American or Roman?

Have We, Like Esau, Cast Aside Our Birthright?

“Those that honor me I will honor; but those that despise me I will disdain” 1 Sam. 2:30

President Obama made a comment in a speech in which he appeared to be trying to appease the Muslim nations by declaring that America was no longer a Christian nation. While it certainly can’t be denied that we are in a post Christian culture, the concept of what makes or made America a Christian nation may be deeper and more complex than the president understands. He also may be misunderstanding exactly what makes America, a “Christian nation”, in the eyes of Muslim people, which has more to do with American history, and our relationship with the nation of Israel, than it does with the protestations of American politicians

In what sense can any nation be called a Christian Nation?  It is a concept that has been held dear since before the Revolutionary War, as each colony made it clear that their very purpose for existing was based on Christian belief. Maybe we shouldn’t be so eager to back away from or be embarrassed by what was obviously our heritage. Particularly if it was on that heritage that our political freedoms were built. And it’s more than doubtful that doing so will gain us more than a plate of beans (if even that) from our Muslim freinds. If we are not a Christian nation, contrary to what the majority of American presidents have said and the Supreme Court has ruled, what kind of nation are we?  Have we become too broad and sophisticated to view ourselves as Christian?

If we believe all religions are equal or if the majority of us are atheists, that would make us pagan, but our heritage and our very reasons for forming a government, and our traditions were not based or built on paganism. Do the majority of us consider ourselves to be atheists? What percentage of citizens have to claim Christianity in order to make us a Christian nation?

Being a Christian nation never meant that we didn’t aknowledge or respect other religions, so what has changed? Could it be that our infatuation with the idea of becoming global citizens has made us eager to back away from our identity? If so, the change may come at a greater price than we imagine.  Will putting ourselves increasingly under global governance solve all our problems, or will we just lose the ability to govern ourselves?  And perhaps the very sense of  independence that generations of Americans have fought for, will be lost in the process .

When England threatened religious freedom, our forefathers fled to Switzerland or Holland or France. If these countries began to back step on religious freedom, they sailed  for America. When a one world government becomes drunk with power and begins to demand religious conformity or makes coercive demands on the people which violate their conscience, where will you flee? Or do you just plan on bending your knee to what ever the powers that be demand?  What has happened to the belief that our safety lies in independence and in a diversity among the nations?  Below are various quotes of legal experts and presidents on what defines the concept of  being a christian nation, an idea which can be more difficult to understand with your head than your heart.


(many of the quotes below are found at , in an article which discusses the definition of what makes a Christian nation) 

…”the teachings of the Bible are so interwoven and entwined with our whole social and civic life that it would be literally impossible to figure what life would be like if these standards were removed. We would lose almost all the standards by which we now judge both public and private morals.”

Teddy Roosevelt,  James Willis, The Letters and Speeches of Theodore Roosevelt, 1937, p.86

[I]n what sense can [America] be called a Christian nation? Not in the sense that Christianity is the established religion or that the people are in any manner compelled to support it. On the contrary, the Constitution specifically provides that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” Neither is it Christian in the sense that all its citizens are either in fact or name Christians. On the contrary, all religions have free scope within our borders. Numbers of our people profess other religions and many reject all. Nor is it Christian in the sense that a profession of Christianity is a condition of holding office or otherwise engaging in public service, or essential to recognition either politically or socially. In fact, the government as a legal organization is independent of all religions. Nevertheless, we constantly speak of this republic as a Christian nation – in fact, as the leading Christian nation of the world.

Supreme Court Justice David J. Brewer, The United States: A Christian Nation (Philadelphia: John C. Winston Company, 1905), p. 13.


           We classify nations in various ways: as, for instance, by their form of government. One is a kingdom, another empire, and still another republic. Also by race. Great Britain is an Anglo-Saxon nation, France a Gallic, Germany a Teutonic, Russia a Slav. And still again by religion. One is a Mohammedan nation, others are heathen, and still others are Christian nations. This republic is classified among the Christian nations of the world. It was so formally declared by the Supreme Court of the United States. In the case of Holy Trinity Church vs. United States, 143 U.S. 471, that Court, after mentioning various circumstances, added, “these and many other matters which might be noticed, add a volume of unofficial declarations to the mass of organic utterances that this is a Christian nation.”

  Supreme Court Justice David J. Brewer, The United States: A Christian Nation (Philadelphia: John C. Winston Company, 1905), p. 11


[I] have said enough to show that Christianity came to this country with the first colonists; has been powerfully identified with its rapid development, colonial and national, and today exists as a mighty factor in the life of the republic. This is a Christian nation. . . . [T]he calling of this republic a Christian nation is not a mere pretence, but recognition of an historical, legal, and social truth.

Justice Brewer, same book, pp.40, 46


  “I believe the entire Bill of Rights came into being because of the knowledge our forefathers had of the Bible and their belief in it: freedom of belief, of expression, of assembly, of petition, the dignity of the individual, the sanctity of the home, equal justice under law, and the reservation of powers to the people. . . . I like to believe we are living today in the spirit of the Christian religion. I like also to believe that as long as we do so, no great harm can come to our country.”

 Justice Earl Warren, “Breakfast in Washington,” Time, February 15, 1954


This is a Christian Nation. More than a half century ago that declaration was written into the decrees of the highest court in this land [in an 1892 decision

 President Harry Truman, Harry S. Truman, “Exchange of Messages with Pope Pius XII,” American Presidency Project, August 6, 1947


America was born a Christian nation – America was born to exemplify that devotion to the elements of righteousness which are derived from the revelations of Holy Scripture.

 President Woodrow Wilson, Paul M. Pearson and Philip M. Hicks, Extemporaneous Speaking (New York: Hinds, Noble & Eldredge, 1912), 177,

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

“If it feels good; do it” The Original argument for our Modern Apostasy

Below are two concepts of liberty, one from one of our Puritan founders, and the other a motto from our sixites enlightenment. The first is by John Winthrop;

“There is a twofold liberty, natural (I mean as our nature is now corrupt) and civil or federal. The first is held in common by man with the beasts and other creatures. By this, man, as he stands in relation to other men, has liberty to do what he wants; it is a liberty to do evil or good. This liberty is incompatible with and inconsistent with authority and cannot endure the least restraint of the most just authority. The exercise and maintenance of this liberty makes men grow more evil, and in time to be worse than brute beasts…This is that great enemy of truth and peace…which all the ordinances of God are bent against, to restrain and subdue it.
The other kind of liberty, the kind I call civil or federal, may also be termed moral, in reference to the covenant between God and man, in the moral law, and in the public covenants and constitutions among men. This liberty is the proper purpose and object of authority, and cannot subsist without it, and is a liberty to do that which is good, just and honest. This liberty you are to stand by, and be willing to hazard for not only your goods, but your lives, if need be. Whatever crosses this is not Authority, but a distemper of it. This liberty is maintained and exercised by way of submission to authority, and it is the same kind of liberty where with Christ has made us free.” Winthrop, John, in Cotton Mather’s Magnalia Christi American, vol. II, p. 13

The second, the ruling philosophy of modern enlightened America;
“If it feels. good, do it!”

Don’t let the blathering academic fool you, that is right where we are at. The newpapers were headlined with the “God is Dead’ line and all hedonism broke out. Since then they have contrived dozens of nuanced reasons to support the shift we made as a society. Slight difference between the two. One philosphy created the most successful and safest society on earth. The other tore it down.

Have a great day

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Strike 3 for US supreme court

Well, we have gotten there; we have arrived at the culture described in Paul’s book of Romans, his human sociology or anthropology 101. We have rejected the standards of the ultimate authority and replaced them with our own, based on the belief that there isn’t any ultimate authority, thus no absolute standards beyond our own making. Starting in 1963 our government ruled out the exercise of prayer in our schools, in 1973 it violated the right to life of unborn humans, and even those that survive the abortion. Today our supreme court gave our nation’s official approval to the practice of sodomy, a name itself derived from the history of Sodom and Gomorrah. And it did this despite the fact that 50% of the men who practice sodomy will be infected by HIV before they are 50. On the bright side it did this despite the fact that many states by popular vote had decided not to give their sanction to the practice of same-sex behavior through marriage. None the less these votes have been over-ruled. A sad day for a nation founded by Puritans who left England because of the decadent behavior there, to found a society that would conform itself to an authority greater than themselves- that of our Creator. However- as Oliver Cromwell said, and whose words are engraved on his tomb- “Christ not man is King.” The world was created, it didn’t form itself and the universe’s Creator is still on his throne.

Romans ch.1

” Paul, a bond-servant of Christ Jesus, called as an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, 2 which He promised beforehand through His prophets in the holy Scriptures, 3 concerning His Son, who was born of a descendant of David according to the flesh, 4 who was declared the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead, according to the Spirit of holiness, Jesus Christ our Lord,..For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 21 For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.
24 Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. 25 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.
26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural , 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips, 30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful; 32 and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Short Excerpt of An Oration Delivered Before the Inhabitants of the Town of Newburyport, at their request, on the Sixty-First Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, July 4th, 1837. By John Quincy Adams

” The Declaration of Independence cast off all the shackles of this dependency. The United States of America were no longer Colonies. They were an independent Nation of Christians, recognizing the general principles of the European law of nations.”

“…Thirdly, the Declaration of Independence announced the One People, assuming their station among the powers of the earth, as a civilized, religious, and Christian People, – acknowledging themselves bound by the obligations, and claiming the rights, to which they were entitled by the laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.

They had formed a subordinate portion of an European Christian nation, in the condition of Colonies. The laws of social intercourse between sovereign communities constitute the laws of nations, all derived from three sources: – the laws of nature, or in other words the dictates of justice; usages, sanctioned by custom; and treaties, or national covenants. Superadded to these, the Christian nations, between themselves, admit, with various latitudes of interpretation, and little consistency of practice, the laws of humanity and mutual benevolence taught in the gospel of Christ. The European Colonies in America had all been settled by Christian nations; and the first of them, settled before the reformation of Luther, had sought their justification for taking possession of lands inhabited by men of another race, in a grant of authority from the successor of Saint Peter at Rome, for converting the natives of the country to the Christian code of religion and morals. After the reformation, the kings of England, substituting themselves in the place of the Roman Pontiff, as heads of the Church, granted charters for the same benevolent purposes; and as these colonial establishments successively arose, worldly purposes, the spirit of adventure, and religious persecution took their place, together with the conversion of the heathen, among the motives for the European establishments in this Western Hemisphere. Hence had arisen among the colonizing nations, a customary law, under which the commerce of all colonial settlements was confined exclusively to the metropolis or mother country. The Declaration of Independence cast off all the shackles of this dependency. The United States of America were no longer Colonies. They were an independent Nation of Christians, recognizing the general principles of the European law of nations.”…

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 2 Comments

Obama; the Moral relativist vs the Jewish Creator

“I can’t imagine my god would allow some little Hindu kid in India who never interacts with the Christian faith to somehow burn for all eternity…”Barack Obama: The 2004 “God Factor” Interview Transcript

It’s true that it certainly took some courage to speak on this subject as a person seeking political office. And it’s also true that the majority of politicians avoid speaking on unpopular biblical teachings like eternal punishment, not so much because they want to be vague, but because they are wary of directly attacking the straight forward teachings of the bible and Jesus himself, which are the basis of the Christian faith. The faith which itself was the basis for the formation of the nation. Thus many presidents, no matter what doubts or antagonism they had about scripture, felt that an attack on the scriptures would weaken the nation’s moral structure. Others, though not professing Christians per se, still had an instinctive fear of offending the deity and so were reluctant to hold forth. The interesting thing about Barack Obama is, he has professed his “Christian faith” more often than many modern presidents, and plays his personal savior card often, and yet unlike his predecessors, he has openly scoffed at the biblical Jesus on more issues than all previous presidents combined. Which is odd, if he actually believes that Jesus is the creator incarnate. In an earlier post we mentioned his insistence that “there are many paths” to heaven, once again ignoring the teachings of Jesus in Matthew 7:14; “Enter ye at the narrow gate, for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction,” among many other verses.

But in all fairness, his talk of many paths to heaven, and the taking on of a more popular, broad and liberal attitude towards religion and mankind in general is nothing more than repeating the secular relativism which is taught on ten thousand college campuses across this country. However, the popularity of a view doesn’t guarantee its accuracy and we really can’t expect secular atheists to espouse a faith in eternal punishment. As we pointed out in a previous post, the idea that all religions are somehow equal is bizarre if just a little research is done, and as the president has proven to be more than a little incompetent in his treatment of history, he fails completely as a theologian.

His attack on Scripture and thus Scripture’s God is nothing new; he simply accuses God of being guilty of sending innocent people to unending fiery deaths in the lake of fire; and he reasons, if that is true, this god, the god of the bible, must be an unjust god and therefore not worthy of his title. However, in Revelation 20:13 it says; “The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done.” Again; “All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left,” Matthew 25:32, 33.   And in Revelation 21 it says;

“He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death’ or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away… But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—they will be consigned to the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death.”

No mention of innocent children there. The bible carefully avoids saying all babies go to heaven; can you imagine how that might work out in a world awash in abortion and infanticide? Ever looked at the stats of how many girl babies and others are killed in China and India alone? And in America abortions take place most often to remove the responsibility of the sexual union between those who view it as a mere vehicle for their own pleasure. In 2 Samuel 12:15-22 the story of David’s first born to Bathsheba is told. While the baby lingered between life and death David fasted and prayed, while lying upon the ground. But when the baby died David rose up and ate. When his servants asked him about his behavior, he said, “…he cannot come to me, but I shall go to him.” It appears that God accepts babies and doesn’t cast them into lakes of burning fire.

Both these verses on judgement, as countless others in scripture, talk of people being judged for what they have done. It’s just possible that the Creator of the universe knows more about judgement than we do.

Also, in the quote above Obama indicates he thinks that all religions and all cultures are somehow equal and innocent, no matter what their behavior, if they haven’t been handed a bible tract or been evangelized by a Christian missionary (which might explain why he is against evangelism). But Romans Ch.1, and indeed the entire history of the bible indicates that the knowledge of God is easily obtainable from nature itself, that all mankind came off of the ark ( as thousands of flood stories all over the world imply) and indeed, His basic moral laws are imbedded in their consciences’. The bible clearly indicates that contrary to popular thinking, men are not earnestly seeking the knowledge of God, but in reality are running from god. In fact, men are actually deliberately suppressing the truth of god. In such a world, innocent children don’t stay innocent very long. So biblically, the world is not the nice, neutral place that Obama and the relativists make it out to be. And even in the church there is a long history of replacing scriptural standards with interpretations that are more accommodating to us and our culture. Man is running from God.

And God does not view mankind as we do. In five thousand years of recorded history we see constant war, long histories of human sacrifice, infanticide, a total disregard for God’s strict but protective sexual standards, adultery, promiscuity, rape and the resultant diseases, the mistreatment of women, men, children and various races, and God must look upon every single abortion, act of infidelity, every work of pornography, etc. without end. And perhaps just as bad, are the scores of people who see themselves as unworthy of hell. Because they have rejected God’s standards, or have readjusted them to fit their own ideas or ethics, they are more self-pious than the most self-righteous Pharisee; being absolutely politically or culturally correct in every area; in their own eyes they are beyond reproach. But God has different standards, and if Christians can ignore the scriptures and the working of the Holy Spirit upon their consciences, how much more a hardened atheist who has tuned himself to every to every whim of his “enlightened” culture?

God does not see us as we see ourselves; He sees the reality we are so good at ignoring. We love to stand up in a classroom and say, “I would never judge a homosexual couple who are in love” God might ask, “Why not? You might save one or both of them from an early death from HIV. You might save his temporal life as well as his eternal.” But in doing so, you also place yourself at risk. It’s easier to play the chameleon game with the culture, than become a martyr. But remember, the lake of fire is full of the cowardly and the faithless; at least those that are outside of Christ and not hiding themselves in his mercy.

And the president belongs to a political party that has promoted the death of millions of babies in saline bath abortions and even endorsed post birth infanticide for those who survive the burning baths. A party that targets its enemies with the IRS, FBI, OSHA, ATF, FEC and almost every supposedly non-partisan government agency under his authority. As acting president he appears to have deliberately repeated many false statements, easily proven to be false, so it’s understandable why he would look askance on a lake of fire for all those who have grown comfortable at toying with the truth for their own ends.

Maybe God is evil, but I don’t think so. If he is evil we are in a world of trouble. But I have noticed that atheists and those like the president who hold atheist worldviews, seem to have no trouble following lesser gods. Having rejected the God of Scripture they have scrabbled behind human leaders who were beyond all doubt guilty of the most heinous crimes, tyrants like Stalin, Mao, Hitler and a dozen other ruthless atheist leaders.

But despite the claims of these lesser gods and their followers, the God of the bible is not a liar and he is not evil and is not a destroyer of innocent human babies; and a wealth of evidence exists that asserts both his goodness and that He is still on His throne. Obama may condemn innocent babies to saline baths and strip them of their humanity and thus their human rights with an appalling and arrogant ease, but God won’t. He is just and righteous. Don’t believe that? Well, you’ll just have to wait and see. The verdict on Obama is in- the verdict on the God of the bible, though he stands condemned by many, is still out. But it’s coming.

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Obama’s god

Christ, not man, is King (from the grave of Oliver Cromwell at Westminster)

“What is sin?” Obama’s response? “Being out of alignment with my values.”

In an interview Obama gave back in a 2004, when asked, “What is sin?” Obama’s response? “Being out of alignment with my values.” Obama goes on to say: “So, I have a deep faith. So I draw from the Christian faith. On the other hand, I was born in Hawaii where already there are a lot of Eastern influences…And I’d say, probably I’ve drawn as much from Judaism as any other faith…So I’m rooted in the Christian tradition. I believe that there are many paths to the same place, and that is a belief that there is a higher power, a belief that we are connected as a people”

When Christ came to earth in roughly 3 AD, the Hindus and many African tribes were burning their wives in their husband’s funeral pyres, in Gaul and Britain they had a vague memory of the creator and an active flood story, but they were sacrificing people to Satan and the druids were burning victims by the carload to get their way with the deities. In Central America they were sacrificing virgins routinely. in North America the people had a much stronger memory of the Creator, so they had less human sacrifice, but they had horrendous torture cults and still served multiple other deities. In Rome the emperor was worshiped as god. Which ones of these religions would president Obama have us believe were one of the many path ways to heaven?

So who is Obama’s god, his higher power? Outside of himself? None. He can pick and choose values and religious authority as the situation demands. Put all the religions in the blender and, Voila! They’re all the same. Obama will explain to you what’s right or wrong, no need to worry yourself over the source or details. His attitude of course is nothing new, I heard the same thing from hippies sitting around the fire smoking pot, “it’s all relative man…”, and from college professors constantly undermining the authority of scripture by claiming the “obvious” plurality of religion, by which they mean that all religions are equal, except of course, atheism.

We’ve come a long way, from this;

“The fundamental idea of Puritanism…was the supreme authority of the Scriptures brought to bear upon the conscience…the Puritan, whether narrow or broad, mistaken or enlightened, seemed to himself at least to be aiming not at singularity (uniqueness) but at obedience to that higher spiritual order prevailing in the Universe, which he recognized as being the mind of God, and therefore of more authority than the mere…requirements of man.”

quotes from

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Democratic interpretation of the Bible and Constitution

Early defenders of the slave trade claimed that since the constitution or it’s preamble had no direct mention or prohibition against slavery, the forefathers never mentioned it, and therefore must have supported it. But Abe Lincoln and many others felt that the fact that it said all people were endowed by their Creator with “inalienable rights to life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness” excluded slave keeping from being a lawful enterprise. Same thing today, most democrats read the constitution and claim it gives no protection to the unborn because it never explicitly mentions or condemns abortion…Really? In the same way some people choose to interpret the bible, as many democrats did in the south; God never directly prohibited slavery, nor did he explicitly condemn multiple marriage partners, and never does he use the word ‘abortion’, therefore he supported slavery and also abortion and multiple marriages. However, does God have to spell everything out for us? He doesn’t think so. He even spoke to us in parables at times with the very purpose of not spelling everything out for us. And yet the Christian nations were the only nations to ever ban slavery and infanticide and abortion and Moses was the first person in the world to recognize the rights of slaves. Both nations outlawed bigamy in time. “Love thy neighbor as thy self, “, ” when you help the least of these, you do so unto me,” etc, along with the knowledge that all humans were made in the image of God and “made from one blood” played a huge role in the minds of Lincoln and Wilberforce and ten thousand other abolitionists, no doubt. The evolutionists however, who were the first socialists, thought differently and had their own ideas about where rights came from;

“These lower races are…nearer to the mammals (apes or dogs) than to civilized Europeans, we must therefore, assign a totally different value to their lives.” (Haeckel, E., reprinted in Natural History 89, the journal, April 1980, 129

So the democratic party has at least been consistent in how they interpret the bible and constitution, and obviously how you interpret scripture and what you believe about where we came from, does matter

“This however has been known to be the great temper of mankind, that they have accordingly labored in all ages, to wrest from the populace the knowledge of their rights… I say rights, for such they have, undoubtedly, antecedent to all earthly government; rights that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws; rights derived from the Great Legislator of the Universe.”
John Adams, The Works of John Adams, Charles Francis Adams, editor (Boston: Charles C. Little and James Brown, 1851), Vol. III, p. 449, “A Dissertation on the Canon and Feudal Law.”

“It is true that New York has no charter. But if it could support its claim to liberty in no other way, it might justly plead the common principles of colonization; for it would be unreasonable to exclude one colony from the enjoyment of the most important privileges of the rest. There is no need however of this plea. The Sacred Rights of Mankind ARE NOT TO BE RUMMAGED FOR AMONG OLD PARCHMENTS or musty records; they are written as with a sunbeam in the whole volume of human nature by Hand of the Divinity itself and can never be destroyed OR OBSCURED by mortal power ”

Alexander Hamilton, The Works of Alexander Hamilton, John Church Hamilton, editor (New York: John F. Trow, 1850), Vol. II, p. 80, “The Farmer Refuted.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Genesis and the rights of the Unborn

Where did our forefathers derive the idea that certain rights pre-existed governments and that innocent human life must be protected? That the right to life was not dependent on the consent of kings or governments? From verses like this;

“Whoever sheds human blood, by humans shall their blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made mankind” Genesis 9

When a government abrogates those rights, whether the person is a one day old fetus or a doddering ninety year old, it becomes a rogue government. God will demand a price for the shedding of innocent blood. No one has the “right” to kill another innocent human for personal gain, and no government can legitimately give that right. Or strip the innocent of their protection. To do so is to invite judgement from the protector of the weak and unprotected. We stripped the blackman of his right to liberty and suffered 9 million dead or wounded in the war to free them, and we’re still paying the price. The mark of a civilization isn’t how it treats or caters to those who vote or hold money and power; it’s rather in how it treats the weakest and most defenseless. And those of us who stand on the sidelines and don’t fight for the protection of the unborn are just as guilty as the woman who allows circumstances to drive her into a government supported abortion clinic. Win or lose, if we fight we win at least a moral battle. Refuse to fight; it’s lose-lose.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | Leave a comment