A few blogs ago I commented about Barak Obama's atrocious pro-abortion view: how, as an Illinois state senator, he stalled legislation on an Infant Born Alive Act, to protect a baby who was born alive after an abortion murder attempt. Keep in mind, this law (signed on the federal level by President Bush in 2002), was not even opposed by chief pro-abortionist group NARAL Pro-Choice America.
Now comes the word out of PA that Obama will pick up the endosement of Bob Casey Jr., the allegedly pro-life senator who rode to office on the name of his father, the great Gov. Bob Casey, who was banned from speaking at the Democrat's 1992 convention because of his brave pro-life stand.
Bob Jr. used this pro-life veneer to defeat Republican incumbent Rick Santorum, a TRUE pro-life senator, in the 2006 voter temper tantrum (Santorum was the one who was debating Barbara Boxer, D-CA, in 1999, when she made the statement that a baby is only a baby when it is brought home from the hospital. It's in the Congressional Record, but the watchdog media gave her a pass as usual. Now, if Dan Quayle had made the same statement ...not that he would).
Now we see the veneer ripped away from Bob Jr., who IMHO is an absolute disgrace to his father's memory.
Friday, March 28, 2008
Sunday, March 23, 2008
Rev. 13 and the North American Union
Revelation 13:1 (ASV) And he stood upon the sand of the sea. And I saw a beast coming up out of the sea, having ten horns, and seven heads, and on his horns ten diadems, and upon his heads names of blasphemy.
This verse about the rise of the Antichrist in the end times envisions a confederation of nations that will give their sovereignty to this ruler.
While the European Union is the most visible manifestation of this trend, the North American Union could also be the next possibility This economic agreement was signed by President Bush (a very sad surprise) and the leaders of Mexico and Canada in 2005, with the goal of unifying the economies of the three countries to be more “competitive” with the EU and China. It could explain why President Bush as not been very urgent in securing the U.S.-Mexico border, even after 9-11.
This agreement may not seem like much; how could it possibly lead to a North American Super-union? And if it does, who cares?
Consider that Europe now has a “European Supreme Court”--is such a development not possible in North America? And this court all started with an “economic” union of European nations (with France and Germany in reality calling all the shots).
Scenario #1: Canada protests to a Union commission, or even a North American Supreme Court, that US laws against same sex marriage discriminate against Canadians. US bans on homosexual marriage could be dashed.
Scenario #2: Consider that Canada has outlawed any “hate speech” against homosexuality, even from the church pulpit. With a North America Supreme Court, this can spread to America (don't think it's inconceivable that this court would overrule the US Constitution, including the Bill of Rights. Some American courts are already leaning on foreign legal precedents to decide American cases, a ludicrous and dangerous development).
Scenario #3: Such a court could conclude that Sharia law favoring Muslims is permissible in sections of the US that want it (don’t look for the ACLU of Americans United for Separation of Church and State to charge to the rescue. In their view, “separation of church and state” only applies to Christians). Thus, places like Dearborn, MI could have sections of the city operate under a Sharia law that trumps any other local, state or national US law.
But why O why should I even waste my breath speculating on this, basing it on Rev. 13? 1 John 4:3 and 2 Thess. 2:7 tell us that the spirit of the Antichrist is already at work in the world--and we should never be unaware of Satan's schemes (2 Corinth. 2:11).
This verse about the rise of the Antichrist in the end times envisions a confederation of nations that will give their sovereignty to this ruler.
While the European Union is the most visible manifestation of this trend, the North American Union could also be the next possibility This economic agreement was signed by President Bush (a very sad surprise) and the leaders of Mexico and Canada in 2005, with the goal of unifying the economies of the three countries to be more “competitive” with the EU and China. It could explain why President Bush as not been very urgent in securing the U.S.-Mexico border, even after 9-11.
This agreement may not seem like much; how could it possibly lead to a North American Super-union? And if it does, who cares?
Consider that Europe now has a “European Supreme Court”--is such a development not possible in North America? And this court all started with an “economic” union of European nations (with France and Germany in reality calling all the shots).
Scenario #1: Canada protests to a Union commission, or even a North American Supreme Court, that US laws against same sex marriage discriminate against Canadians. US bans on homosexual marriage could be dashed.
Scenario #2: Consider that Canada has outlawed any “hate speech” against homosexuality, even from the church pulpit. With a North America Supreme Court, this can spread to America (don't think it's inconceivable that this court would overrule the US Constitution, including the Bill of Rights. Some American courts are already leaning on foreign legal precedents to decide American cases, a ludicrous and dangerous development).
Scenario #3: Such a court could conclude that Sharia law favoring Muslims is permissible in sections of the US that want it (don’t look for the ACLU of Americans United for Separation of Church and State to charge to the rescue. In their view, “separation of church and state” only applies to Christians). Thus, places like Dearborn, MI could have sections of the city operate under a Sharia law that trumps any other local, state or national US law.
But why O why should I even waste my breath speculating on this, basing it on Rev. 13? 1 John 4:3 and 2 Thess. 2:7 tell us that the spirit of the Antichrist is already at work in the world--and we should never be unaware of Satan's schemes (2 Corinth. 2:11).
Monday, March 17, 2008
Larry Norman, RIP
This afternoon I was watching an Internet video from Hillsongs United, "One Way." It's breathtaking to me to see all the youth jumping and down and singing at the top of their lungs--to praise Jesus. As I watched the video (several times actually), I couldn't help but think about the man who really made it all possible--Larry Norman, who passed away last month at the age of 60.
Norman has been called the Father of Contemporary Christian Music (originally labeled Jesus Music), and deservedly so. In the late 60s, Norman was watching while an entire generation of young people were slipping away in rebellion, when he figured out that rock music could be used to reach out to them. At it goes with such groundbreaking music, he was scorned by "established" church authorities who labeled such Norman classics as "I Wish We'd All Been Ready" (about the Rapture) and "Sweet Song of Salvation" as the "music of the devil" (his answer to them was another classic, "Why Should the Devil Had All the Good Music?"). Ironically, Jimmy Swaggart, a major critic of Christian rock, admitted that his own "honky tonk" style Christian songs were unwelcome in churches in the 50s.
Of course others, including Billy Graham, concluded otherwise, seeing a new way to reach the young for Jesus and to encourage worship among youth. Norman's music stood out so much, that Time magazine named him the most important song writer since Paul Simon (of Simon & Garfunkel). Norman even got to share his witness with the Beatles' Paul McCartney, who had sought him out to discuss his music.
He walked away from Capitol Records when the company refused to title one of his albums "We Need a Whole Lot More of Jesus, and a Lot Less Rock N Roll."
Norman had an immense influence on subsequent Christian artists, including Randy Stonehill and Keith Green. At it was at a Vineyard Bible Study he led that Bob Dylan became a Christian, after which he released his now classic album Slow Training Coming.
Norman's influence on Contemporary Christian Music was no less of that of Elvis and the Beatles on rock music in general, opening a door for many young people to find Jesus and worship Him wholeheartedly. For that, the church world owes him a tremendous debt. RIP.
Norman has been called the Father of Contemporary Christian Music (originally labeled Jesus Music), and deservedly so. In the late 60s, Norman was watching while an entire generation of young people were slipping away in rebellion, when he figured out that rock music could be used to reach out to them. At it goes with such groundbreaking music, he was scorned by "established" church authorities who labeled such Norman classics as "I Wish We'd All Been Ready" (about the Rapture) and "Sweet Song of Salvation" as the "music of the devil" (his answer to them was another classic, "Why Should the Devil Had All the Good Music?"). Ironically, Jimmy Swaggart, a major critic of Christian rock, admitted that his own "honky tonk" style Christian songs were unwelcome in churches in the 50s.
Of course others, including Billy Graham, concluded otherwise, seeing a new way to reach the young for Jesus and to encourage worship among youth. Norman's music stood out so much, that Time magazine named him the most important song writer since Paul Simon (of Simon & Garfunkel). Norman even got to share his witness with the Beatles' Paul McCartney, who had sought him out to discuss his music.
He walked away from Capitol Records when the company refused to title one of his albums "We Need a Whole Lot More of Jesus, and a Lot Less Rock N Roll."
Norman had an immense influence on subsequent Christian artists, including Randy Stonehill and Keith Green. At it was at a Vineyard Bible Study he led that Bob Dylan became a Christian, after which he released his now classic album Slow Training Coming.
Norman's influence on Contemporary Christian Music was no less of that of Elvis and the Beatles on rock music in general, opening a door for many young people to find Jesus and worship Him wholeheartedly. For that, the church world owes him a tremendous debt. RIP.
Friday, March 7, 2008
Trilemma
My wife asked me this morning why I haven’t written on this blog lately. Well, part of it may be I’ve been super busy with church and kids and Missy’s knee surgery and everything else. Well, maybe that’s part of it.
But I’m sure recent political developments have also had a lot to do with this. It was so much easier writing about the presidential election when there was, well, a clear-cut choice between George W. Bush (who the liberals are STILL campaigning against, even though he’s leaving office soon) and Senator John Kerry (a side note: I wrote a letter of encouragement to Kerry and his wife after they lost the 2004 election, due to the media’s hypocritical bashing of them. And what do you know: he actually wrote me back last December thanking me for the letter! I’m sure part of it was his upcoming re-election bid, but it was nice for him to recognize my letter nonetheless).
I’m still trying to come up with a description of the way I feel about the three major contenders we’re stuck with … wait, here’s one: when I was 15, I remember playing with some friends when I slipped on some ice and was knocked out cold for about a minute … I remember the numbness and disorientation when I regained consciousness. That’s about as close as I can get to giving you an idea of my bewilderment over the election.
But that’s what you get when you have three candidates bought and paid for by George Soros, President Bush’s multibillionaire archenemy. THREE candidates? Well, Clinton and Obama are a given, but McCain? You may want to make a merry stroll over to the NewsMax website for articles about how a McCain organization got loads of money from Soros, and how they seem to share staff members.
I don’t really need to go over the whole deal with Billary, I mean Hillary, so let’s jump over to the great hope for mankind, Barak Obama. He can forget my vote. Here’s someone who opposed a proposed Illinois state law that would have protected the life of a baby who was born alive after an abortion murder attempt. Keep in mind, this same law, thankfully signed on the federal level by President Bush in 2002, was not even opposed by arch-abortionist NARAL Pro-Choice America. Then there is his wife Michelle Obama, who urges a poor town in Ohio to not go into corporate America (and try to make a better life for themselves), but to follow her and Barak into public service. Just like the public service job she got as a hospital administrator, where she made about $120,000 per year—then watched her salary jump by $200,000 (you read that right) when her husband was elected to the state senate (it’s sort of common in Illinois, I’m finding out. The newly wedded bride of the state senate president, Emil Jones, got a human services administrative job out of the blue to the tune of $145,000 per year. But we’ve been assured that she was qualified. Uh, yeah, okay). And I’m sure Michelle Obama will follow through with totally leaving the corporate world behind—by resigning those corporate boards on which she is still serving. Throw in a shady money man behind Barak, and his quick rise through the ranks of the Chicago political machine, and you get a great picture of someone who REALLY doesn’t need to be leader of the free world.
So you can see my predicament (and those of millions of others). Do I try to ride out Hillary for four years, or take my chances with McCain? (And no, Ralph Nader, I’m not voting for you either). Maybe I can take the word of President Bush and Mitt Romney and trust McCain? Well, I’ll be sorting all this out for the next several months, so stay tuned.
But I’m sure recent political developments have also had a lot to do with this. It was so much easier writing about the presidential election when there was, well, a clear-cut choice between George W. Bush (who the liberals are STILL campaigning against, even though he’s leaving office soon) and Senator John Kerry (a side note: I wrote a letter of encouragement to Kerry and his wife after they lost the 2004 election, due to the media’s hypocritical bashing of them. And what do you know: he actually wrote me back last December thanking me for the letter! I’m sure part of it was his upcoming re-election bid, but it was nice for him to recognize my letter nonetheless).
I’m still trying to come up with a description of the way I feel about the three major contenders we’re stuck with … wait, here’s one: when I was 15, I remember playing with some friends when I slipped on some ice and was knocked out cold for about a minute … I remember the numbness and disorientation when I regained consciousness. That’s about as close as I can get to giving you an idea of my bewilderment over the election.
But that’s what you get when you have three candidates bought and paid for by George Soros, President Bush’s multibillionaire archenemy. THREE candidates? Well, Clinton and Obama are a given, but McCain? You may want to make a merry stroll over to the NewsMax website for articles about how a McCain organization got loads of money from Soros, and how they seem to share staff members.
I don’t really need to go over the whole deal with Billary, I mean Hillary, so let’s jump over to the great hope for mankind, Barak Obama. He can forget my vote. Here’s someone who opposed a proposed Illinois state law that would have protected the life of a baby who was born alive after an abortion murder attempt. Keep in mind, this same law, thankfully signed on the federal level by President Bush in 2002, was not even opposed by arch-abortionist NARAL Pro-Choice America. Then there is his wife Michelle Obama, who urges a poor town in Ohio to not go into corporate America (and try to make a better life for themselves), but to follow her and Barak into public service. Just like the public service job she got as a hospital administrator, where she made about $120,000 per year—then watched her salary jump by $200,000 (you read that right) when her husband was elected to the state senate (it’s sort of common in Illinois, I’m finding out. The newly wedded bride of the state senate president, Emil Jones, got a human services administrative job out of the blue to the tune of $145,000 per year. But we’ve been assured that she was qualified. Uh, yeah, okay). And I’m sure Michelle Obama will follow through with totally leaving the corporate world behind—by resigning those corporate boards on which she is still serving. Throw in a shady money man behind Barak, and his quick rise through the ranks of the Chicago political machine, and you get a great picture of someone who REALLY doesn’t need to be leader of the free world.
So you can see my predicament (and those of millions of others). Do I try to ride out Hillary for four years, or take my chances with McCain? (And no, Ralph Nader, I’m not voting for you either). Maybe I can take the word of President Bush and Mitt Romney and trust McCain? Well, I’ll be sorting all this out for the next several months, so stay tuned.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
