BILL'S TWITTER PAGE

Friday, August 31, 2012

Vienna church says Fairfax County sign rules violate First Amendment

Vienna church says Fairfax County sign rules violate First Amendment

washingtonpost.com
That’s because Fairfax County has a commandment of its own: Thou shall not change electronic signs more than twice a day.
So, after the Vienna United Methodist church posted three messages one day last month — offering refuge from the heat, then promoting its Web site and finally listing the time of a group prayer meeting — a zoning inspector called it a sin and hit the church with a warning letter:
“It is noted that the screens changed more than twice in a twenty-four (24) hour period,” the letter stated. “This changeable copy LED sign is considered a prohibited sign.”
The county offered two choices: permanently limit the sign to two message changes per day or remove it altogether.
At a meeting at the end of July, about two months after the church installed the sign, the county and the congregation couldn’t agree on a compromise. So the church, believing that the First Amendment also applies to the word of God, sued last week in federal court in Alexandria, saying the two-message limit violates the church’s rights to free speech and the free exercise of religion. The suit says that the county’s ordinance violates a 2000 law, the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, which prohibits zoning rules that place undue burdens on religious institutions.
“Under the county’s restrictive policy, the church must pick and choose which of its various functions can be displayed on its sign each day,” the suit says. “Such an impact is a substantial burden on the church’s religious exercise.”
County officials declined to comment, as is their policy when a lawsuit is pending. Several members of the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors said they weren’t aware of the two-message limit and didn’t want to discuss it until they learned more.
“It doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to me,” Supervisor Pat S. Herrity (R-Springfield) said.
Neighbors, even those who said they don’t like the sign, said it seemed a waste of government time and resources to worry about the number of messages on a church sign.
“It’s a pretty small fish in the scheme of things,” Steve Hull said.
At the crux of the matter is a zoning ordinance that bans electronic signs that use flashing lights or moving text. But what qualifies as moving? The county defines it as changing a sign’s message more than twice in 24 hours.
“It’s just too restrictive,” Sherry Spinelli, a member of the church’s board of trustees, said this week. “It doesn’t make sense.”
She noted that the church got the proper county permit to erect the $37,000 sign but said it wasn’t aware of the message limit until the county’s letter arrived.
In addition to the lawsuit, a county spokeswoman said staff members also couldn’t discuss the ordinance, including its purpose, history or past cases in which it has been enforced.

PAGE 2

The sign isn’t exactly flashy. It stands a few feet off the ground at the edge of the church parking lot, facing the street. The electronic portion is about 2½ feet tall and 6 feet wide. Its green letters, on a black background, can at times be hard to read.
Spinelli noted that on the day the county’s investigator observed the sign, just after the June 29 derecho storm, one of the offending messages invited neighbors without power into the air-conditioned church.
On Monday, the sign’s message was, “8:30 am prayer, 9 am Sunday school, 10 am worship.”
The next day, it read, “Morning prayer, Wednesday at 6:30 am.”
The messages for which the church was cited were similarly staid.
“Welcome, come on in and beat the heat,” read the first.
“Visit us at goodshepherdva.com,” read the second.
And the third advertised a prayer group meeting: “Practicing the Presence, Thurs., July 5, 1 pm.”
The mere fact that the new sign is more noticeable than the old one — its lettering had to be changed manually — is enough to have caused a stir along wooded, winding Hunter Mill Road. The two-lane thoroughfare predates the Civil War and is officially designated a Virginia scenic byway. More than one civic group works to preserve it.
Members of the Hunters Valley Association and the Hunter Mill Defense League said the groups consider the church a good neighbor and have no plans to try to get the sign taken down, but they acknowledged they don’t especially like it either.
“It has a commercial look,” said Hull, of the defense league. The organization would have advocated a more understated sign had it been given a chance to weigh in, he said.
“Our main concern is that we don’t see a proliferation of these kinds of signs,” Bill Cramer, another member, said.
Both groups said the number of different messages displayed in a day was of no concern to them.
Church leaders never imagined the sign might cause problems and that wasn’t their intent, Spinelli said. Rather, it was the exact opposite.
“We want to be a good neighbor,” she said. “That’s what the messages are all about.”
She said the church has no desire to use flashing or scrolling text or to change the sign numerous times each day.
But there might be situations in which more than two messages make sense, she said. Say, for example, that the sign advertises a Boy Scouts meeting in the morning and the next day’s services in the afternoon. What if a neighborhood child is kidnapped later in the day or a major storm comes in? If it abided by the rules, the church wouldn’t be able to post emergency information for the community.
“We just want the freedom to post the messages we see fit,” Spinelli said.

No firearm owner is safe

No firearm owner is safe

wnd.com
By Jeff and Chris Knox
Suppose you sold a car and it was later used in a hit-and-run fatality. Would you be culpable? Suppose the person who used it didn’t have a driver’s license. Would that make you responsible? What if the person who bought your car actually committed the hit and run with another car, but had your old car parked in their backyard – and on top of that, they actually bought the car, not from you, but from a police officer you had sold it to several months earlier? Is there any way anyone could blame you for contributing to the hit and run?
That’s basically what happened to John Shipley – except it wasn’t a car he sold, but a gun. What’s more, Shipley was an FBI agent at the time and was extremely scrupulous about making sure that the handful of gun sales he made each year were in compliance with the law.
In 2007 Shipley purchased a Barrett long-range target rifle. A short time later, a local sheriff’s deputy who was a casual acquaintance offered him more than he had paid for the rifle, and Shipley agreed to sell it (knowing that he could replace or upgrade the rifle with the proceeds of the sale). The deputy later consigned the gun at a local gun shop, and the shop owner hooked him up with a potential buyer. The deal was made and the transaction completed in the parking lot of the gun shop – off the books of the gun shop. The buyer was a Mexican national who held a Texas driver’s license with a Mexico address. The gun was later found in a house in Mexico where Mexican police engaged in a shootout with drug-gang members. The gun was not used in the shootout, nor was it involved in any other crime beyond being illegally possessed in Mexico.
It was perfectly legal for Shipley to sell the gun to the deputy, and it was perfectly legal for the deputy to offer the gun for sale at the gun shop. It was even legal for the deputy to sell the gun to a Mexican national, as long as he was a legal resident alien with a “Green Card” and a local driver’s license. The fact that the buyer’s license showed a Mexico address raises some questions – not just regarding a firearm purchase – but it is legal for a resident alien to purchase a firearm from a dealer or a private seller. Where the gun crossed over into questionable territory was when a licensed dealer brokered a sale of a gun, that had been on his books, in an off-book transaction. It crossed into clear illegality when it was smuggled into Mexico and possessed in that country.
The Mexican buyer was already a trafficking suspect before purchasing this gun and was later arrested and charged with gun-trafficking crimes – though not specifically for trafficking this particular gun. The gun shop owner was apparently working with the ATF and brokered the sale under the agency’s direction – which suggests that the ATF allowed the gun to “walk” to Mexico and would explain why this gun wasn’t included in the charges against the trafficker. I am unclear as to what happened to the deputy who sold the gun to the trafficker, but John Shipley, the FBI agent who sold the gun to the deputy, was charged with dealing in firearms without a license, causing a firearms dealer to maintain false records and lying to a federal officer.
An examination of the Shipley case suggests that the jury actually convicted him of committing straw purchases, even though that was not what he was charged with. The law defines “engaging in the business” as: “A person who devotes time, attention, and labor to dealing in firearms as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the repetitive purchase and resale of firearms, but such a term shall not include a person who makes occasional sales, exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby, or who sells all or part of his personal collection of firearms.” (Emphasis added.)
I have been shooting, collecting guns and studying firearms laws for over 40 years – since I got my first real gun when I was just 10 years old – and I can tell you that it is extremely common for an active firearms enthusiast to buy and sell dozens of guns over the course of a year. Sometimes selling last year’s model to buy this year’s model. Sometimes buying just because he found a great deal, and often buying, selling and trading just for the love of the horse-trade. It is highly unusual for ATF to bring charges of “engaging in the business without a license” against anyone who isn’t practically running a full-time business selling guns at gun shows and swap meets. For them to bring charges against Shipley – a decorated FBI agent – for selling a total of 66 firearms over five years, with 24 being the most sold in any single year, is so unusual as to be suspicious.
The bad smell of the case gets stronger when you look at the lengths investigators and prosecutors went to in order to secure a conviction. A search warrant was issued based on false information. The charge of lying to a federal agent was based on Shipley providing investigators with only records he believed were pertinent when he had no legal requirement to maintain any records at all. And rather than charge Shipley with making straw purchases and lying on the federal purchase form about who the actual purchaser was, they claimed that by so lying, Shipley caused the dealer’s records to be false. This last is significant because it is easier to argue that since a dealer’s records say the gun was bought by and for John Shipley, and the gun is actually in possession of some other person, that Shipley caused the records to be false, as opposed to proving that he purchased the gun on behalf of another person with that person’s money. Of course, any gun Shipley subsequently sold would be in possession of someone other than Shipley. Even so, in one of the three false records counts, the gun in question was still in Shipley’s possession at the time of his arrest, and no money had ever changed hands.
The arguments put forward by the prosecution in relation to the Barrett rifle described above are among the most troubling aspects of the case though. Shipley was charged with acting as a gun dealer without having a dealer’s license, but the prosecution focused on violence in Mexico and the one gun Shipley had sold that was found in Mexico. They showed pictures of dead bodies and seized weapons caches that actually included grenades and full-auto machine guns, bodies and weapons which had nothing whatsoever to do with Shipley.
There is no indication that John Shipley ever sold a gun to anyone who could not have purchased the same gun at any gun shop in the state. While one individual who purchased a gun from Shipley did claim that Shipley “took orders” to buy certain guns for him, that witness’s veracity is questionable and, even then, the man was not a felon or otherwise prohibited from purchasing a firearm.
Probably the most troubling aspect of this case to me is the lack of public support for Shipley from his fellow federal agents. I have seen police go to criminal lengths to cover for a fellow officer who clearly crossed the line. It seems odd that federal law-enforcement officers and organizations stood silently by as one of their own was so apparently railroaded. Even the NRA, notorious for staying away from criminal cases, contributed to Shipley’s defense, but little or nothing came formally from federal law-enforcement support organizations.
This case isn’t closed yet. John Shipley has appealed the case to the Federal Appeals Court for the 5th Circuit. It is hoped that the court will hear it soon. Meanwhile, Shipley remains in federal prison. With good behavior, he could be released to a halfway house soon. Still, his life has been devastated. His career is gone. He has been permanently debarred from pursuit of his passion for firearms, and his gun collection, including those passed down from his grandfather, is probably lost forever. Worse yet, even if the 5th Circuit agrees with Shipley’s challenges to his conviction, its most likely action would be to remand the case back to the lower courts for a new trial. In such a case, it would be likely that the prosecutor would simply choose not to pursue the case “at this time,” leaving Shipley in limbo, not convicted, but not exonerated. In that case there is little hope of counter suits or recovery of property. (See the sad case of Albert Kwan.) But the personal tragedy this case represents for the Shipley family is minor compared to the valid concerns the case raises for the corruption, vindictiveness and anti-gun bigotry that is apparent in our criminal “justice” system.
We will continue to track this case along with friend and colleague David Codrea, the National Gun Rights Examiner, who helped to bring it to our attention and who has done yeoman’s service getting the details of the case out to the public. Those interested in helping John Shipley can find information at a site set up by his family: http://www.shipleylegalfund.com.

16 Facts That Show How Members Of Congress And Federal Workers Are Living The High Life At Your Expense

16 Facts That Show How Members Of Congress And Federal Workers Are Living The High Life At Your Expense

activistpost.com
The laziness at some federal agencies is absolutely legendary. Trust me, I used to work in Washington D.C. and I have seen the mindset firsthand. Some federal buildings are absolute ghost towns at 5:01 PM. Hordes of federal workers are just putting in their time, collecting their fat paychecks and counting down the days until retirement.
And members of Congress are some of the worst offenders when it comes to milking the American people. Yes, members of Congress have fat salaries and enormous pensions, but it is the host of "funds" and "expense accounts" that they have access to where the worst abuse takes place. For example, did you know that more than $33,000 was spent in 2010 on the hair care needs of U.S. Senators? That comes to more than $300 per Senator. The truth is that most members of Congress and most federal employees don't really care that other Americans are absolutely breaking their backs to pay the taxes that fund this system. Most of them enjoy milking the American people and most of them have absolutely no intention of changing the system that has been so incredibly good to them.
There is a reason why the median household income is higher in the Washington D.C. area than anywhere else in the nation. The U.S. government is the goose that just keeps laying golden eggs. Over the past 40 years there has been an incredible economic boom in the areas of Virginia and Maryland bordering our capital. But it is not because those areas have added value to our economy. Rather, it is because the federal government has been sucking the lifeblood out of the rest of the country and has been showering it on millions of parasites that are living the high life at our expense.

Nobody is saying that we should shut the government down. All societies need government. However, the cold, hard truth is that our bloated federal government has gotten wildly out of control.
We desperately need to change course, because our federal government has become a deeply corrupt monster that just keeps getting larger and larger no matter which political party is in control.
The following are 16 sickening facts that show how members of Congress and federal workers are living the high life at your expense....
#1 Nearly 500,000 federal employees now make at least $100,000 a year.
#2 In 2006, only 12 percent of all federal workers made $100,000 or more per year. Now, approximately 22 percent of all federal workers do.
#3 If you can believe it, there are 77,000 federal workers that make more than the governors of their own states do.
#4 In 2010, the federal government spent $33,387 on the hair care needs of U.S. Senators.
#5 In 2010, U.S. Senators pulled $72,370 out of the "Senate Restaurant Fund".
#6 In 2010, U.S. Senators took $166,673 out of something called the "Senate Gift Shop Revolving Fund".
#7 In 2010, an average of $4,005,900 of U.S. taxpayer money was spent on "personal" and "office" expenses per Senator.
#8 Cooks working for the Bureau of Prisons make an average of $66,225 a year.
#9 During 2010, the average federal employee in the Washington D.C. area received total compensation worth more than $126,000.
#10 During 2010, compensation for federal employees came to a grand total of approximately 447 billion dollars.
#11 According to the Heritage Foundation, federal workers on average make 30 to 40 percentmore money than their counterparts in the private sector.
#12 The U.S. Department of Defense had just nine civilians earning $170,000 or more back in 2005. When Barack Obama became president, the U.S. Department of Defense had 214 civilians earning $170,000 or more. By June 2010, the U.S. Department of Defense had 994 civiliansearning $170,000 or more.
#13 If you are a federal worker, you are 13 times more likely to die of natural causes than you are to get laid off by the federal government.
#14 Insider trading is 100% legal for members of Congress, and they refuse to pass a law that would change that.
#15 At this point, more than half of those "serving the American people" in Congress are millionaires.
#16 Nearly 15,000 retired federal workers are collecting federal pensions for life worth at least $100,000 annually. The list includes such names as Newt Gingrich, Bob Dole, Trent Lott, Dick Gephardt and Dick Cheney.
Meanwhile, much of the rest of the nation is deeply suffering.
As I have written about previously, 77 percent of all Americans are now living paycheck to paycheck at least part of the time, and a whole host of statistics show that the middle class in America is in a deep state of decline.
Median household income has declined by 8.1 percent since the year 2000, and 14 million more Americans have been added to the food stamp rolls since Barack Obama became president.
It is not right for members of Congress and federal employees to be living the high life while the rest of the country is experiencing tremendous economic pain.
What makes all of this even worse is that the U.S. national debt has now reached the 16 trillion dollar level.
If we could pay for all of this wild government spending that would be one thing, but the truth is that the U.S. national debt is now more than 22 times larger than it was when Jimmy Carter became president.

We cannot afford this kind of spending.
We need to totally change the culture in Washington.
We need a government that is lean and efficient and that is full of people that have a passion for serving the public.
So do you think that we will ever get there?
Please feel free to post a comment with your opinion below....
You can support this information by voting on Reddit HERE

» VIDEO: TSA Takes Over Bus Station In Tampa, DHS Agents Threaten Journalists Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!

» VIDEO: TSA Takes Over Bus Station In Tampa, DHS Agents Threaten Journalists Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!

VIDEO: TSA Takes Over Bus Station In Tampa, DHS Agents Threaten Journalists

  •  The Alex Jones ChannelAlex Jones Show podcastPrison Planet TVInfowars.com TwitterAlex Jones' FacebookInfowars store
Reporters forced to show papers or be “detained for 72 hours” by Homeland Security
Steve Watson
Infowars.com
Aug 29, 2012

Independent Journalists documenting the level of security theatre surrounding the Republican National Convention in Tampa were threatened with being “detained for 72 hours” by Homeland Security agents, after they filmed TSA employees occupying a Greyhound bus station close to the security perimeter.
The reporters with the Houston Free Thinkers captured video of no less than five blue shirted TSA workers manning the ticket office at the station, ready to conduct bag searches and pat downs on bus passengers.
The station, at 610 Polk Street in downtown Tampa, was adorned with TSA and Homeland Security notices, designating it a high security screening area.
After filming the TSA workers inside, the reporters turned their attention to a parked Homeland Security vehicle across the street, claiming that the agent that sat in the car was taking photographs of them.
Upon crossing the street to ask the agent why he was taking pictures, two more DHS vehicles pulled up and agents jumped out and immediately confronted the reporters, asking them for ID.
When the reporters refused to provide ID and asked why they were being detained, one DHS agent stated “You are filming a federal compound… that in itself is against the law.”
  • A D V E R T I S E M E N T
“The fence?” one reporter questioned.
“Everything behind the fence.” the agent replied, before again asking the reporter for ID.
When the reporter again questioned why he needed to show ID, the agent stated “This is not a game, I don’t want you to tell me anything. I want to see something, or I can hold you for 72 hours, it’s your choice.”
The reporters provided ID in order to avoid detainment, but made it clear to the DHS officers that they believed the agents were violating their rights.
Watch the exchange below:
As the reporters’ live internet video feed went down, the DHS officers asked them if they had any weapons. One agent asked “Do you mind if we check your bag, while you are standing on federal property?”
“The street is federal property?” the reporter asked.
“You pay your tax dollars to who?” the agent replied, before answering his own question, “The State AND the Fed.”
The agent then claimed that as soon as the reporters set foot in the State of Florida they were “on federal property”.
Watch the exchange:
The HFT reporters then posted a follow up analysis of their run in with the DHS:
As we reported yesterday, TSA screeners have been seen conducting bag searches at bus and train stations close to this week’s Republican National Convention in Tampa.
A short video clip filmed by journalists working for AMTV shows TSA workers putting personal belongings through an x-ray screener at the entrance to the convention.
AMTV’s Christopher Greene included a photo of his RNC press pass in the blog post to prove that the TSA screeners were at the convention.
As we reported last week, TSA workers were also present at a recent Paul Ryan political event in The Villages, Florida, where the screeners conducted invasive bag searches as well as pat downs.
As we have previously documented, airport security style checkpoints and inspection procedures are already in place at bus terminals,train stations, and are rapidly being expanded to the streets of America.
Agents have even been spotted roaming around at public events such as sports games and music concerts, and even at high school proms.
The ‘Transportation’ part of the TSA’s acronym has presumably been dispensed with as the Department of Homeland Security attempts to create an occupying army of security goons at every public event.
The TSA even moved beyond its own borders this summer as agents were dispatched to airports in London for the Olympic Games.
The TSA has also announced its intention to expand the VIPR program to include roadside inspections of commercial vehicles, setting up a network of internal checkpoints and rolling out security procedures already active in airports, bus terminals and subway stations to roads and highways across the United States.
—————————————————————-
Steve Watson is the London based writer and editor for Alex Jones’ Infowars.com, andPrisonplanet.com. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham in England.

Share this article:


Democratic dhimmitude

Democratic dhimmitude

dailycaller.com
Now that the Democratic National Committee has reversed its original stance and decided to allow New York Cardinal-Archbishop Timothy Dolan to deliver the closing prayer at the DNC convention next week, Buzzfeed is reporting that LGBT groups are upset with the decision. “While Cardinal Dolan has a respected track record in the ministry, his work to undercut the dignity of LGBT people cannot be overlooked. There are many faith leaders who would be an ideal fit to close out the Democratic National Convention — but Cardinal Timothy Dolan is not that leader,” said Michael Cole-Schwartz of the Human Rights Campaign.
In light of their perception that a bigot has been invited to pray over the convention, it is curious why there isn’t more criticism coming from the LGBT folks toward the “Jumah at the 2012 DNC” event, a Muslim prayer vigil and “issues conference” that has been promoted on the official 2012 DNC website. Sponsored by an advocacy group which calls itself the Bureau of Indigenous Muslim Affairs, the Jumah will “serve and facilitate the efforts of Islamic organizations and Institutions in their endeavors as well as spread awareness about Indigenous Muslim issues.” Apparently, this includes topics like Islamophobia, anti-Shariah bills, the NYPD surveillance program, and the Patriot Act. There’s nothing inherently wrong with Muslims being included at a political event, but the organizers of the Jumah seem to have a history of radicalism. According to The Blaze:
The mosque of Jibril Hough … is owned by the North American Islamic Trust, which was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation trial as one of the entities “who are and/or were members of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood.”
Siraj Wahhaj, the “Grand Imam” for Jumah at the DNC, is often considered a “moderate” because he was the first Muslim to give an invocation in the U.S. Congress, but as Robert Spencer notes, he has a number of troubling ties to dangerous radicals. In the early 1990′s the man reportedly sponsored talks by “the Blind Sheikh” Omar Abdel-Rahman in New York and New Jersey mosques, and told his followers that the United States will fall unless it “accepts the Islamic agenda.”
The Blaze also quotes Zhudi Jasser, a Muslim who founded the anti-extremist American Islamic Forum for Democracy, who said, “The leaders of this event — Jibril Hough and Imam Siraj Wahhaj — [are not] moderates. They are radicals. These individuals embrace Islamist supremacy and have demonstrated support for radical ideologies.”
If the organizers of the Jumah are as radical as they seem to be, then there’s a moment of cognitive dissonance happening here within the Democratic coalition. While LGBT groups are indignant at the inclusion of Cardinal Dolan, there’s been no quarrel from them on the invitation extended to individuals that share sympathies with hardline Islamist groups. Radical Islamists have a far, far more intolerant attitude toward homosexuals than any Catholic clergyman, to the point that they have recently been stoned and burned alive in some countries. Why doesn’t the LGBT lobby get as fired up about the organizers of the Jumah as it does about Cardinal Dolan? Partly, adherents to the Judeo-Christian tradition are familiar targets for the LGBT lobby. But this situation is also the product of the unqualified embrace of pluralism that characterizes the left. When moral judgments are subordinated to the mantra of “diversity,” then the truly odious views aren’t diminished. The result is that the LGBT lobby has become another group on the left that fails to see the danger that radical Islam poses to all of us.
David Wilezol is a producer for “Morning in America,” a nationally syndicated radio show hosted by former U.S. Secretary of Education Bill Bennett. Follow him on Twitter: @davidwilezol.

Tribunal to hear plans on promoting atheism to students

Tribunal to hear plans on promoting atheism to students

wnd.com
The Human Rights Tribunal in Canada’s Ontario province has agreed to review a situation where an atheist is demanding permission to hand out books on “free thought’ to fifth-graders.
According to a report in Canada’s CNews, Rene Chouinard has been trying for years to force the local school board to allow him to distribute “Just Pretend: A Free Thought Book for Children” or “Losing Faith in Faith: From Preacher to Atheist” to fifth-graders.
Now the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal has agreed to hold a hearing on the arguments, and it already has agreed to allow the Ontario Human Rights Commission and Canadian Civil Liberties Association in be part of the arguments.
The fight staged by Rene Chouinard and his wife, Anna, began after they were approached about allowing their daughter to be given a Bible from Gideons International.
The international ministry is allowed to distribute Bibles to fifth-graders but cannot give to students unless they have a signed consent form from their parents, the report said.
The Chouinards refused to sign the form for their daughter, and they subsequently unsuccessfully sought permission to distribute “Just Pretend.”
Rene Chouinard said his ultimate goal is to have “religion” completely removed from the schools.
In the meantime, the plan for the hearing “is a solid decision by the tribunal that is good for society,” he said in the report.
Tristin Hopper at the National Post explained that Rene Chouinard, of Grimsby, Ontario, never really intended to distribute atheist literature, but just wanted to create an issue with the school.
It was after Chouinard launch the fight in 2010 that the Niagara schools, where his children attend, drafted an open policy that allows students to be given Qurans, Bibles, Torahs and others – if their parents approved.
Brett Sweeney, a spokesman for the school board there, told the National Post that most religious texts are available, but only with that signed parental permission form.
The Post report said school officials consulted the Ontario Multifaith Information Manual to decide what to allow to be distributed. They said the manual doesn’t include unbelievers, so the “free thought” books were rejected.
Rene Chouinard explained on his own website that he was raised Catholic “but my parents migrated to the fundamentalist movement … after my father was seriously injured; I think they were looking for a miraculous healing – mostly from the type of ‘Christians’ who make their living making those types of promises.”
He said it didn’t take him long to “see through that nonsense.”
“I fairly evaluated religious claims, both the nonsense miracle claims and the more mainstream apologist analysis, and I have honestly concluded that, regardless of honorable intent and heartfelt beliefs, there simply is no bases (sic) for belief; and lots of evidence against the claim of a theistic deity (i.e. there is no god!).”
The Bible League of Canada said, “The secularization of Ontario’s public schools stands in contrast to the original intent of founders of the province’s educational system. In the 1944 edition of the ‘Programme for Religious Education in the Public Schools,’ issued by the authority of the Minister of Education, it states ‘In the Programme of Studies for Grades I to VI of the Ontario Public and Separate Schools, it is pointed out that ‘the schools of Ontario exist for the purpose of preparing children to live in a democratic society which bases its way of life upon the Christian ideal,’ and further, that ‘the school must seek to lead the child to choose and accept as his own those ideals of conduct and endeavour which a Christian and democratic society approves.’”

Arizona Congressional candidate caught in uproar for noting that Islamic jihadis want to enter the U.S. to harm Americans - Jihad Watch

Arizona Congressional candidate caught in uproar for noting that Islamic jihadis want to enter the U.S. to harm Americans - Jihad Watch

Arizona Congressional candidate caught in uproar for noting that Islamic jihadis want to enter the U.S. to harm Americans

Obviously Mercer meant those Middle Easterners who enter the country illegally from Mexico, not all Middle Easterners who come to the United States. And so the uproar is clearly a cynical orchestrated hit for political purposes, like virtually all of the shock and outrage that the Left generates for supposed "gaffes" by figures on the Right.
After all, why exactly are Middle Easterners sneaking in to the U.S. from Mexico? It isn't as if it's difficult in this Age of Obama for Muslims to get refugee status in the U.S. As Pamela Geller noted here: "Christians are in imminent danger across the world, and yet they are being refused refugee status, while Muslim refugee immigration goes on unimpeded. U.S. policy regarding refugee resettlement would shock most Americans if they only knew. The United Nations picks who gets to come to the U.S. as a refugee. The mandate of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) is to determine which of the world’s huddled masses comes to the U.S. as humanitarian refugees. And predictably, this U.N. body is favoring Muslims. Christians from Muslim lands are being refused refugee status."
That being the case, it is more than passing strange that any Middle Easterners at all are crossing illegally into the U.S. from Mexico. And the fact that they do so does raise legitimate questions about their motives.
"Arizona Republican's 'Middle Easterners' comments spark debate," by Tim Gaynor for Reuters, August 29 (thanks to Trita Parsi):
(Reuters) - Remarks by a conservative Arizona Republican Congressional candidate that Middle Easterners' "only goal in life is to cause harm to the United States" have landed her in the midst of a dispute over whether the comments amount to hate speech.
Tea Party-backed Gabriela Saucedo Mercer, who was born in Mexico and is a naturalized U.S. citizen, won the Republican primary on Tuesday to run in an Arizona Congressional district that flanks the border in southern Arizona. She faces Democrat Raul Grijalva, a five-term incumbent, in the November general election.
Grijalva sparked the debate Tuesday when he circulated a video in which the Republican tells an interviewer that authorities in the previous year nabbed 25,000 illegal immigrants who were other than Mexican nationals.
"That includes Chinese, Middle Easterners. If you know Middle Easterners, a lot of them they look Mexican or like a lot of people in South America - dark skin, dark hair, brown eyes, and they mix in," she said in the interview, recorded last year by WesternFreePress.com.
"And those people, their only goal in life is to cause harm to the United States, so why do we want them here, either legally or illegally?" she said....
Grijalva, a long-term opponent of the immigration crackdown, issued a news release on Tuesday denouncing what he called Mercer's "reckless hate speech" and urged everyone who endorsed Mercer to "withdraw their support immediately."
"This is not a he-said, she-said question of interpretation. Her comments are reprehensible and deserve condemnation from every quarter. Anyone who continues to support her campaign should be asked whether they want someone with her views in Congress," he said in a statement.
[Muslim Brotherhood-linked] Rep. Keith Ellison, the first Muslim American elected to Congress, said he was "disappointed" in Mercer's "decision to inject division and fear" into the Congressional race.
The American-Arab Anti Discrimination Committee, a non-sectarian civil rights and civil liberties group, also weighed into the debate, slamming Mercer's choice of words, which it said "once again exemplifies the bigotry and racism rampant within the Republican party, and politics as a whole."
The nonprofit group called on Republican party leaders, including presidential candidate Mitt Romney, to condemn her remarks and "move away from the politics of hate and fear."
A call to Mercer seeking comment was not immediately returned on Wednesday. In comments reported by the Arizona Daily Star newspaper, she said the video was edited to be misleading and took her comments out of context.
"He (Grijalva) must be scared or something," the newspaper reported Mercer saying at a primary-election night party on Tuesday. "The tactics he's using to smear me as a racist are unconscionable."
| 7 Comments
del.icio.us | Digg this | Email | FaceBook | Twitter | Print | Tweet

Atheist's invocation a 'slap in the face' to the nation

Atheist's invocation a 'slap in the face' to the nation

Culture

ATHEIST'S INVOCATION A 'SLAP IN THE FACE' TO THE NATION

Russ Jones   (OneNewsNow.com)
Thursday, August 30, 2012 11:09 AM
An Oklahoma delegate to the Republican National Convention is incensed that the Tulsa City Council has agreed to allow an atheist to pray at its meeting today.The prayer, or "invocation," ends a year-long battle with council members in the "Bible Belt" city. The Humanist Association of Tulsa has worked for years to prevent sectarian prayers before Tulsa City Council meetings, finding little success with the leaders who remain confident that the practice is constitutional.
Toni Calvey, Oklahoma resident and Republican delegate representing The Sooner State in Tampa, has concerns about what the atheist's prayer represents.
"Personally I think it's a slap in the face to our Christian heritage … our nation and … our state of Oklahoma," she comments. "We are a conservative state, and I think that something like this is meant to be provocative, and it's insulting to me."
Dan Nerren, a former Southern Baptist and retired railroad employee, is one of the founders of the Humanist Association of Tulsa. He is scheduled to give the prayer at today's 6:00 p.m. meeting and claims it will encourage council members to respect "the inherent dignity and worth of each person."
Calvey says decisions like this further erode the nation's Christian foundation.
"We don't go to other countries or other places and demand that they be so accommodating. I don't think that we should feel like we have to be," she offers.
The Associated Press reports that Bill Dusenberry of the Northeast Oklahoma chapter of Americans United for Separation of Church and State says allowing an atheist to offer the invocation is a good move by the city that shows a "willingness to accommodate diversity."
The Tulsa City Council has called for extra security for Thursday's meeting.

Homosexual promiscuity’s national health crisis

Homosexual promiscuity’s national health crisis

By David R. Usher and Cynthia L. Davis
“Marriage Equality” is perhaps the most convoluted canard of our time. Underneath the hood of the homosexual revolution churns today’s most serious avoidable health problems.
The majority of our most dangerous sexual diseases emanate from the homosexual revolution and are transmitted to wives, infants, children, and men by LBGTQ individuals who are most often bisexual.
Bisexuals are the majority in the LBGTQ movement. Approximately1.8 percent to 4 percent of Americans are bisexual. This broad gateway infects unsuspecting heterosexual Americans with serious or fatal diseases. The impact to heterosexual women is serious. Seventy percent of HIV infections in women are attributed to heterosexual contact.
The impact of homosexuality on the rest of us can no longer be ignored:
  • Among female adults and adolescents who were diagnosed with HIV infection in 2009, 84.9 percent were infected throughheterosexual contact.
  • Twenty-five percent of new HIV infections are in women who are often straight.
  • HIV is the No. 14 cause of infant mortality (Table B). This is most often caused by women who have a bisexual husband or boyfriend.
  • There are about 1.2 million individuals infected with HIV in the United States. About 20 percent of them do not know they are infected and are spreading the disease invisibly.
  • Children raised by homosexual parents are dramatically more likely than peers raised by married heterosexual parents to suffer from a host of social problems.
  • The total death impact of promiscuity is difficult to quantify because so many other opportunistic fatal diseases are the final cause of death.
  • High rates of psychiatric disorders are well-known even in the Netherlands, where homosexuality is widely accepted. Substance abuse is also common in the LGBTQ community. The rest of American often bears the costs of treatment for STDs and endless psychological treatment for confused individuals.
Homosexuality has been “legitimized” in our schools. It is considered an act of hate to question or oppose sexual perversion. Why do we teach homosexuality in our schools while strongly encouraging our children not to use drugs or smoke? Fatality data indicate that promiscuity and homosexuality are at least as dangerous to health and life as smoking or drugs.
In New York City, very high rates of risky homosexual practices are reported. Nearly 10 percent of sexually active New York City high school students say they had at least one same-sex partner. Children do what they are taught. “Gay, lesbian, and bisexual students are not born that way. The most recent, extensive, and scientifically sound research finds that the primary factor in the development of homosexuality is environmental not genetic.
Smoking is banned everywhere in America because of the risks imposed to others. We are tough on drinking and driving for the same reasons. We can no longer give homosexuality a free pass due to the grave health-care burden it imposes on the rest of us. The taxpayers cannot “leave the room” to avoid being harmed.
Incubating a national health problem
Gay men have between 4 and 100 times more sex partners than heterosexual men. Lesbians are 4.5 times more likely to have over 50 sex partners in their lifetime compared with heterosexual women. Seventy-five to ninety percent of women who have sex with women have also had sex with men.Only 10 percent of homosexual relationships are monogamous after five years.
  • The incidence of HIV in men who have sex with men is 44 times that in heterosexual men, and 40 times greater than women
  • Homosexual men are 46 times more likely than heterosexual men to contract syphilis.
  • HIV is the No. 10 cause of death for black males and No. 24 for white males (Table D).
  • 63 percent of syphilis cases were among men who have sex with men.
  • The majority of lesbians commonly have sex with men.
Gay advocacy overwhelms science
Ryan Sorba’s authoritative history of gay advocacy documents how the homosexual revolution overwhelmed the scientific community in the 1970s and 1980s and applied aggressive activism and now-debunked “studies” to achieve the impossible: Diagnoses of homosexual disorders are no longer objective. A psychiatric disorder exists only if the individual subjectively discovers it. The majority of therapy today focuses on solipsistic “affirmative therapy” (helping homosexuals feel comfortable with their behavior) instead of steering them to effective “change therapy” that could save their lives and relieve their mental anxieties.
Since psychiatric science does not recognize homosexuality as a diagnosable disorder, the policy responses of the CDC, psychological and psychiatric professions, and schools are limited to carefully encouraging condom use and spending vast sums of taxpayer money taking care of ill and dying individuals.
Gay advocates now controlling the American Psychiatric Association created false science far more dangerous than Al Gore’s debunked global-warming theories. Gore’s confabulations did not kill anyone.
Gay advocates blame the consequences of their behavior on us, demanding that science and taxpayers take care of them. Elton John blames “stigma” for causing the AIDS crisis, asserting that“love can fix the problem.” If gay leaders truly loved their followers, they would be addressing rampant promiscuity to save lives instead of blaming everyone else.
Gay politics has become another big-government enterprise. It forces us to accept it, urges more youth to do it and creates expensive problems requiring massive funding to clean up the mess.
Kinsey acolytes have perverted politics and science in ways not seen since the dark ages. The U.S. House of Representatives recently passed a bill that would “protect all 547 forms of sexual deviancy or ‘paraphilias.’” The California state Assembly just passed legislation guaranteeing that many children will die: S.B. 1172 will bar counselors from helping children recover from unwanted same-sex attractions.
Gay marriage will not reduce homosexual promiscuity
Gay marriage is an absurd proposition. Dan Savage, a leader of the gay movement, promotespromiscuity. The homosexual revolution is founded on sexual promiscuity.
In states that have gay marriage, few men marry. Between 2004 and 2008, only 37 percent of same-sex marriages in Massachusetts involved men.
There is no evidence that “coupling” or gay marriage has notable impact on gay promiscuity.
Marriage becomes a promiscuous government village
Gay marriage is destined to be a three-way marriage between two women and big government. When Suzie marries Joanie, the kids will most often be born of serial extramarital encounters (where men are unlikely to know that birth control is not being used).
Gay marriage establishes a superior four-income, two-mother, big-government family. Marriage-as-village policy is a lucrative tentacular arrangement: women keep their own incomes, depending on government to force several men to provide multiple tax-free “child support” incomes.
The tremendous advantages of gay marriage for women are reflected in marriage data. Gay marriage is nearly twice as popular with women in Massachusetts, where 63 percent of gay marriages involved women between 2004 and 2008.
Gay politics overruns libertarianism and conservatism
Gay conservatism is an impossible concept. The gay movement will settle for nothing less thanhard-core multiculturalist government.
GOProud pretends that gay marriage is a state issue while actively supporting it at the federal level. Gay marriage is very much a federal issue because the Defense of Marriage Act exists. An onslaught of litigation intended to demolish DOMA is raining down on the U.S. Supreme Court. Lawsuits of every possible stripe are headed to the Supreme Court to force homosexuality on America.
The Republican Party allowed Homocon 2012 to be held at its convention and allowed leftists to participate in writing its 2012 platform – a move that may suppress or alienate a large segment of the conservative and tea-party vote.
Glenn Beck now supports gay marriage. He is apparently unaware of the grave damage gay marriage will do to the rest of America.
Dear Glenn: Multicultural marriage divides America into two absolute classes depending solely on reproductive ability – with women entitled and men plantation bondservants to big government. God-given natural social, parental and economic rights will be fully usurped by government. Health-care costs will soar due to increasing illness and social problems thanks to the numbers of sexually confused children and adults. Your pocket will be picked and your children indoctrinated whether you like it or not.
We must rescind irresponsible homosexual public policy from the law books across-the-board and discourage homosexual behavior. We must not allow pansexuals to take over the conservative movement like they did the American Psychiatric Association. Their invasion is as dangerous to our socioeconomic fabric as the Occupy movement is to free enterprise.
America is burning down because of the demise of heterosexual marriage. Marriage-absence is the greatest socioeconomic problem we face. Our focus must be on restoring heterosexual marriage as the social norm.
Certainly, budget cuts are necessary. We must also learn from the political failure of “austerity” in France. If we do not change what the “Federal Sausage Machine” makes, it will continue generating mass social disaster. There will be no funding to clean it up, and angry voters will again swing to the hard left as they did in 2008.
Protecting Marriage Month
The debate over gay marriage never should have left the starting gate. It has always been an illegitimate conversation. The hotbed of dangerous sexually transmitted diseases transmitted from the homosexual population to the rest of America is the problem that must be addressed.
Where we do not provide special protections or affirmations for drug users, smokers, or criminals with behavioral problems, entertaining gay marriage, civil unions and local ordinances giving homosexuals special rights is out of the question.
“Protecting Marriage Month” is a viral leafleting campaign initiated by the Center for Marriage Policy that every American can use to help others understand what is at stake. Businesses, politicians and city councils should care about health and safety of women and children. We encourage everyone who backed Chick-fil-A to join with us once again by downloading and actively distributing the Protecting Marriage Month leaflet during the month of September.

David R. Usher is president of the Center for Marriage Policy. Cynthia L. Davis is executive director of the Center for Marriage Policy.