. He believes homosexual activists will use the incident to push for hate crimes legislation.
"Really [it's] a ploy to try to intimidate Representative Kern in particular, and the state legislature in Oklahoma in general, to try to get these laws passed that favor them and end up criminalizing Christianity," he says.
Rooney explains that in addition to defending Kern's right to free speech, the Law Center wants to deliver a message to those threatening the lawmaker.
"[We're] making sure that these advocacy groups for the radical homosexuals know that a Christian public-interest law firm is involved, and that Representative Kern does not back down one iota from what she said; she stands by that," says the attorney. In addition, he says his firm wants those groups to know that "if there's any ill-conceived or misguided lawsuits against her that we will defend her free of charge."
Rooney says legal action may also be taken against some homosexual advocacy groups who erroneously reported that Kern's son was homosexual. Rooney says many media outlets reported that information, despite the fact that the homosexual groups did not have the correct name of Kern's son.
Four years ago, Oklahoma voters overwhelmingly approved a state constitutional amendment defining marriage as only between one man and one woman.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)