Christ, Christians and Christmas Under Attack In The Courts

[Soldier4Christ]

The name of this organization says it all, Freedom from Religion Foundation. Even this name says that it is anti-Constitutional as the Constitution specially states freedom of religion. They claim that they want inclusion. The Constitution statement does include them as they have the freedom they claim they want in those three little words of "freedom of religion", they can worship as they want even if it is not to worship at all. Inclusion is not what they want, this is clear that what they want is the exclusion and denigration of Christ and Christians in all aspects.

[Soldier4Christ]

State ban on Christian charities dropped
Agrees to let workers donate to faith-based groups

Officials in Iowa have agreed to let employees participating in a government program to donate to charities choose Christian organizations, overturning a state ban that was the target of a lawsuit by the Alliance Defense Fund.

It's at least the fourth state in which the dispute has arisen, according to officials.

The newest situation has been resolved with an agreement from the Iowa Department of Administration to let state workers contribute to faith-based charities under the state's Iowa One Gift program, the ADF said.

"Religious charities providing critical social services should not be discriminated against simply because they practice their religious beliefs and hire persons who share them," said M. Casey Mattox, litigation counsel for the Center for Law & Religious Freedom of the Christian Law Society, which also worked on the case.

"While it is disappointing that legal action was even necessary to address this clear constitutional violation, we applaud the state for eventually getting it right and amending its rules to respect religious freedom," Mattox said.

Officials said the state agreed to correct rules that previously excluded faith-based organizations from getting voluntary donations through a payroll deduction system.

Attorneys with the ADF and the CLS had filed suit in March alleging the rules excluding religious charities violated the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

The rules of the Iowa One Gift program excluded any charitable organization that "engages in any way in sectarian activities," advocates "religious viewpoints" or "discriminates" on the basis of religion in employment.

The department has now eliminated the exclusion of "sectarian" and "religious" charities and amended its nondiscrimination rule to only require employment practices to comply with Iowa employment law, which includes an exemption for the faith-based hiring policies of religious employers, officials said.

As a result of the changes, ADF and CLS attorneys will voluntarily dismiss their lawsuit, Association of Faith-Based Organizations v. Anderson, from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa.

The same issue also has arisen in Florida, Michigan and Wisconsin, officials said.

In Wisconsin, a federal district court ruled in 2006 in favor of the Association of Faith-Based Organizations which sued for being denied permission to participate in Wisconsin's State Employees Combined Campaign.

The order prohibited the program from denying religious organizations permission to participate.

Also in 2006, attorneys for the ADF and CLS successful worked with Michigan officials to allow religious charitable groups to participate in the Michigan State Employees Combined Campaign.

The next year the dispute came up in Florida, where state officials ultimately agreed to amend state rules for their Florida State Employees' Charitable Campaign.

Under the Florida agreement, the state adopted rules to ensure religious charities no longer would be excluded because of their religious viewpoints.

The AFBO is an association of non-profit religious charities seeking to protect the constitutional freedom of religious organizations to staff and select members on a religious basis. AFBO is comprised of social service providers, educational institutions, membership associations, and advocacy outreach organizations, including the Christian Legal Society and other non-profit organizations.

[Soldier4Christ]

Court considers ACLU demand for Bible ban
School policy targeted for treating Scriptures equally

A federal appeals court is considering a Missouri dispute in which the American Civil Liberties Union challenged a school district policy that treated the Bible the same as other books and demanded the authority to veto what would be handed out to students.

The controversy arose over a request by the Gideons to distribute Bibles in the South Iron School District, which has a neutral policy that allows distribution of outside literature by various groups under set rules, irrespective of whether the literature is secular or religious.

"Under this policy, an outside group may offer Bibles to students who wish to take them in the same manner as other nonreligious groups are permitted to distribute secular literature," according to Liberty Counsel, whose chief, Mathew Staver, argued the case today before a panel of the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis.

The Bible distribution was targeted by an ACLU lawsuit in 2006, and the school responded with a written policy that treats all literature the same.

But at the trial court level, Judge Catherine Perry issued an order specifically prohibiting distribution of the Bible, and the Bible alone, after calling it an "instrument of religion."

She said the district's neutral treatment of literature is unacceptable, because it actually would allow the distribution of the Bible.

"The ruling presented a novel (and unconstitutional) theory that a private third party (like the ACLU) must have the opportunity to veto the distribution request of the private applicant," Liberty Counsel said. "The veto power, the judge wrote, must be provided to veto religious, but not secular, literature."

Staver said the Constitution simply doesn't allow the Bible to be singled out, like contraband, for special penalties.

"How ironic that in America, until recent times, the Bible formed the basis of education, and now its mere presence is radioactive in the opinion of some judges," he said. "The Founders never envisioned such open hostility toward the Christian religion as we see today in some venues. To single out the Bible alone for discriminatory treatment harkens back to the Dark Ages. America deserves better. Our Constitution should be respected, not disregarded."

Staver told WND that a decision is not expected to be announced for about two months.

He said the lower court's ban targets only the Bible.

"The Quran is OK, and other kinds of religious texts; just not the Bible. The Bible alone is impermissible in the public school," he said.

WND reported earlier when a brief was filed with the federal appeals court.

Among the groups that have distributed material at the school are the Army Corps of Engineers, Red Cross, Girl Scouts, Boy Scouts, Iron County Health Department, Missouri Water Patrol, Missouri Highland Healthcare and Union Pacific Railroad, officials said.

"The ACLU might not like the fact that equal access also means equal treatment for religious speech, but the Constitution requires equal treatment. The First Amendment protects private religious viewpoints. Hecklers may heckle but they may not veto private religious speech. ... Religious viewpoints have Constitutional protection," Staver said.

The minutes from board meetings noted the board president "explained to the board at this point, we are an open forum and any group can request to enter our school and distribute materials – atheists, communists, gay rights, etc." The minutes note the board members acknowledged the policy.

However, Perry banned the district "from distributing or allowing distribution of Bibles to elementary school children on school property at any time during the school day."

"The district court also opined that 'Bibles are different' from other forms of religious literature," Liberty Counsel said.

The Gideons, a group founded in the late 1800s, have as their "sole purpose" the goal "to win men, women, boys and girls to a saving knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ through association for service, personal testimony, and distributing the Bible in the human traffic lanes and streams of everyday life."

Gideons have placed the Bible in 181 nations in 82 different languages over the years.

The organization focuses on hotels and motels, hospitals and nursing homes, schools, colleges and universities, the military, law enforcement, prisons and jails.

"The demand for Scriptures in these areas far exceeds our supplies that we are able to purchase through our donations," the group said.  Much more could be done – if funds were available. However, we are placing and distributing more than one million copies of the Word of God, at no cost, every seven days in these areas. ..."

The Gideons is the oldest Christian business and professional men's association in the U.S.

[Soldier4Christ]

'Under God' foe's defamation complaint tossed
Sued WND, minister for commentary critical of lawsuit against school district

California attorney Michael Newdow, who pushed a case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court in an unsuccessful effort to remove the words "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance, has lost a defamation complaint against a pastor who criticized him.

According to the Thomas More Law Center, a court ruling has dismissed Newdow's defamation complaint against Rev. Austin Miles. Newdow also had targeted WND with his legal action but agreed to release the news site from his case.

"We are pleased with the court's decision," said Law Center attorney Brandon Bolling, who tried the case before Judge Barbara Zuniga. "It was very clear from the start that Newdow's claims against Reverend Miles had no merit."

The judge concluded in a ruling released Nov. 20 that Newdow was not defamed and was not entitled to damages. The dismissal was with prejudice, meaning the claim cannot be refiled, the legal advocacy group said.

The law center said the claim was based on an article Miles wrote asserting Newdow had lied to the court in the Pledge of Allegiance case by claiming his daughter was forced to recite the words "under God" at her school.

Miles' commentary noted Newdow's daughter actually is a Christian who willingly said the Pledge.

Newdow initially was awarded, in June 2004, a default judgment against Miles for $1 million, but the law center said Miles hadn't been notified of the complaint. He contacted the Thomas More Law Center after learning about the award, and lawyers persuaded the court to set aside the judgment and allow the case to proceed to trial

Mark A. Thiel of Stockton, Calif., assisted the law center as local counsel.

The case previously involved WND, the Internet's leading independent news site.

But shortly after naming WND has a defendant, Newdow agreed to drop the organization from the complaint.

The case, which originated about six years ago, alleged WND published a quote from Newdow that his daughter "was forced to recite, caused her emotional damage, stress, anxiety and a sense of being left out."

The lawsuit alleged the quote was never said by Newdow.

But WND did not publish the quotation, and Newdow quickly agreed to dismiss WND as a defendant.

Newdow attained national prominence by suing his then-8-year-old daughter's Sacramento school district, claiming that having public-school students recite the Pledge is a violation of the First Amendment's prohibition of "an establishment of religion."

In March 2002, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco ruled in his favor, prompting widespread national outrage. The U.S. Supreme Court later rejected his claim on a technicality, explaining that he didn't have standing to bring the action.

According to published reports, Newdow's daughter and her mother at the time attended an evangelical Christian church and had no opposition to the Pledge of Allegiance.

Newdow, in a contemporaneous interview with Fox News, said his case "is more about me than her," referring to his daughter.

He later launched a renewed attack on the "under God" words in the Pledge. He's also challenged in a separate action the national motto "In God We Trust" on U.S. currency.

Brad Dacus, who directs the work of the Pacific Justice Institute, told WND his chief counsel, Kevin Snider, pointed out that the motto actually does not "endorse" religion and to remove it actually would be an act of hostility toward religion.

"We pointed out to the court that the phrase 'In God We Trust' in no way amounts to an endorsement of any particular religion or sect," he told WND. "Courts have made clear distinctions between a generic acknowledgement of God and an endorsement of a particular religion."

Dacus also said legal precedent has been to allow references to God "in a context that is commemorative or reflective of our nation's history or heritage."

He also pointed out that should the motto be banned from currency, there still would be problems in the U.S., because the Declaration of Independence as well as the U.S. Constitution contain references to God or a creator.

The phrase "under God" was added to the Pledge of Allegiance in 1954 by Congress. Two years later, Congress made "In God We Trust" the country's official motto.

As WND reported, the Texas Legislature has voted to add the words "under God" to the state pledge.

[Soldier4Christ]

Islamic star, crescent join
Christmas tree, menorah
Town votes for 'spirit of inclusion': 'Jesus Christ
himself would have gathered everyone around him'

The decision by a New York village to place the Islamic star and crescent alongside the community's official Christmas tree has a Catholic leader wondering if there are any wise men among the town's leaders.

Supervisors for Armonk, N.Y. voted to display a menorah and a star and crescent at tonight's Christmas tree lighting ceremony at the town's gazebo.

"We've decided to go in the direction of being all-inclusive," Supervisor Reese Berman told Associated Press.

The village had added the menorah previously. Last year, town resident Asad Jilani, saying the Christmas season is an appropriate time to celebrate all cultures, asked the board to include Islamic symbols as well.

"I said 'Oh, there's a menorah and a Christmas tree and where is my crescent?'" said Jilani.

Berman, who is Jewish, said the town did not have time to adequately address Jilani's request last year and, to not make Muslims feel they were being specifically excluded, the menorah was removed to a local synagogue.

"The last thing I was suggesting was to move the menorah," Jilani said. "I wanted this to be for openness, for representing everyone."

Would you like to be able to give friends and relatives exactly the right gifts this holiday season– but you just aren't sure what they would like? Shop.WND.com gift certificates is the answer.

This year, after a committee researched the law and what was being done in other communities, Armonk leaders voted to include the star and crescent, even though the closest Islamic festival of Eid al-Adha does not always fall in December.

"It might have been easier to just do away with the Christmas tree and everything else but it would be too much of an assault on what we're used to at Christmas," said Berman.

According to the board's guidelines, any group interested in displaying a privately-funded symbol through the Christmas season must submit a formal application. The board makes no determination as to whether a symbol is secular or religious. The process is open to all religions.

"Arab-Americans and Muslim Americans are Americans and respect other religions," said Laila Al-Qatami, spokeswoman for the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee in Washington. "They know that Christmas is a big holiday and they're glad to be included."

That's a sentiment that feels right to Catholic-raised Judy Wesley, director of the Armonk Chamber of Commerce.

"In my opinion there's nothing wrong with having a spirit of inclusion," she said. "Jesus Christ himself would have gathered everyone around him."

Bill Donahue, president of the Catholic League for Civil and Religious Rights, disagrees, saying the town has chosen to display Jewish and Islamic religious symbols while leaving out the Christian religious symbol of the season, a Nativity scene. He does not believe the Christmas tree is a religious symbol.

Further, he says, the inclusive display "shows tremendous sympathy for Jews and Muslims at the expense of the majority Christians."

[Soldier4Christ]

Atheist: U.S. troops 'evangelizing' in combat
Soldier suing Defense Secretary Robert Gates, claims discrimination by Christians

An atheist soldier who is suing Secretary Robert Gates for purportedly violating his religious rights is amending his lawsuit to include allegations of evangelizing in combat.

U.S. Army Spc. Dustin Chalker, a combat medic, claims videos discovered by the Military Religious Freedom Foundation reveal soldiers and Christian missionaries declaring their faith and saying they would like to spread Christianity to Muslims, the Associated Press reports. The recording allegedly shows embedded missionaries distributing Bibles.

"What we're putting in is shocking," Military Religious Freedom Foundation President Mikey Weinstein told AP.

He added that missionary efforts endanger the U.S. military because Muslims are convinced the United States is on a crusade to convert them.

Chalker's attorney, Pedro Irigonegaray, said the grievance against the Department of Defense will be filed in U.S. District Court in Kansas City, Kan., within weeks.

"[The video] has the clear potential to galvanize those who see us as the enemy," Irigonegaray said. "It's against the law. It is inconceivable to see this type of behavior and not assume that significant members of the United States military are aware of this behavior and approve of it."

According to the report, the video was recorded for a Trinity Broadcasting Network program called "Travel the Road" that aired on April 2006. It features missionaries Tim Scott and Will Decker in Afghanistan and also shows members of the Oklahoma National Guard.

Chalker filed suit against Gates and the DOD in October, claiming he was forced to be present for Christian prayers at a Fort Riley, Kan., change of command ceremony, a formation and a barbecue.

The lawsuit cites presentations by "anti-Muslim activists" and a "spiritual handbook" for soldiers endorsed by Gen. David Petraeus.

[Soldier4Christ]

No, Christ isn't allowed in Christmas
6th-grader's teacher says Jesus can't be mentioned in seasonal poem

A public school teacher in Mississippi marked down an eleven-year-old's Christmas poem assignment and told the boy to rewrite it because he used the word "Jesus," which, the instructor explained, is a name not allowed in school.

Liberty Counsel, a non-profit organization dedicated to advancing religious freedom, reports that sixth-grader Andrew White of Hattiesburg, Miss., chose to write the poem on the assignment "What Christmas means to me."

After White turned in his rough draft, however, his teacher circled the word "Jesus" and deducted a point from his grade. The teacher then explained that he needed to rewrite the poem without the offending word.

When White's parents questioned the teacher, Liberty Counsel reports, they received a response email explaining, "[Andrew] and another child did a poem about Christ. I know we can't discuss these type [sic] of things in school so I asked the two of them to do another poem of their choice."

Mathew D. Staver, founder of Liberty Counsel and dean of Liberty University School of Law, expressed dismay that despite many legal clarifications on the issue, there are still educationl officials that mistakenly believe students can't speak of their faith at school.

"Some educators need education that the story of Christmas is not banned from public schools," Staver said in a statement.

Staver says he was "horrified that a sixth-grader was told by his teacher, 'we can't discuss these types of things in school.' I don't understand why some people don't get it. Christmas is a state and federal holiday. Schools are closed to celebrate this holiday. Obviously, Christmas is constitutional."

The principal at White's Thames Elementary School agreed with Staver.

After White's parents encouraged Andrew to turn in his first, unedited poem, Principal Carrie Hornsby changed the boy's grade to a 100 and conceded that there was nothing improper in using Jesus' name. Hornsby also coordinated a mailing to all the school's parents, explaining that students' religious expression is permitted under federal guidelines.

White's parents, however, told OneNewsNow that the situation has caused them to consider homeschooling their son, concerned about other challenges to the faith Andrew may be experiencing apart from their knowledge.

Andrew's original poem, "A Great Christmas," reads: "The best Christmas ever is when everyone is there. It is when everyone is laughing here and there. That is the Christmas I want to share. Christmas is about Jesus’ birth. About peace on Earth. This is what Christmas is about. It is when He lay in a manger. And the three wise men come to see. That's what it means to me."

[nChrist]

Andrew's original poem, "A Great Christmas," reads: "The best Christmas ever is when everyone is there. It is when everyone is laughing here and there. That is the Christmas I want to share. Christmas is about Jesus’ birth. About peace on Earth. This is what Christmas is about. It is when He lay in a manger. And the three wise men come to see. That's what it means to me."

AMEN!

This is a smart young man who should be supported and encouraged. I wish that ALL children had this same view of Christmas. A child or anyone else should never be penalized for mentioning the name of JESUS CHRIST. JESUS CHRIST is our LORD AND SAVIOUR, and HIS NAME IS ABOVE ALL OTHERS! We currently live in a society where profanity and filthy language is more common. Mentioning JESUS CHRIST is at the other end of the spectrum, and there can never be any prohibition of mentioning HIS HOLY NAME. If there is, THE PROHIBITION MUST BE IGNORED AND VIOLATED AS OFTEN AS POSSIBLE! Bluntly, this is something that we must never ALLOW!

[Soldier4Christ]

Modern 'David' defeats New York 'Goliath'
Empire State ordered to leave Christian man's Bible message alone

A New York man has won a battle with the New York Department of Transportation over a trailer he parked on his private property along a public highway that was targeted because of its Christian message.

Daniel Burritt installed a tractor-trailer for his company, Acts II Construction, Inc., on private business property along U.S. Route 11 in 2007.

In May he got a letter from the New York State Department of Transportation stating that his trailer violated a state law and constituted a "public nuisance." The NYDOT said a permit had to be obtained or the trailer would be forcibly removed and legal action would follow, even though the agency does not require permits for commercial messages being displayed.

Burritt's legal counsel objected to the NYDOT's requirement for a permit, saying it penalized him because of his faith.

"Christians shouldn't be singled out and penalized for sharing their beliefs," Alliance Defense Fund Legal Counsel Matt Bowman said. "We are pleased the court recognizes that displaying a religious message on private property has always been protected under the First Amendment."

Bowman said the state violated the Constitution by treating religion in a less favorable manner than business because it did not take into account that a central aspect of the Burritt's construction business is evangelism.

ADF attorneys filed suit on behalf of Burritt in June and reached an agreement with the NYDOT to allow the trailer to stay until a decision could be reached. A state district court decision now has ordered the state to allow the sign to remain.

[Soldier4Christ]

Religious tunes banned by school
Public interest law firm fight what it calls 'anti-Christmas virus'

A public interest law firm has launched a new attack on what it calls an "anti-Christmas virus" evidenced by a school district that banned even traditional Christmas tunes.

According to the Thomas More Law Center, the public interest firm based in Ann Arbor, Mich., its lawyers have filed a brief in the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia in a case challenging a New Jersey district's ban on the melodies.

"As so often is the case," the firm said in its announcement, "a complaint from one parent resulted in the district's policy that banned the playing of all Christmas music, including simple instrumentals without words."

The case dates from more than four years ago, when the issue arose at the South Orange-Maplewood School District.

WND earlier reported on the case brought on behalf of Michael Stratechuk and his two children, who are students in the New Jersey district.

The district had decreed that performances would be limited to selections such as "Winter Wonderland" and "Frosty the Snowman," with a complete ban on tuns about Jesus and even Santa Claus.

The high school's brass ensemble had to rebuild its repertoire, the Martin Luther King Gospel Choir was ordered not to perform and "printed programs" were edited to remove any "graphics which refer to the holidays, such as Christmas trees."

Just a year before the policy was imposed, the school district's holiday concert had featured "Joy to the World," "O Come All Ye Faithful," and "Silent Night.'

The policy to cleanse the religious holiday of religious music was imposed after a closed-session meeting.

The Center's brief says the ban "conveys the impermissible, government-sponsored message of disapproval of and hostility toward religion in violation of the Establishment Clause, and it deprives the students of the school district the right to receive information and ideas, an inherent corollary of their First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and academic freedom."

"This anti-religious policy is yet another example of the militant hostility that many public schools have towards Christians and Christmas," said Richard Thompson, president and chief counsel of the Law Center.

"Traditional Christmas music has long echoed in the halls and auditoriums of our nation's public schools, reflecting our national celebration of this holiday season," he continued. "Unfortunately, our recent history has not been so favorable to this holiday and its traditions. Even the word 'Christmas' itself is becoming a forbidden expression – a casualty to the forces of political correctness that consider it enlightened, if not outright fashionable, to remove all traces of religion from the public domain.

"If we do not stop these policies now, it is likely that they will continue to spread across our nation like an anti-Christian virus. This is an important case; it will likely decide the fate of one of our most cherished traditions," he said.

Robert Muise is the Law Center attorney handling the case.

He said, "Christmas is a national holiday, and religious music in the public schools is one of the rich traditions of this season. Those that are hostile to these traditions hide behind the mantle of 'tolerance,' only to promote intolerance. Indeed, we learn to understand and respect traditions, customs, and beliefs not by being offended or threatened by the traditions of others, but by understanding the meaning of such traditions and why they have the capacity to inspire."

[nChrist]

Religious tunes banned by school
Public interest law firm fight what it calls 'anti-Christmas virus'

A public interest law firm has launched a new attack on what it calls an "anti-Christmas virus" evidenced by a school district that banned even traditional Christmas tunes.

According to the Thomas More Law Center, the public interest firm based in Ann Arbor, Mich., its lawyers have filed a brief in the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia in a case challenging a New Jersey district's ban on the melodies.

"As so often is the case," the firm said in its announcement, "a complaint from one parent resulted in the district's policy that banned the playing of all Christmas music, including simple instrumentals without words."

The case dates from more than four years ago, when the issue arose at the South Orange-Maplewood School District.

WND earlier reported on the case brought on behalf of Michael Stratechuk and his two children, who are students in the New Jersey district.

The district had decreed that performances would be limited to selections such as "Winter Wonderland" and "Frosty the Snowman," with a complete ban on tuns about Jesus and even Santa Claus.

The high school's brass ensemble had to rebuild its repertoire, the Martin Luther King Gospel Choir was ordered not to perform and "printed programs" were edited to remove any "graphics which refer to the holidays, such as Christmas trees."

Just a year before the policy was imposed, the school district's holiday concert had featured "Joy to the World," "O Come All Ye Faithful," and "Silent Night.'

The policy to cleanse the religious holiday of religious music was imposed after a closed-session meeting.

The Center's brief says the ban "conveys the impermissible, government-sponsored message of disapproval of and hostility toward religion in violation of the Establishment Clause, and it deprives the students of the school district the right to receive information and ideas, an inherent corollary of their First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and academic freedom."

"This anti-religious policy is yet another example of the militant hostility that many public schools have towards Christians and Christmas," said Richard Thompson, president and chief counsel of the Law Center.

"Traditional Christmas music has long echoed in the halls and auditoriums of our nation's public schools, reflecting our national celebration of this holiday season," he continued. "Unfortunately, our recent history has not been so favorable to this holiday and its traditions. Even the word 'Christmas' itself is becoming a forbidden expression – a casualty to the forces of political correctness that consider it enlightened, if not outright fashionable, to remove all traces of religion from the public domain.

"If we do not stop these policies now, it is likely that they will continue to spread across our nation like an anti-Christian virus. This is an important case; it will likely decide the fate of one of our most cherished traditions," he said.

Robert Muise is the Law Center attorney handling the case.

He said, "Christmas is a national holiday, and religious music in the public schools is one of the rich traditions of this season. Those that are hostile to these traditions hide behind the mantle of 'tolerance,' only to promote intolerance. Indeed, we learn to understand and respect traditions, customs, and beliefs not by being offended or threatened by the traditions of others, but by understanding the meaning of such traditions and why they have the capacity to inspire."

Brothers and Sisters,

We should all recognize things like this for what they are:  preparation for the devil's last stand. There is GREAT POWER in any TRUE MESSAGE ABOUT CHRIST! This is why the devil and the forces of darkness are trying to shut Christians up and ban every way to share any portion of the CHRIST MESSAGE! For the devil, the most dangerous name in existence is JESUS CHRIST. He doesn't want to hear that HOLY NAME or anything about that HOLY NAME. Christians have suffered all kinds of persecution throughout history to share the GOOD NEWS OF JESUS CHRIST! SO, this isn't new, but it is different and more GLOBAL because the last days of the devil are drawing near. The attempts to SILENCE the CHRIST MESSAGE is more desperate and wide-spread. Many Christians are ALREADY dying RIGHT NOW to share the CHRIST MESSAGE OF GOOD NEWS! NO! - we will not stop! NO! - we will not renounce JESUS CHRIST, our LORD and SAVIOUR Forever!

Brothers and Sisters, I'm convinced that worse times are coming, and the Bible clearly tells us this. We don't know when the 7 Year Tribulation Period will start, but it is probably SOON. The time of the BEAST will come, and people will be forced to take his mark or be beheaded. Those who take his mark will be damned to the eternal fires of hell. Hosts of people will accept JESUS CHRIST during the Tribulation Period, and hosts will be beheaded. This short life is NOT all there is. There is a great war going on between good and evil as we speak. CHRIST HIMSELF will win this war at HIS Appointed Time. Until then, GOD'S WORD tells us what the future holds. For Christians, physical death simply means "Absent from the body - present with the LORD." Christians throughout history have had the backbone, with GOD'S Help, to stand up for JESUS CHRIST and share the GOOD NEWS that the world is so desperate for. This lost and dying world is more desperate for this Precious Message than ever, and the Messengers of this GOOD NEWS will never be stopped! GOD'S WORD will endure forever, and no force can destroy it. The time will come when everyone will be given an opportunity to DENY CHRIST - WHAT WILL YOU DO? Does it matter what the consequences are? My answer is "NO!" - I will not DENY CHRIST, and I won't sit down and shut up! If this leads to my physical death, I can't think of a better reason or way to die.

Love In Christ,
Tom

Matthew 5:11 NASB  "Blessed are you when people insult you and persecute you, and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of Me.

[Soldier4Christ]

Traditional family defenders now in 'gay' agenda bull's-eye
Licensing proposal could require lawyers to endorse homosexuality

One of the top lawyers in the nation in the battle to protect traditional marriage, historically Christian lifestyle choices, parental rights and the key freedoms provided by the U.S. Constitution is warning that there eventually could be no lawyers left to take up those disputes.

That's because of a recommendation before the State Bar of Arizona – the organization that licenses attorneys – to require all new lawyers to swear they won't let their personal religious perspective on homosexuality affect their representation of any client. Mathew Staver, chief of Liberty Counsel, warns that the proposal is just the "tip of the iceberg."

According to reports in Arizona, the state bar is considering a major change to its existing oath that requires lawyers to affirm they won't "permit considerations of gender, race, age, nationality, disability or social standing to influence my duty of care" to clients.

The proposal in Arizona is to add "sexual orientation" to that list.

The concept would demand that Christian lawyers affirm they would pursue child custody cases for lesbians and "marriage" rights for homosexuals just as they would pursue any other issue for clients, regardless of their religious perspective.

Not agreeing to the demand would end a Christian lawyer's career before it even starts, since attorneys cannot practice law without bar association permission.

Already, several dozen attorneys have sent a letter objecting to the plan, and concern has been raised by the online Catholic.org report.

"Are these lawyers going to be excluded from their profession because of their religious beliefs? Or will they have to give up their beliefs in order to continue practicing?" the report asked.

"The Catholic Church teaches that: 'homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.' They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.," Catholic Online continued. "Does this mean that all Catholic lawyers in the state of Arizona will now either have to apostatize from the faith or lose their jobs?"

Staver has argued in courts across the nation, including the U.S. Supreme Court, on a wide range of fundamental constitutional questions. He's appeared to discuss constitutional issues on "The O'Relly Factor," "Hannity and Colmes," "Good Morning American," the "Today" show and others. He said Arizona's plan isn't unique, citing controversial provisions already in force in Minnesota and the District of Columbia.

But he said Arizona's proposal is broader, and therein could lie considerable discrimination against Christians.

"It is a disturbing trend," he said.

"It opens a wide door (against) people like us who defend traditional marriage," he said. "We're not going to represent someone who's engaged in the homosexual lifestyle and the issue deals with that matter.

"Obviously from our perspective, we would take that into consideration," he said.

Staver said the change actually would require Christian lawyers to endorse and support the homosexual lifestyle choice that their deeply held religious beliefs may not allow.

"What if you represent someone in a divorce and you're the attorney of record. Afterwards this person enters into a lesbian lifestyle and wants a change of custody. They want the child. That presents Christian attorneys with a conflict with their religious beliefs. Would (that Christian lawyer) want to continue to represent that person?" he asked. "It would be pushing that child into a homosexual lifestyle."

Staver said he's seen the threat to lawyers coming for some time already.

"We've talked about the fact one of the major threats coming down the road as Christian attorneys is bar regulations with regard to homosexuality," he said. "What we're seeing in Arizona is the tip of the iceberg.

"If they can license you out of defending traditional morality, they can eventually capture the whole court system. There would be nobody left to defend traditional marriage," he said.

Staver said there already are a number of bar association codes preventing lawyers from "denigrating" others such as opposing counsel. For example, remarks on race or sex are disallowed.

When homosexuality is given the special protected status previously reserved for issues like race, Christians face choices for which there is no right answer, he said.

"These are significant threats," Staver said. "It further illustrates the conflict between the homosexual agenda and the Christian world view."

He noted the attacks already have begun. Opposing lawyers in lesbian custody dispute in which Liberty Counsel is participating already have asked the court to fine Staver's organization $100,000, accusing the group of being "engaged in a nationwide effort to take away rights of gays and lesbians," he said.

Such attacks on Christian lawyers mirror attacks already taking place on Christian churches because of their biblical disapproval of the homosexual livestyle.

Staver's organization is working on one such case, a discrimination complaint brought by two lesbians who were denied permission to rent a Christian group's facilities for a "ceremony."

That pending situation involves the United Methodist Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association, which has been accused by the government in New Jersey of discriminating against a self-described lesbian duo, Luisa Paster and Harriet Bernstein, who were denied permission to rent a church pavilion.

The pavilion is on church-owned beachfront property near Asbury Park and had been open to the public for decades under an agreement reached between the church and the local government.

One of the provisions of the agreement was that the pavilion would be open to the public "on an equal basis," according to the report from Liberty Counsel. But in 2007 the state adopted a new definition of equal, granting civil union rights to same-sex couples. The lesbians wanted the pavilion, the church refused on grounds its religious beliefs did not allow that, and the state now is pursuing a discrimination case.

[David_james]

Jesus, please haste in your return.

[Soldier4Christ]

God doesn't exist? Proof demanded!
Dispute is latest in war over bus advertisements

A complaint has been filed with the government over a series of advertisements posted on buses that suggest God doesn't exist, demanding proof of the statement in order to comply with federal truth-in-advertising laws.

Officials with the Christian Voice in the United Kingdom have brought the issue of the truthfulness of the "no-God" ads to the attention of the Advertising Standards Authority, which regulates ad statements across the nation.

It's just the latest skirmish in a long-running dispute over such advertisements: statements by the Christian Voice have in the past been targeted by those who want proof there is a God.

According to the Christian Voice, it is raising questions now about ads that state, "There's probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life."

Spokesman Stephen Green has suggested the ads break the ASA's requirements for substantiation and truthfulness.

"Advertisements are not allowed to mislead consumers," said a statement on the organization's website. "This means that advertisers must hold evidence to prove the claims they make about their produces or services before an ad appears."

Green continued, "According to one national newspaper, 'some atheist supporters of the campaign were disappointed that the wording of the adverts did not declare categorically that God does not exist, although there were fears that this could break advertising guidelines.'

"Well, I believe the ad breaks the Advertising Code anyway, unless the advertisers hold evidence that God probably does not exist," he said.

"The ASA does not just cover goods and services, it covers all advertising. The advertisers cannot hide behind the ASA's 'matters of opinion' exclusion, because no person or body is named as the author of the statement. It is given as a statement of fact and that means it must be capable of substantiation if it is not to break the rules."

He said there is ample evidence there is a God: "from peoples' personal experience, to the complexity, interdependence, beauty and design of the natural world."

But, he said, "there is scant evidence on the other side, so I think the advertisers are really going to struggle to show their claim is not an exaggeration or inaccurate, as the ASA code puts it."

Published reports said the advertisement is being carried on about 800 buses in England, Scotland and Wales as well as on the London Underground in a $200,000 month-long campaign supported by the British Humanist Association and atheist Richard Dawkins.

The "no-God" campaign was prompted, the organization said, by comedy writer Ariane Sherine.

"Apparently, Miss Sherine saw a red London bus in June 2008 with a Bible quote and the URL of a website. When she visited the website (www.jesussaid.org.uk), she was told that non-Christians would burn in hell for all eternity," Christian Voice said.

"This so upset her that, with the help of prominent atheist Professor Richard Dawkins, she started a campaign which raised a massive amount of money for what amounts to an agnostic evangelistic crusade."

Green said there shouldn't have been an issue for Sherine.

"If she does not believe in a final judgment, what is her problem? And if she does believe in an afterlife, where does think she is going to spend it? She won't like heaven, because God is there," he said.

He said his own organization also is under investigation for an advertorial it placed in the New Statesman, following a single complaint about its commentary.

It said: "There is a Biblical principle that we reap what we sow. It applies to nations as well as to individuals. What politicians sow, the people reap. When politicians sow evil, the people reap misery, and the poorest reap it the worst."

It then described the damages from government policies in society, and said, "But now we have the disaster of teenage infertility. Every government initiative, including the HPV vaccine, will increase it, but as all the targets revolve around pregnancy, no-one in power knows how many young people they are making sterile and nobody cares."

Detractors demanded "robust, scientific evidence that the HPV vaccine caused infertility in teenagers," but missed the point "that it is the encouragement of promiscuity in government teen sex initiatives which spreads the infections which to the damage," the organization said.

It was just a few weeks earlier when the same government agency banned an ad campaign by a Presbyterian church explaining the Bible's condemnation of homosexual behavior.

According to LifeSiteNews, the campaign by Sandown Free Presbyterian Church included an ad denouncing behavior at last year's "gay pride" march in Belfast.

The ads pointed out that sodomy is described in the Bible as an "abomination."

The report said even though such statements merely repeating the Bible, the ASA prohibited future publication.

The report then said Ian Paisley, one of the church founders, confirmed the order would be ignored>

"We believe the Bible is the written word of God – the infallible word of God, and it has to be obeyed, so we will obey God rather than men, and if it means there has to be court proceedings, if it means even that we are going to be jailed for holding on to this, then that's a price we have to pay, and we are prepared to pay it," he said.

"It is a good job the Advertising Standards Authority was not around when the Old Testament was written, or we would be missing half the Christmas story. The ASA would have wanted Isaiah to substantiate his claim that 'a virgin shall conceive and shall bear a son' (Isa 7:14). They would have demanded 'robust, scientific evidence' that virgins can conceive," said Green.

"The prophet's predictions of the fall of Jerusalem and of Christ's crucifixion would have gone the same way. As for nations beating swords into ploughshares, and the wolf dwelling with the lamb, the ASA would have banned him from ever repeating such an unsubstantiated claim," he continued.

"But you don't need to be an Old Testament prophet to see that teenage pregnancy has risen as sex education and the distribution of condoms have gathered pace."

Green also said he wasn't concerned that a complaint about the atheistic ads would prompt further complaints about Christian statements.

"I am sure many of them have complained about Christian advertising already," he said."

Christian Voice describes itself as a ministry for "those Christians who are fed up with the way things are, who have had enough of secularist politicians imposing wickedness on the rest of us and who are not satisfied with trying to get 'Christian influence in a secular world' because they know 'The earth is the Lord's and the fullness thereof."

[Soldier4Christ]

Prof calls Christian student 'fascist *******'
Lawsuit filed after speech met with: 'Ask God what your grade is'

A student at Los Angeles City College has filed a lawsuit against the institution after a professor called him a "fascist *******" and told him to "Ask God what your grade is" following the student's speech about morality.

The case has been filed by the Alliance Defense Fund on behalf of Jonathan Lopez after his encounter with Professor John Matteson in a speech class.

The lawsuit alleges Lopez was participating in a class assignment to give a speech on "any topic" from six to eight minutes.

"During the November, 24, 2008 class, Mr. Lopez delivered an informative speech on God and the ways in which Mr. Lopez has seen God act both in his life and in the lives of others through miracles. In the middle of the speech, he addressed the issues of God and morality; thus, he referred to the dictionary definition of marriage as being between a man and a woman and also read a passage from the Bible discussing marriage," the ADF explained.

At that point, the professor interrupted him and refused to allow him to finish his speech, ADF said. Matteson then called Lopez a 'fascist *******" and dismissed the class.

Later, the professor left an evaluation form on Lopez's backpack without a grade, instructing him to "Ask God what your grade is."

The professor also warned on the evaluation form, "proselytizing is inappropriate in public school."

Yet several weeks earlier, Matteson has announced to the class, in connection to the California vote Nov. 4 in support of a constitutional amendment defining marriage as being between one man and one woman only, that, "if you voted yes on Proposition 8, you are a fascist *******."

A spokeswoman for the school said she had consulted with the school's legal counsel, and since they had just been notified of the case, they would have no comment.

David French, a senior counsel with the ADF, however, was critical of the school's actions.

"Public institutions of higher learning cannot selectively censor Christian speech," he said. "This student was speaking well within the confines of his professor's assignment when he was censored and ultimately threatened with expulsion."

The threat reportedly came when Matteson saw Lopez talking to the college's dean of academic affairs and then said , "he would make sure he'd be expelled from school."

"Professor Matteson clearly violated Mr. Lopez's free speech rights by engaging in viewpoint discrimination and retaliation because he disagreed with the student's religious beliefs," said French. "When students are given open-ended assignments in a public speaking class, the First Amendment protects their ability to express their views. Moreover, the district has a speech code that has created a culture of censorship on campus. America's public universities and colleges are supposed to be a 'marketplace of ideas,' not a hotbed of intolerance."

The ADF earlier had written to academic dean Allison Jones about the case, asking for a resolution.

The letter argued the First Amendment protects religious speech and the government may not suppress speech on public campuses. It also cited the professor's refusal to grade the speech as viewpoint discrimination.

Jones responded that the situation was a concern to the school but told the ADF that two other students also had objected to the content of Lopez' speech. She also said she had started a "progressive discipline" procedure in the case, but because of the "privacy" of the professor, she would not share information about it.