Find a Church Yet, Barack?

I mentioned this to my mother the other day as we were talking on the phone. I had told her that I believe BHO could very well be a closet muslim due to his actions on trips to the Middle East and the way he has pandered to the muslim jihadists at Gitmo. If ANYONE out there has iron-clad proof that he ISN'T muslim, I'd love to see it.

During the 2008 campaign for the job of POTUS, a lot was made of the fact that BHO and family sat in the pew at Jeremiah Wright's church and listened to his black separatist, anti-America views. Personally, I think that it was a legitimate issue. It spoke to character. If I had been sitting in a church that from day one preached such divisiveness, there wouldn't have been a day two let alone 20 years. But I digress...

When elected, the Obamas said that one of their first orders of business was going to be to find a church to attend. Many past presidents have attended church services over the years. Hell, Bill and Hill regularly attended services. What has been the big holdup in the Obamas finding a church? It isn't like there aren't any in Washington. Pick one!

One could very well look at a pattern that has emerged with this POSOTUS (Piece of S*** of the United States). He has spoken about how much he admires the muslim culture, bowed to muslim heads-of-state, and sympathized with those who wish death upon western civilization. Why? I know a lot of his family in Kenya are muslim, so maybe that's it. Or, he attended a madrassa in Indonesia as a child. Could that be where his uber-tolerance of muslims stems from? It is within the realm of possibility.

I would also like to point out the scrubbing of Jesus from the White House on Christmas. Traditionally, a nativity scene was placed in the East Room of the White House. This year, the Obamas said, "Nope!" Only after a small kerfuffle did they put it up in the East Room.

Last Monday, BHO made an appearance at a Boys and Girls Club in Washington, DC. He seemed to be a little uncomfortable as a few of the children in attendance mentioned the other Messiah.



How can we forget BHO's speech at Georgetown where he had the monogram "IHS" -- which symbolizes Jesus--covered up by a blue sheet (see photos below)? Georgetown officials said that they were complying with a request from the White House. What's the problem, dear leader? Didn't want to share the stage with the True Messiah?












Christmases past have been celebrated by past administrations in the church of their choice, but the vast majority have spent Christmas Eve in church. Unless someone put a church on a golf course in Hawaii, BHO and family weren't there. Why? If BHO and family don't believe in God, why not just say it? It would be at least one honest thing he'd have said.

It may seem like I'm making more of this than what there may be, but after hearing BHO say how important faith is to him, I'm wanting him to put his money where his mouth is. If it's so important to you, Barry, then pony up and pick a church. If it's not that important to you, just frickin' say so. We won't like it, but be honest if that's your stance.

Maybe BHO doesn't like the competition from Jesus.

Can I Get an Amen?

From World Net Daily comes this absolutely BRILLIANT and extremely powerful piece by Pastor Kenneth L. Hutcherson. I've shied away from posting articles in their entirety, but this is most certainly worth the read. It ties in to the posts over the past few days.

Christians Are the New Negro

by Kenneth L. Hutcherson

I did not become a Christian so I would have to fight for my constitutional freedoms all over again.

Growing up in Alabama being black, knowing how that felt and the way I was treated in an all-white world of power and control, I had to fight for equal rights under the Constitution. How ironic now as a Christian to have those same thoughts and feelings again and to have to try and wrestle control of my constitutional rights from the secular community.

Many reading this may not understand where I came up with this concept of calling Christians "the new Negro."

The reason is because there are undeniable similarities. Jim Crow laws were passed to keep me from having my constitutional rights and my rights under the Declaration of Independence of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Even though the Constitution gave me those freedoms, man was smart enough to be able to keep me from living those freedoms by saying I was "separate but equal."

Today, my constitutional right of freedom of religion is being eroded again by laws such as the Hate Crimes Bill and repeated attacks by the politically correct crowd. Threats that came along as a result of an African American wanting to get out from under Jim Crow laws were formidable and scary and designed to keep African Americans quiet. The same thing is happening to Christians today.

Another way secular society is trying to control Christians is by the fallacy of the separation of church and state. That establishment clause was intended to protect the church from the state, not to keep the church from participating in the state. Christians' ignorance of the meaning of the establishment clause has allowed us to be controlled just like the African Americans were in the 1950s and '60s.

Many may question why I'm writing this article because they can't see the fight in our society and world concerning the overt attack on Judeo-Christian values.

If you don't believe one could be attacked for their stand on Judeo-Christian beliefs alone, take the case of Miss California, Carrie Prejean. Look at her refusal to compromise her Christian values. She has been vilified, demonized and lost her title simply because of her constitutional right to freedom of religion. What is so encouraging is that she will not compromise; she will not give up her values and would rather please God than take what the world has to offer her.

Sarah Palin is another example.

The politically correct crowd has a very difficult time dealing with Sarah because of who she is. Mrs. Palin is a pro-life, pro-gun, pro-traditional marriage, pro-hunting, white, conservative, Christian male who happened to have been born a woman! The politically correct crowd knows exactly what to do with a white male with those attributes, but a woman?

She is the perfect picture of the politically correct woman – strong, beautiful, able to both buy and fry the bacon, take care of the family, run an entire state and still take care of her baby. But because of who she is, and because she does not subscribe to politically correct thinking, she has been attacked for no other reason than her Judeo-Christian values, just as African Americans were attacked for no other reason than their skin color.

If you still don't think Christians are being attacked for our beliefs, consider Pastor Ake Green in Sweden and Pastor Stephen Boisson in Canada and many other men of God around the world who have been jailed and had their non-profit status threatened because they dare to call homosexuality a sin. The sad commentary is many Christians have backed off our God-given responsibility to tell the truth because secular society has deemed the truth "political." Marriage is a church issue, pornography is a church issue, homosexuality is a church issue, and divorce is a church issue. The problem is, as soon as the secular elites named them political, the evangelical church – especially the white evangelical church – retreated and held up the cowardly white flag.

If you don't think Christians have become the new Negro, just look at Christmas! We are no longer able to celebrate Christmas in schools. Even though as taxpayers, our tax dollars help pay for our broken educational system, we are forced to celebrate winter break and the fabulous "holiday tree!"

How about the wonderful greeting, "Happy Holidays!"? Department stores are afraid to put up signs with the word "Christmas" on them. Don't mistakenly think this is anything new. Secular society began taking Christ out of Christmas when they started calling it "Xmas" – and we let it happen.

In my wonderful state of Washington just last year, Gov. Christine Gregoire and the state legislators allowed an Atheist Manifesto to be put up right next to the Nativity scene of our Lord Jesus Christ! I have to say straightforward: the state of Washington is the armpit of the United States, and our lovely legislators are supplying the odiferous scent to the armpit.

Because 2008 was such a disaster, this year there will be no Christmas or religious displays in the Capitol rotunda, period. Oh, except they will put up a huge holiday tree.

Can anybody tell me where common sense is? Everyone in the world knows it's a Christmas tree. This nonsense is all in the name of tolerance toward whom? It's certainly not toward those of us who hold strong Judeo-Christian values. As Christians, it's an attack on what we hold dear. But just like the Negroes, Christians should understand they are not equal under the Constitution's right to freedom of religion.

The only difference between Christians and African Americans is that Christians put up with this intolerance while standing behind the false disguise of humility and love. We are obsessed with showing the world our love when our primary job is to tell them the truth. The Bible does not say, "Sensitivity shall set you free." It says, "The truth shall set you free." Are we not the truth-tellers?

When are we as believers, like the African Americans that came before us, going to say, enough is enough? No more "separate but equal!" Our battle cry is "We are the salt of the earth, onward Christian soldiers and to God be the glory! For in unity we will stand and we will not be stopped!

The Most PC Time of Year

Well, folks, we stand on the cusp of yet another season filled with the blessings of family and friends while celebrating either the birth of Jesus or the Festival of Lights. Lurking right around the corner, though, are the grinches of the ACLU.

Every year, numerous stories arise about some hippie leftover from the left whining about a nativity being displayed on government property somewhere. Evidently, the ACLU has nothing better to do with their time than to try and remove all traces of Christianity from American life.

Aiding the ACLU in their efforts is Americans United for Separation of Church and State (AUSCS). This group of fruits and nuts has been responsible for school Christmas programs to be renamed "Holiday pageants" and for valedictorians across the country to be censored when mentioning God.

I was watching t.v. the other night when a Gap commercial came on. At first, I found myself grooving along with the hip-hop beat of "Go Christmas...go Christmas..." Then I hear "Go Hanukkah..." Not an issue. The two holidays do overlap, and Hanukkah has a legitimate basis in religion. It was when I heard "Go Kwanzaa" and "Go solstice" that I got my panties in a twist.



Can anyone tell me where the hell the idea of Kwanzaa came from??? When I was growing up, black children celebrated Christmas side by side with white children. Who was it that decided to separate the blacks from the whites by inventing a holiday? That seems pretty racist, don't ya think? I mean, what was so wrong with people of all color celebrating the birth of our Savior (and I don't mean BHO)? It was a common bond that has since been broken in the name of black separatism.

Not to leave out the atheists, the idea of celebrating the winter solstice has become popular in recent years. What is there to celebrate about the one day that heralds in nasty weather until March? I, for one, despise the winter solstice in large part because I know it means bone-chilling temperatures and dangerous driving conditions. And these freaks want to celebrate this crap?

I would challenge these groups who desecrate the notion of Christians and Jews alike celebrating their respective holidays to show me the passage in the Constitution that says you can't erect a creche or menorrah on government property. First Amendment, you say? WRONG!!! The First Amendment only dictates that the government shall not establish an official state religion nor restrict anyone's free exercise of their chosen faith. It's freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion. In fact, I offer that cleansing society of all traces of religion establishes atheism as the official government religion and is in itself unconstitutional.

The Founding Fathers built this country on Judeo-Christian principles. Removing all traces of it from society in the name of PC is an abomination of the dreams these brave men brought to fruition.

Spanish Calendar Features Transgender Models as Virgin Mary

COGAM, the Lesbian, Gay, Transgender and Bisexual Association of Madrid, has released a calendar in Spain to promote awareness. Unlike most calendars, this calendar is chock full of transgender models posing as the Virgin Mary. The calendar also offers secular alternatives to religious holidays such as Christmas.

One example of this is "Wherever it's noted that December 25 is Christmas, a candy sweet should be eaten on behalf of International Democracy Day." Gee...and all these years I thought December 25th was celebrated as the birth of our Savior. Guess I need to get out more!

Condom use seems to be a recurring message throughout each of the pictures. This not only gives further offense to the idea of male-born people depicting Blessed Mother, but it goes against the Catholic Church's long held opposition of use of contraception. [Note: This is one place the Church and I disagree. If I'm wrong on the issue, I'll answer to God, not the Pope.]

Juan Antinoo, the Venezuelan photographer who authored the images, sees no reason why there should be controversy.

"It's not something that worries me, what truly is important is that the message gets out there; which is the importance of the use of a condom" he said. "They are interpretations of religious images, not copies," he added, "I sincerely don't think anyone should be offended by them".

If interpreting religious images using transgenders is something that shouldn't be offensive, then why didn't Mr. Antinoo depict transgenders as Muslim women? Maybe even Muslim women worshipping an image of a one-time female who is now male as Mohammed? No..... THAT would be offensive, right? War on Christianity has been declared on numerous fronts, folks.

The scariest part of this is that there are people out there who actually think that this is perfectly okay and actually empowers women. Don't believe me? This was posted on a blog that shall remain nameless. You decide whether this seems logical.

"The depiction of Mary as a transgender woman seems very natural to me. I really don't understand how it is any different than the myriad ways that Mary has already been depicted. I know that some people arrogantly think that they can own the divine. They don't want others to know that Mary belongs to everyone. She is the face that we see when we think about the feminine divinity. If Mary looks like us and the Creator deemed her worthy of recognition and respect and admiration, how could we worthless? In my opinion, depicting Mary as a transgender woman only magnifies her image and I think this is something that could be quite empowering for all women. "

How does a bunch of transgenders posing as The Virgin Mary empower women? Empowerment comes from within. You are only a victim of a patriarchal society if you allow yourself to be. Many women have been extremely successful in a "man's world" without playing the sexism card. THAT is real empowerment. I digress....

Just as we have chosen sides on the political front in the war on conservative values and freedom, we are reaching a point where we will need to choose sides in the war on Christianity. Attacks have come from Muslims, liberals, and, in some instances, from within church pulpits. It's like nothing I've ever seen in my life.

Christians have been portrayed as zealots and lunatics more and more in recent times, and the idea of religious tolerance seems only to apply to religions other than Christianity. I, for one, am fed up with having my faith ridiculed and the icons of that faith smeared. Our time to make a stand is fast approaching.

Big h/t to The Right Guy
[Author's note: Anyone who, for whatever reason, would like to view the images on the calendar, click here. I have chosen not to do so.]

Microchipping: What You Need to Hear

We've all heard it. Microchipping would enable doctors to link to a database and be able to view your medical information. Beware this benign campaign, folks. It opens the door to government intrusion even further.




Sounds pretty safe, eh? I mean this could come in handy should you find yourself in an emergency room on vacation, right? The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.

Two days from now, representatives from the VeriChip Corporation and RECEPTORS LLC will meet in New York to unveil two new proposals. One is a virus triage detection system. It would utilize a small strip or test tube and a reader similar to the glucometers used by diabetics to check their blood sugar levels. The other is a plan to get diabetics to have their blood sugar levels monitored via an implanted RFID microchip. No more pricking your finger or resetting your glucometer. The chip would provide a reading at any time.

To read more about this, click here.

I'll be honest. Microchipping scares the crap outta me. Not only because of my personal religious beliefs, but because it allows for more government control of the people. Yes, we got Zeus chipped earlier this year, but he's not going to be carrying our personal information on it. In fact, should he run off and be scanned, all they'll know is where the chip was implanted. From there, my vet can contact me.

Think of what could be done with a microchipped population. No need for money conversion anywhere in the world (a one-world currency system), the ability to see whether or not you contracted an STD in college, and viewing your entire criminal history (including a shoplifting charge you had as a juvenile) would become conveniences of an already overreaching government. In fact, I offer a one-world government.

What would be the next step? Requiring a chip to drive? Want a credit card? Filling out that pesky application would become a thing of the past. When the government can't find a fugitive, GPS tracking within the chip would solve that problem. Then, and this is where my belief system comes in, you can't do business without a chip. All done in the name of convenience and efficiency.

The problem of convincing people that this is a real possibility (and arguably a foretold reality) is that those who float the idea of microchip abuse are often painted as religious zealots or crackpots. Those of you who are regulars here: Do I fit that description?

I urge each of you to look within yourselves and decide whether this is something that you're comfortable with. Explore your faith and your conscience. If you fear being labeled as crazy or paranoid, don't be afraid.

There ARE people who agree with you.

The NWO Birthplace: Pittsburgh?

Have you ever had a time in your life when something so disturbing just keeps eating away at you and you struggle with the notion of whether or not to say it for fear of being labeled a nut? Well, dear friends, I'm at that crossroads right now. But, for one reason or another, I truly believe that God is telling me to do a post on this, and when He speaks, I listen. If the subject of religion bothers you, please stop here. I won't hold it against you.

My dear friend, Bungalow Bill, did a post on the upcoming G20 being held in a few days here in my beloved city of Pittsburgh. It concerns the issue of whether this G20 gathering could produce a New World Order. I'm not going into the details because he did an excellent job of making a sound argument in support of the possibility.





The idea of a NWO, to be perfectly candid, scares the ever-loving daylights right out of me. Not so much for myself, but for my children. Do I want to see a world where there is only one government and one currency? No. Do I want to see a world where people can't make transactions without first being microchipped (Mark of the Beast, in my opinion)? No. Do I really want to see the rise of the most evil being to ever walk the face of the earth? No. But I believe that this is the world that will be coming soon because it has been foretold by St. John in the book of Revelation.

The Catholic Church and I differ on a few issues. One of them is the Rapture. I believe that there will be a Rapture of God's children before the dark period known as the Tribulation. I went to my priest after Mass one day and told him about a nightmare I had that had awakened me in a full-blown panic attack. The nightmare was that my kids came home one sunny day and showed me the "tattoos" they had received in school. Realizing that these were "The Mark," I felt such agony that I couldn't control myself. My priest immediately told me, "There is no such thing as the Rapture. Just the Second Coming." I think not.

"For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. Wherefore comfort one another with these words." (1 Thess, 4:16-18).

"Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal [must] put on immortality" (1 Cor. 15:51-53).

This is where my hope lies. I can't wait to meet all of the wonderful people God has sent into my life through the blogosphere. I believe you were sent into my life for a purpose, and rest assured that I am ever grateful to Him.

I'm going to leave you with this video. It's one of my favorite hymns and always seems to move me to the bottom of my soul.

Thank you for reading this post that seems somewhat out of character for me. I truly am blessed.

Michigan Wrestling Coach Fired Over Religion

Dearborn, Michigan, has one of the largest Muslim populations in the United States, and, evidently, the slow installation of Muslim culture seems to be alive and well. Controversy over the firing of a popular coach at Fordson High School has erupted in the predominantly Muslim community, according to the Michigan Messenger.

Gerald Marszalek has filed a lawsuit in federal court after being dismissed because of, what he believes, are his Christian values. Marszalek was the wrestling coach at Fordson High School for 35 years, but his contract is not being renewed. Marszalek says he was told by Fordson principal Imad Fadlallah that the decision was made in response to complaints from parents in this predominately Muslim community over alleged proselytizing by Trey Hancock, a former volunteer assistant coach for the team who is also a Pentecostal minister. At a recent school board meeting, according to the Detroit News, more than 200 parents from the school came to support the principal’s decision and expressed anger at Hancock’s attempts to convert Muslim students.

The problem for the school, however, is that none of the incidents referred to in those complaints is connected to Hancock’s activities as an assistant wrestling coach. Hancock has not been a volunteer assistant for the team since 2005, when Fadlallah ordered Marszalek to keep him away from the team after he baptized a Muslim student. But Hancock told the Michigan Messenger that the incident had nothing to do with him being involved with the wrestling team. The boy that he baptized, who was of Yemeni descent, was a close friend of Hancock’s son and had been attending Hancock’s church for two years before being baptized at a church retreat. Hancock notes that the baptism took place before the wrestling season had even begun the first year the boy was on the team.

The other incident referred to by the school and by critics of Hancock is his attempt to convert a teenage Muslim girl. The Detroit News mentions an ongoing divorce case where this issue has been raised. But Hancock again argues that this had nothing to do with the school. The mother of the girl came to his church complaining of abuse by her husband, and the mother and daughter began attending the church. The girl was not involved with the wrestling team in any way, and any discussions they have had took place in church, where the girl and her mother voluntarily attended. Hancock wonders, quite reasonably, why this is the school’s business at all and says that he understands quite well where the line is drawn between what he may do as a private citizen and what he may do as a coach at a public school.

They claim that the principal in question is the one who has violated separation of church and state. After the incident involving the baptism of the young boy, the student was called into the office and lambasted by the principal. Other students have ridiculed and ostracized the former Muslim student because of his decision to convert to Christianity.

Attempts by the press to contact Mr. Fadlallah have been unsuccessful.

THERE IS NO SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE!!!! HEY ACLU: Have you done anything to help this man? Bet not, you wienies!

The looming caliphate must be stopped!!

My Dealings With a Moonbat

In yesterday's post about the rape of young Iranian women before execution, I referred to an exchange I've been having at Libertarian Republican with a woman (I assume; sounds like she might be wearing a burqa) after a comment I made regarding Michael Savage being taken off the UK (United Koranlovers) banned list. I'm warning you that she has tossed in a few expletives. I, on the other hand, have tried to remain respectful, but that's coming to an end.

Here's the exchange so far:

blackandgoldfan said...

After the way he was treated for just giving his opinion about a religion that tolerates the execution of women who are raped and condones men beating their wives, Mr. Savage shouldn't spend another cent of his money in that country.

The UK (United Koranlovers) has capitulated to radical Islam almost to the point of no return. Even after the 2005 London terrorist attacks, there has been little effort to stem the flow of radical Islam in that country.

Tolerance for those whose only mission is to eliminate "infidels" is a national security nightmare for any country.

July 19, 2009 6:55 AM

bint alshamsa said...

blackandgoldfan,

"After the way he was treated for just giving his opinion about a religion that tolerates the execution of women who are raped and condones men beating their wives"

As opposed to the world's biggest religion? The one that condones the rape of little children and condemns those who try to save them? The one whose members have killed more people than Muslims ever have? The one where women who are beat by their husbands are not allowed to divorce them?

blackandgoldfan said...

bint: If you're referring to Christianity, yes, it did have its dark history. No one is disputing that. But when did Christianity ever condone the rape of children? If you're referring to the Catholic Church, you are wrong. I am a Catholic, and I know of no fellow parishoners or priests who condone child rape or the molestation of children. We do not agree with the relocation of priests who commit such heinous acts.

Women who are beaten by their husbands are allowed to divorce, contrary to what you may think. If they are Catholic, or want to remarry in a Catholic church, they need an annulment. They can't take the sacraments of the church until they do. Don't agree with it, but those are the rules. And if domestic abuse is the issue, the church would most likely grant an annulment.

The only reason you can cite Christianity as "The one whose members have killed more people than Muslims ever have" is because the history of Muslims seems to be more secretive. Not much has been said until recent years about what REALLY goes on in the Muslim world. We had the Crusades and the Inquisition, but never was a woman killed by Christians for being the victim of a violent sexual assault. How can any decent human being rationalize that? I forgot; it's different because we're talking about "the religion of peace". The same "religion" that has no problem flying airplanes full of innocent people into skyscrapers because anyone who doesn't believe as they do is an "infidel" and deserves to die. Yeah...real peaceful.

July 20, 2009 5:39 PM

bint alshamsa said...

Blackandgoldfan,

"If you're referring to Christianity, yes, it did have its dark history."

That's definitely the understatement of the year. There was no point where these things stopped occurring.

"But when did Christianity ever condone the rape of children? If you're referring to the Catholic Church, you are wrong. I am a Catholic, and I know of no fellow parishoners or priests who condone child rape or the molestation of children."

Actually, I'm correct. Regardless of whether you know of any priests who condone the rape of children, there are plenty who not only condone it but actually engage in it, too. Do I really need to dig up some links from all of the sex scandals involving clergy (including PLENTY of Catholic priests) and young children? Let's not forget this recent case where the mother of a 9 yr. impregnated by her step-father was excommunicated because she chose to save her daughter's life (instead of forcing her to try and carry TWINS that almost certainly would have killed her in the process) but did nothing to the man who was actually responsible for the girl being pregnant in the first place.

"We do not agree with the relocation of priests who commit such heinous acts."

Nevertheless, the Catholic church certainly agreed with doing this because it happened again and again and again.

"Women who are beaten by their husbands are allowed to divorce, contrary to what you may think."

Clearly you've never read your Bible.

"If they are Catholic, or want to remarry in a Catholic church, they need an annulment. They can't take the sacraments of the church until they do. Don't agree with it, but those are the rules."

Frankly, I don't give a shit about those rules. Every religion makes up rules about why something or another should be allowed or forbidden. The issue is what supposedly-Christian groups teach and allow and what the Bible says.

"The only reason you can cite Christianity as "The one whose members have killed more people than Muslims ever have" is because the history of Muslims seems to be more secretive. Not much has been said until recent years about what REALLY goes on in the Muslim world."

Wrong! The fact that you are ignorant of Islamic and Muslim history doesn't mean that it's any more secretive than that of other religions and their members. It would be nice if people like you would educate yourself before you make comments that are so easily disproved.

"We had the Crusades and the Inquisition, but never was a woman killed by Christians for being the victim of a violent sexual assault."

So, killing a woman because you think she's a witch is somehow more civilized? How about when you kill her because she belongs to the wrong denomination of Christianity? Is that better? How about when you kill her because she lives in a place where you don't like the government's policies? How about when you kill her because she won't convert to Christianity? Is that somehow justifiable, to you?

"it's different because we're talking about 'the religion of peace'."

It's no less peaceful than the religion you are attempting to defend. If you have a problem with a man passing judgment on a woman based on something that happened to her body, then how can you defend the Catholic church? It does just that, over and over again, all around the world.

"The same "religion" that has no problem flying airplanes full of innocent people into skyscrapers because anyone who doesn't believe as they do is an "infidel" and deserves to die."

As opposed to dropping bombs on and slaughtering cities full of innocent people because your leader thinks the whole world is either "with us or against us"? Yeah, that's really peaceful!

July 20, 2009 9:21 PM

blackandgoldfan said...

bint: Here's a story about child rape you might be interested in. Hint: It doesn't involve a Christian denomination.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,534116,00.html?test=latestnews

July 21, 2009 4:40 AM

bint alshamsa said...

Blackandgoldfan,

Is there some reason why we shouldn't pay attention to the rapes committed by your clergy and condoned by your denomination? Are you that ashamed of your church's behavior that you have to try to avoid talking about it by pointing to stories like that one? Have you ever heard of the saying, "Physician, heal thyself."?

I see you still haven't been able to find any justification for how your church treated the 9 yr. old girl who was raped and impregnated by her step-father. Doesn't she matter? Or are you okay with what was done to her? If you had a daughter who was 9 yrs. old, would you tell her that her body was as developed as it would need to be in order for her to have a couple of babies AT THE SAME TIME. Would you tell her that, at the age of 9 years old, she is emotionally mature enough to be able to deal with being a mother? Would you tell her that, if she is raped, she should be willing to die in childbirth?

What's the matter? Are you going to stand by your "those are the rules" justification when it comes to the rape of children?

July 21, 2009 10:21 AM

blackandgoldfan said...

bint: Despite what you may think, I don't agree with everything that has gone on in the Catholic Church, the Muslim religion, or any other heinous act that has been committed in the name of that religion. To pervert religion for the sake of justification of one's sick twisted actions is a travesty.

Not once have I ever advocated ignoring the crimes that SOME within the Catholic Church have committed. In the case of the 9-year-old child, it's a moral dilemma. How do you deal with a situation where you have an innocent child who has forever been violated while preserving the sanctity of life? Unfortunately, it's a double-edged sword, and I can't honestly say how I would handle the same situation with my own daughter. And yes, she is 9.

I don't agree with keeping those who commit such acts around children. They deserve to be in prison. Or better yet, handed over to the families of their victims.

While I appreciate and share your concern for child rape vicitms, I haven't heard anything about the article I posted for you to read. Did you read it? If you did, then you cannot say that what is happening in Iran is any different than what you keep slamming Christian denominations for.

July 21, 2009 3:17 PM

This is what we're up against folks!!! My patience is wearing mighty thin with this mental midget!!

UPDATE: The story of the 9-year-old girl that bint keeps referring to came from the Daily Kos, so there you have it! We all know how ethical they are! Also, check out bint's profile. 32 years old and her career is a student. That speaks volumes!

UPDATE 2: After doing some more checking, it appears that the story of the little girl is true. Fox News and the Catholic News Agency both had pieces on it. Three innocent lives were lost when the abortion was performed; the aborted twins died, but the little girl lost her innocence. I'm having a hard time wrapping my brain around the story because Cheyenne just turned 9. I value innocent life, but I just don't know what I would do if I was in the mom's shoes. Really tough dilemma.

More Wonderful Bedtime Stories From "The Religion of Peace"

It seems that the tolerant Islamic religion just keeps proving itself for what its true agenda is. This story comes from foxnews.com with a link to the original article at the Jerusalem Post.

Report: Iranian Militias Marry, Rape Virgin Prisoners Before Executions

Monday, July 20, 2009

• Print
• ShareThis

AP

FILE: Members of Iran's Basij paramilitary force on parade in Tehran. A reputed militia member said prison guards in Iran marry and rape female virgins the night before their executions.

TEHRAN, Iran — Members of Iran's feared Basij militia forcibly marry female virgin prisoners the night before scheduled executions, raping their new "wives" and making it religiously acceptable to execute them, a self-professed member of the paramilitary group said.

The anonymous militiaman told the Jerusalem Post that at age 18 he was "given the 'honor' to temporarily marry young girls before they were sentenced to death."

In the Islamic Republic of Iran it is illegal to execute a woman if she is a virgin, the former guard told the newspaper. So the government arranges "wedding" ceremonies to be conducted the night before executions, and prisoners are forced to have sexual intercourse with a guard.

Raped by her new "husband," a female prisoner is now fit to be put to death.

"I regret that, even though the marriages were legal," said the militiaman, who told the Jerusalem Post he had just been released from prison himself after freeing two teenagers rounded up during post-election protests.

Some of the prisoners in his care were drugged with sleeping pills to make them docile, as the girls in their custody always fought back, he said, fearing the night of the rape more deeply than their executions the following day.

"I remember hearing them cry and scream after [the rape] was over," he told the paper. "I will never forget how this one girl clawed at her own face and neck with her finger nails afterwards. She had deep scratches all over her."

Click here for more on this story from the Jerusalem Post.

I post this because of a little comment debate at Libertarian Republican that I seem to have become involved in with someone called "bint". I commented on a post about Michael Savage being taken off the banned list in Britain. During my comment, I mentioned how Islam condones the execution of women who are raped and the beating of wives by their husbands. Well, bint seems to think that Christianity has killed far more people and tolerates child rape and that women who are beaten aren't allowed to divorce. I put my two cents in on those comments. Waiting to see what the reply is (hee hee).

How anyone can defend the twisted view of the world that Islam takes is beyond me. Yes, Christianity has had its dark history. I think we can all agree on that. But has anyone ever heard of a rape victim being stoned to death by priests?

Islam is not a peaceful religion, despite what many say. I remember reading a book written by a princess of the Saudi family (her name and the title escape me) and cringing at the stories she told. Her friend next door had been caught with a boy on the street who was not a relative. Her friend's punishment? Being wrapped in chains and thrown into the swimming pool by her father. Real tolerant, eh?

A message for you radical Islamic nutjobs: Try to make me wear a burqa, MFers!

Sidenote: I haven't forgotten about the earmarks. Just been really busy. BNGF

To America's Youth: A Few Bits of Wisdom

Since tomorrow is the day we celebrate our independence from the tyrannical rule of Britain, I thought it appropriate to remind the youth of today of the ideals our Founding Fathers sacrificed so much for. I've elaborated a bit on some things that are being forgotten by or just not being taught to the generation that will one day inherit this great country. Please feel free to pass it on to them.

To the Youth of America:

You live in the greatest country on Earth. While we have our faults and we make mistakes, we are unparalleled in our ideals and principles. You continue to be a part of the greatest experiment for any country in the history of mankind. Be proud.

The Founding Fathers of this country put pen to paper 233 years ago to declare this nation's independence from England and allow for this country to determine its own destiny. Be proud.

They determined that the rights of the citizens of this nation come from God, not man. Despite what you are told, there is no separation of church and state. The Founders meant that government shall not establish an official government religion, not that you can't put a nativity scene on the steps of city hall. Government will not be there in your darkest hour of need; God will be. Believe.

Your freedom of speech does NOT mean that you are free to say what you will without consequence. This freedom comes with great responsibility, and, sometimes, there are negative consequences to what we say. That does NOT mean that government has the right to determine what is "hate speech" and to try and stop it. A quote I've always loved is: "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend with my dying breath your right to say it." Live it and be proud.

Respect life. Children are a gift from God, not a "mistake" as our President would have you believe. Life begins at conception, and only God can determine whether that life becomes part of this world or not. Unplanned pregnancies are a consequence of decisions you make. Do not destroy innocent life to eliminate that consequence. Instead, think about what consequences could come from your decisions. Learn from that.

Happiness is a state of mind. When you encounter adversity in this life, look for any positive aspect, no matter how small. That will encourage you to try again instead of giving in to defeat. The Founding Fathers knew adversity, yet they were determined to make this the greatest nation ever. Follow their example.

Do not fall into the "politically correct" mindset. Realize that people have come from all different walks of life to unite as a citizenry. While respecting their diverse backgrounds, do not lose sight of yours. Have respect for the feelings of others, but do not fear standing on your principles. Use the moral compass God gave you. Be proud of who you are.

Study the history of this country. Vow to never let the ideals that the Founders set forth 233 years ago be for naught. There are those who will label you a "hater" or tell you that you are intolerant and uncaring. Do not fear this. Instead, listen to the voices of 233 years ago and carry on. It won't always be easy, but greatness never is.

Pursue your dreams. You will encounter setbacks, but forge ahead. This nation was founded on dreams and is a great example of what can be. Stay focused.

I'm going to leave you with the story of what was sacrificed so that you may be free. Ask yourselves one question: What would I be willing to sacrifice?

The Price They Paid

Have you ever wondered what happened to the 56 men who signed the Declaration of Independence?

Five signers were captured by the British as traitors, and tortured before they died. Twelve had their homes ransacked and burned. Two lost their sons in the Revolutionary Army, another had two sons captured. Nine of the 56 fought and died from wounds or hardships of the Revolutionary War.

They signed and they pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor.

What kind of men were they? Twenty-four were lawyers and jurists. Eleven were merchants, nine were farmers and large plantation owners; men of means, well educated. But they signed the Declaration of Independence knowing full well that the penalty would be death if they were captured.

Carter Braxton of Virginia, a wealthy planter and trader, saw his ships swept from the seas by the British Navy. He sold his home and properties to pay his debts, and died in rags.

Thomas McKean was so hounded by the British that he was forced to move his family almost constantly. He served in the Congress without pay, and his family was kept in hiding. His possessions were taken from him, and poverty was his reward.

Vandals or soldiers looted the properties of Dillery, Hall, Clymer, Walton, Gwinnett, Heyward, Ruttledge, and Middleton.

At the battle of Yorktown, Thomas Nelson, Jr., noted that the British General Cornwallis had taken over the Nelson home for his headquarters. He quietly urged General George Washington to open fire. The home was destroyed, and Nelson died bankrupt.

Francis Lewis had his home and properties destroyed. The enemy jailed his wife, and she died within a few months.

John Hart was driven from his wife's bedside as she was dying. Their 13 children fled for their lives. His fields and his gristmill were laid to waste. For more than a year he lived in forests and caves, returning home to find his wife dead and his children vanished. A few weeks later he died from exhaustion and a broken heart. Norris and Livingston suffered similar fates.

Such were the stories and sacrifices of the American Revolution. These were not wild eyed, rabble-rousing ruffians. They were soft-spoken men of means and education. They had security, but they valued liberty more. Standing tall, straight, and unwavering, they pledged: "For the support of this declaration, with firm reliance on the protection of the divine providence, we mutually pledge to each other, our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor."

May all of us remember and celebrate this sacred day, and may God bless each and every one of us and this great nation.

NY Public Schools: More Islamic Pandering

The Education Committee of the New York City Council has approved two new Muslim holidays, Eid Ul-Fitr and Eid Ul-Adha, to be added to the school calendar, according to newsmax.com. How politically correct of them. AAARRRGGGHHH!

From Catholic League president Bill Donohue:

On January 14, I testified before this very same committee requesting equal rights for Catholics: Jewish and Islamic religious symbols are displayed in the schools every December, but Christian symbols are banned. With the exception of Councilman Tony Avella, and a few others, the Education Committee showed no interest in appeasing Catholics. But its members are apparently capable of demonstrating great sensitivity to Muslims. Speaker Christine Quinn, who was raised Catholic—and who has shown no interest in the push for parity that the Catholic League wants—is now urging all City Councilmen to vote for this new round of Muslim rights.

What’s at work is the politics of multiculturalism: tolerance for some, intolerance for others. But this fight isn’t over yet. Where do I enlist?

Ten Commandments Judge to Seek Governor's Office

Image via Wikipedia

Judge Roy Moore, from the great state of Alabama, has announced that he is running for governor of Alabama in 2010. This man needs to be there.

Judge Moore was at the center of controversy in 2002-2003 when, as the elected Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, he refused to remove a granite monument in the state judicial building that was engraved with the Ten Commandments. On November 13, 2003, Alabama's Court of the Judiciary unanimously removed Judge Moore from his post as Chief Justice.

Moore's likely opponent will be Democratic Rep. Artur Davis, a longtime friend of Barry's going back to their days at Harvard Law School. But Davis wouldn't get any preferential treatment from Washington, right? That makes it even more imperative the the wonderful state of Alabama elect Judge Moore.

The ACLU is forever citing "separation of church and state" in their efforts to establish atheism as the one true government religion. THERE IS NONE!!! Let me whip out my pocket Constitution and tell you what the First Amendment says about religion.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;..."

In other words, we are not to have one official religion in this country, much as many nations do. Again, I believe that the left has set out to establish atheism and moral relativism as this nation's official religions.

I posted a few days ago about a lawsuit, again brought by the ACLU, that seeks to have a cross to honor our country's brave war dead removed from Sunrise Rock in the Mojave Desert. This group must have a hard time understanding the First Amendment.

Let's be clear: religious freedoms in this country are being targeted just as heavily as all of our other rights. When we believe that our rights descend from God, it makes government very uncomfortable. They know that if that is our true belief system, we will only answer to God himself. The folks at Government House don't like that; it makes them less important.

Let's pray that the good people of Alabama send a message that this is truly what America needs and wants.

ACLU Wants War Cross Gone

Ah, more twisted thinking by our friends at the American Communist Leninist Union.

According to newsmax.com, the ACLU wants a memorial cross remembering war dead removed from atop Sunrise Rock in the Mojave Desert, citing the bogus claim of separation of church and state. The cross, first erected in 1934 by the VFW to remember all fallen heroes, now sits shrouded until the U.S. Supreme Court hears the case. Mojave National Preserve falls under the control of the National Parks Service.

Has anyone ever told the ACLU that there is no separation of church and state in the Constitution? The First Amendment clearly states:

"Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;..."

In other words, Congress cannot establish an official government religion, such as Islam being the official religion in many countries Barry loves to travel to. The ACLU also ignores the "prohibiting the free exercise thereof" clause.

When the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Madeline Murray O'Hair and the American Atheists to ban prayer in public school, it put this nation on a slippery slope. I like to argue that by banning Christian symbols in schools, banning a nativity scene at city hall, and not allowing a child to talk about the Bible at show-and-tell is actually establishing atheism as the official government religion. I like Quinn's first law (go to warroom.com to find out who Quinn is): Liberalism always generates the exact opposite of its stated intent. How very true.

How would the ACLU react if a Muslim was in the White House and wanted to do daily prayers in what is technically a taxpayer-owned property? Oops....already have that. Still waiting for the reaction from the ACLU. Maybe if I hold my breath....

Shepard Smith Has Left the Building!!!

Shepard Smith, host of "Studio B" on Fox News Channel, called those of us who question Dear Leader's eligibility with regards to his birth status as 'crazies', according to World Net Daily.

In an interview with Heidi Beirich of the Southern Poverty Law Center (uber liberal organization) on the topic of the Holocaust Memorial Museum shooting, dear Shep said:

"There are these crazies out there who want to pretend [Obama's] not a citizen of the United States, who want to pretend that his religion is something they see as in some way troublesome to them and all of us. And there is a group perpetuating this thought, and there is a culture to which you can attach yourself very easily through the Internet. ... We know it's absolutely – there is no truth whatsoever – zero – to any of those ideas, yet they live within the computer and they fester in people's minds."

A few hours after making this bone-headed statement, Glenn Beck, also a Fox News personality, summed it up nicely. "This is not the work of right-wing conservatives." Amen, brother!

I for one will not be tuning in to Studio B with Shepard Smith anymore. Doesn't he realize just how many viewers he has now turned away?

Hey Shep! Common sense ideas may be festering in my mind, but at least I'm not a closet liberal as you are appearing to be. I welcome honest, intelligent, and respectful debate. And if you are so sure that there is no truth to the eligibility issue, why not go to Dear Leader and tell him just to produce the long-form birth certificate? You are not who I thought you were if you truly believe we are all crazies. Shame on you.

Smith's remarks about how the right sees Obamarx's religion as a threat are dead wrong. We all know that Obama has no religious principles. If anything, he is a Muslim. Anyone out there who can prove me wrong, please respectfully do so. One thing for sure: he is not a Christian.

I wonder what form of "Oh, crap!" he will use when the one TRUE Messiah returns.

Btw...did anyone notice I put Shep's image on the LEFT side of this post? :-D