.
I tell you, the likes of these who wish to be "politically correct" at the expense of the word of God, will well deserve a Muslim takeover!
"When asked about the death penalty Iran imposed on homosexuals,
Ahmadinejad discussed the death sentence for drug smugglers. When
pushed by moderator and acting dean of the School of International and
Public Affairs John Coatsworth, the Iranian president said: 'In Iran, we
don't have homosexuals like in your country. In Iran, we do not have
this phenomenon. I don't know who has told you we have that.'
"Despite fears from some that the controversial leader would go
unchallenged in his comments, Columbia President Lee Bollinger quickly
took the Iranian president to task in his opening statements, calling
him 'a petty and cruel dictator' and pointing to a number of
well-documented instances in which the Iranian regime has executed
children, oppressed women and imprisoned and tortured homosexuals,
academics and journalists." ABC News
Ah! Won't it all be well-deserved!
What Will be Illegal When Homosexuality is Legal
Enlarged MARCH 28, 2013
(first published August 5, 2008) (David Cloud, Fundamental Baptist
Information Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061,
866-295-4143, fbns@wayoflife.org; for instructions about subscribing and
unsubscribing or changing addresses, see the information paragraph at
the end of the article) –
Note: Certain words in this article have been edited so that it may pass through spam filters.
If homosexuality is fully legalized, meaning if homosexual activists
are given every right they demand, citizens in western nations will be
robbed of many liberties they have heretofore enjoyed. This is not a
guess; it is a judgment based on current facts. The right to free speech
and the right to the free exercise of religion, in particular, will be
effectively destroyed.
WHEN HOMOSEXUALITY IS FULLY LEGAL, YOU WON’T BE ABLE TO SAY ANYTHING THAT MIGHT APPEAR BIASED AGAINST HOMOSEXUALITY.
In 1997 Jo Ann Knight was fired by
the Connecticut Department of Public Health after she counseled a
homosexual couple from the Bible about salvation and about the necessity
of repenting of sin. Knight’s job was to supervise the provision of
medical services by Medicare agencies to home health care patients, and
in that capacity she interviewed patients. The homosexuals filed a
complaint with the Commission on Human Rights. A district court upheld
Knight’s dismissal, claiming that her religious speech caused her
clients distress and interfered with the performance of her duties.
In 2000 Evelyn Bodett was fired by
CoxCom Cable for expressing her biblical views against homosexuality to a
lesbian subordinate. They claimed that she was thereby “coercing and
harassing” the lesbian contrary to company policy. The lesbian, Kelley
Carson, had sought Bodett’s advice in regard to a recent breakup with
her homosexual partner, and Bodett gave her biblical counsel that
homosexuality is a sin. Carson complained about the matter to a
supervisor. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected Bodett’s
religious discrimination suit.
In 2001 Richard Peterson was fired
by Hewlett-Packard after he posted Bible verses condemning
homosexuality. Peterson, who had worked for HP for nearly 21 years,
posted the verses in response to the company’s diversity policy that
requires acceptance of homosexuality. The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of
Appeals ruled in 2004 that Peterson was not discriminated against
because of his religious beliefs. Commenting on the case, Stephen
Crampton, chief counsel for the American Family Association’s Center for
Law & Policy, said: “The new rule in the workplace seems to be: The
Bible is out; diversity is in” (“Using Caesar’s Sword,” AgapePress,
March 19, 2004).
In 2002 homosexual activists tried
to get the Ferndale City Council in Michigan to fire volunteer police
chaplain Tom Hansen for stating his biblical views against
homosexuality. The organization Soulforce claimed that Hansen, the
pastor of a Baptist church, was committing “spiritual violence” against
homosexuals by saying that it is sinful. The divided city council opted
not to dismiss the pastor, but it did issue a resolution condemning him
for his “anti-Gay” views.
In 2002 Rolf Szabo was fired by
Eastman Kodak for objecting to the company’s diversity policy. The
program, which is called “Winning & Inclusive Culture,” allows no
“negative comments” toward “gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgendered”
employees. After the company sent out an email memo in October 2002
announcing “coming out” day for homosexual employees and demanding that
they be given full acceptance and encouragement, Rolf replied to the
same mailing list (1,000 employees), “Please do not send this type of
information to me anymore, as I find it disgusting and offensive. Thank
you.” For refusing to apologize and submit to diversity sensitivity
training, Rolf was fired. He had worked for Kodak for 23 years.
In 2002 in Saskatchewan, Canada, the StarPhoenix
newspaper of Saskatoon and Hugh Owens were ordered to pay $1,500 to
three homosexual activists for publishing an ad in the newspaper in 1997
quoting Bible verses regarding homosexuality. The advertisement
displayed references to four Bible passages (Romans 1, Leviticus 18:22,
Leviticus 20:13 and 1 Corinthians 6:9-10) on the left side. An equal
sign (=) was situated in the middle, with a symbol on the right side
comprised of two males holding hands with the universal sign of a red
circle with a diagonal bar superimposed over the top. Owens bought the
ad and the StarPhoenix merely printed it.
The Human Rights Commission’s
ruling was appealed to the courts. In February 2003 the Court of Queen’s
Bench in Saskatchewan refused to overturn it, with Justice J. Barclay
saying the advertisement was an incitement to hatred. But in April 2006
the ruling was overturned by the Saskatchewan Court of Appeals (“Court
Reverses Ruling,” WorldNetDaily, April 14, 2006).
In 2003 the city of Oakland,
California, labeled a flier posted on a workplace bulletin board as
“homophobic” because it used the terms “the natural family and marriage”
(Suit to Decide Workplace ‘Hate Speech,’” The Washington Times,
June 11, 2007). The flier, which was posted by Regina Rederford and
Robin Christy, was removed after a lesbian complained to the city
attorney’s office that it made her feel “excluded.” When Rederford and
Christy sued the city, claiming their First Amendment rights had been
violated, they lost at the local, state, and federal level, with the 9th
U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling against them. The case has been
appealed to the Supreme Court.
In June 2004 Pentecostal Pastor Ake
Green in Sweden became the first pastor in the European Union to be
charged under hate crimes. He was convicted for denouncing homosexuality
as “abnormal,” “something sick,” and “a deep cancerous tumor in the
body of society” and sentenced to one month in jail. The conviction was
overturned by an appeals court.
In October 2004 eleven Christians
with the Repent America organization who were protesting a homosexual
“Outfest” in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, were arrested and charged with a
laundry list of crimes. In February 2005 four members of the group
stood trial on three felony and five misdemeanor counts and the judge
dismissed all charges. Common Pleas Court Judge Pamela Dembe said, “We
cannot stifle speech because we don’t want to hear it, or we don’t want
to hear it now” (“Judge Drops Charges,” Baptist Press, Feb. 18, 2005).
(Homosexual activists claim that the group was disrupting their program
and refusing police requests to move, but the judge ruled that they did
nothing illegal.)
In 2005 in Alberta Fred Henry,
Roman Catholic bishop of Calgary, Alberta, Canada, was subject to two
complaints before the Alberta Human Rights Commission after publishing a
pastoral letter defending the traditional definition of marriage
earlier that same year. (“Canada’s Human Rights Beef with Catholics,”
Zenit, Feb. 5, 2008). Bishop Henry told Zenit: “The social climate right
now is that we’re into a new form of censorship and thought control,
and the commissions are being used as thought police.”
In January 2006, Catholic city
councilman John Decicco of Kamloops, British Columbia, Canada, was fined
$1,000 and required to apologize for saying that homosexuality is “not
normal or natural” (LifeSiteNews, Jan. 19, 2007). In his remarks, which
were made in a city council meeting, DeCicco was expressing the official
doctrine of his church. The fine goes to two homosexual activists who
brought the complaint. DeCicco was also forced to issue a public
statement that his comments were “inappropriate and hurtful to some.”
DeCiccco told LifeSiteNews, “I’m not against lesbian and gay people, but
I don’t agree that I should have to endorse it.”
After he preached against
homosexuality at a fellow officer’s funeral in September 2006, Sgt. Eric
Holyfield of the Los Angeles Police Department was removed from his
position in community relations, moved back to patrol duty, and passed
over for promotions and pay raises (“Police Office Sues LAPD and Los
Angeles, Alleging Religious Discrimination,” Los Angeles Times,
July 2, 2008). In his euology, Holyfield, who is also a pastor, quoted
Bible verses proving that homosexuality is an abomination before God and
said that one must repent or be condemned to hell. Holyfield’s
commanding officer, Charlie Beck, who was present at the funeral, filed a
formal complaint against him.
In February 2007 complaints were brought before the Human Rights Commission in Canada targeting Catholic Insight
magazine and priest Alphonse De Valk, a well-known pro-life activist,
for quoting from the Bible and church documents to refute “sameSex
marriage.” The complaint was brought by homosexual activist Rob Wells, a
member of the Gay, Lesbian and Transgendered Pride Center of Edmonton.
He accuses the magazine of promoting “extreme hatred and contempt”
against homosexuals. De Valk says, “The basic view of the Church is that
homosexual acts are a sin, but we love the sinner,” adding that
opposing sameSex marriage is not the same as rejecting homosexuals as
persons (“Canada’s Human Rights Beef with Catholics,” Zenit, Feb. 5,
2008).
In 2007 the Christian Heritage
Party of Canada and its leader Ron Gray were investigated by the
Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) after a homosexual activist
complained that he was offended by material on the party’s web site. The
activist, Rob Wells, has also launched complaints against Craig
Chandler in Alberta and Alphonse de Valk and Catholic Insight magazine. One of the articles that Wells complained about was an April 29, 2002, report published by WorldNetDaily
in America citing a study that found that pedophilia is more common
among homosexuals (http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=27431).
Another article, written by Ron Gray, protested Canada’s bill to legalize sameSex marriage. Gray told LifeSiteNews:
“Christians are probably the best friends homosexuals have in the world
because we want to see them delivered from an addiction that will
shorten their lives in this world and condemn them in the next. I’m not
motivated by hate at all. I would guess that very few if any real
Christians are motivated by hate in their response to these issues.
It’s a question of compassion. Who truly loves you, someone who tells
you the truth even when it hurts, or someone who will tell you you’re
okay even when you’re headed down the wrong road.
The Scripture says, ‘Faithful are
the wounds of a friend, and deceitful are the kisses of an enemy’”
(“Christian Political Party before Human Rights Commission,” LifeSiteNews,
Nov. 27, 2007). He added: “I really think this is a crucial case
because if an agency of the government, which the CHRC is, can tell a
political party what it may and may not include in its political
statements we have gone way down the road to totalitarianism.”
In June 2007 a coalition of protestant churches in Brazil was ordered
to halt their campaign “In Defense of the Family” and to remove
billboards that said, “Homosexuality: God made them man and woman, and
saw that it was good!” “A court order decreed the removal of the
billboards and the cancellation of a public event scheduled by the
coalition to further the defense of family values, claiming that it was
‘homophobic’” (“Brazil Attacks against Family Defenders,” LifeSiteNews, July 30, 2007).
In June 2008 Stephen Boisson, an evangelical youth pastor,
was banned from expressing opposition to homosexuality in any public
forum and ordered to pay $7,000 “damages for pain and suffering” to the
homosexual activist who brought the complaint. [I doubt very much, that I be able to bring a similar suit for the egregious offense homosexuality be to the word of God which I profess to believe!] The trouble began in 2002
when Boisson wrote a letter to the editor of the Red Deer Advocate
newspaper in Alberta and denounced the advance of homosexual activism
in the schools. Printed under the heading “Homosexual Agenda Wicked,”
the letter said: “Children as young as five and six years of age are
being subjected to psychologically and physiologically damaging
pro-homosexual literature and guidance in the public school system; all
under the fraudulent guise of equal rights.” This offended a homosexual
teacher named Darren Lund who complained to the Alberta Human Rights
Tribunal.
In May 2008, Crystal Dixon was
fired as associate vice president of human resources at the University
of Toledo after she wrote an editorial to the Toledo Free Press
expressing her views on homosexuality. She disagreed that “gay rights”
can be compared to the civil rights struggles of black Americans. She
wrote: “As a Black woman, I take great I take great umbrage at the
notion that those choosing the homosexual lifestyle are 'civil rights
victims.' Here's why. I cannot wake up tomorrow and not be a black
woman. I am genetically and biologically a black woman and very pleased
to be so as my Creator intended” (“Homosexuality Editorial Puts 1st
Amendment on Trial,” WorldNetDaily, Dec. 2, 2008).
Dixon was fired by the university
president, Lloyd Jacobs, who condemned her statements. Robert Gagnon,
author of “Homosexuality and the Bible: Two Views,” condemned the
university, saying that such actions “come out of the Stalinistic,
Soviet state. This is the kind of elimination of any expression of
differences of opinion.”
In December 2008 the Advertising
Standards Authority in Ireland banned a newspaper ad by a Belfast
church, claiming that it was offensive and indecent. The ad, entitled
“The Word of God against Sodomy,” was run by the Sandown Free
Presbyterian Church to coincide with Belfast’s Gay Pride parade. “The
Advertising Standards Authority upheld complaints from seven members of
the public who felt the ad was homophobic, ruling that it had ‘caused
serious offense to some readers’” (“Church Ad Banned,” Christian Post,
Dec. 3, 2008). This government agency has therefore ruled that the
Bible is offensive and indecent and that its statements can be banned if
they cause “offense” to some.
Also in December 2008, Graham
Cogman was fired from the police force in Norfolk, England, for sending
e-mails to colleagues quoting Bible verses and “suggesting that
homosexual [sexual activity] was sinful” (“Office Force to Quit after 15
Years,” Daily Mail, Dec. 6, 2008). Cogman, 50, had been on the force for fifteen years and had three commendations. He told the Daily Mail:
“In the service in general there is a feeling of fear. There is a
definite bias against faith--any faith--if it takes a critical view of
homosexual [sexual activity].
The easy option for me would have been to keep quiet but when there is
such prejudice towards one point of view, how can that be right? That
doesn’t sound like equality and diversity to me. I don’t have any
worries with what people do in their private lives--if they are gay,
that’s fine. I haven’t gone after anyone maliciously.” He is appealing
the verdict.
In August 2009, Peter Vadala was
fired by the Brookstone Corporation for telling a lesbian co-worker that
his Christian faith did not accept sameSex marriage. Two days after she
contacted the Human Resources department, his job was terminated
(“Massachusetts man Fired from Corporation over Christian Belief in
Traditional Marriage,” MassResistance.org, Oct. 30, 2009). The company
told Peter that “in the State of Massachusetts, sameSex marriage is
legal” and his actions were deemed to be “inappropriate” and
“harassment.” He was accused of “imposing his beliefs upon others.”
In April 2010 Ken Howell was fired
as adjunct professor by the University of Illinois for telling his
Catholicism class that he agrees with the Catholic Church’s teaching on
homosexuality (“Firing Follows Anonymous ‘Hate Speech’ Complaint,”
OneNewsNow.com, July 14, 2010). Howell had taught at the university for
nine years, and the complaint was made anonymously by a friend of a
student who attended the class.
That homosexual activists are
trying to silence all Bible believers in the public arena with shrill
brow-beating was evident in the March 2012 brouhaha following Christian
actor Kirk Cameron’s bold defense of biblical marriage in his appearance
on “Piers Morgan Tonight.” Asked for his views on homosexual marriage,
Cameron showed more spiritual conviction and courage than the average
preacher today by stating in a public forum: “I believe that marriage
was defined by God a long time ago. Marriage is almost as old as dirt.
And it was defined in the garden between Adam and Eve--one man, one
woman for life, till death do you part. So I would never attempt to
redefine marriage and I don’t think anyone else should either. So do I
support the idea of ‘gay’ marriage, no I don’t.”
Mr. Cameron also said that
homosexuality is “unnatural, detrimental, and ultimately destructive to
so many of the foundations of civilization.” The response by homosexual
activists and entertainment figures was hysterical. Some were nearly in a
state of apoplexy. GLADD (Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against
Defamation) claimed that such comments “contribute to a climate of
hostility” and “have no place in modern America.” Roseanne Barr said
Cameron is “an accomplice to murder with his hate speech.” Many have
told Cameron to “shut up” in no uncertain terms and to keep his views to
himself. In spite of the deluge of shrill criticism, Cameron hasn’t
backed down.
He said: “I should be able to
express moral views on social issues, especially those that have been
the underpinning of Western civilization for 2,000 years--without being
slandered, accused of hate speech, and told from those who preach
‘tolerance’ that I need to either bend my beliefs to their moral
standards or be silent when I’m in the public square.” Indeed.
After the president of Chick-fil-A
spoke out in July 2012 for traditional marriage and against homosexual
“marriage,” government leaders in four cities said the fast-food
restaurants are not welcome in their territory.
Asked about Chick-fil-A’s support
of the traditional family, Dan Cathy said, ‘Well, guilty as charged. We
are very much supportive of the family--the biblical definition of the
family unit. We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and
we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that”
(“Chick-Fil-A Interview Triggers Media Storm,” Biblical Recorder,
July 19, 2012). Speaking on the Ken Coleman radio program on June 16,
Cathy said, “As it relates to society in general, I think we are
inviting God’s judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at Him and
say, We know better than You as to what constitutes a marriage. I pray
God's mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant
attitude to think that we would have the audacity to try to redefine
what marriage is all about.”
The response was loud and
outrageous. The Human Rights Campaign--the nation’s largest gay activist
group--posted a Chick-fil-A logo on its website with a fake tagline,
“We Didn't Invent Discrimination. We Just Support It.” Boston Mayor Tom
Menino said, “You can’t have a business in the City of Boston that
discriminates against a population. We’re a city that’s at the forefront
of inclusion.” Chicago Mayor said, “Chick-fil-A values are not Chicago
values. They disrespect our fellow neighbors and residents.” This
ridiculous statement ignores the fact that larger numbers of Chicago
citizens hold the same belief about marriage that Dan Cathy holds.
Mountain View, California, is trying to block a new Chick-fil-A from
opening. Homosexual activists announced that they would conduct “kiss
ins” at Chick-fil-A stores.
John Hayward correctly said that homosexual activists are trying to silence any dissent:
“The name of the game being played against Chick-fil-A involved ending
the discussion, by ruling one side of this important social debate
completely out of order, and dismissing their beliefs as unworthy of
respect. All resistance to gay marriage is instantly transmuted into
personal hatred of gay people. On the other hand, criticism of
traditional marriage proponents cannot be viewed as hateful, no matter
how angrily it might be expressed. It’s a rigged heads-we-win,
tails-you-lose game. Cathy isn’t allowed to encourage reverence
and support for the traditional family, or even worse, put his money
where his mouth is. He’s not allowed to say that he finds moral or
practical value in the time-honored definition of marriage, without
feeling animosity towards gay people. His ideas and principles are
automatic thought crimes, no matter how gently and constructively they
might be presented” (“The Chick-fil-A Gay Marriage Controversy,” Human Events, July 24, 2012).
After massive numbers of people
visited Chick-fil-A restaurants across the country on August 1 to show
their support for the company, homosexual activists continued to spew
their vile thoughts and express their hated of Bible-believing
Christians. Many sent Twitter messages that wished for the death of
Chick-fil-A supporters.
The following were typical of those
that were reproduced in a report entitled “Choke to Death on That LGBT
Hating Chicken,” TheBlaze, Aug. 1, 2012. “Lets all go to Chick-fil-a
today, lynch a f_g or two, then hopefully all suffer major heart attacks
and die.” “Oh please please let there be a news story about some bible
thumper having a heart attack and dying in a chick-fil-a today fingers
crossed.” “If you go eat at a Chick fil A today I hope you choke to
death on that LGBT hating chicken.” “Buy ten bigot sammiches, eat em
all, and die of a heart attack. Its all in the bible.” “At least we can
take comfort in the fact that all the homophobes stuffing their face
with Chick fil a will be dead sooner than later.” Many of the Tweets
were too vile to reprint.
In July 2012, Jane Pitt, mother of
Hollywood superstar Brad Pitt, received a deluge of vicious responses,
including death threats and an outpouring of filthy vulgarities, for
simply expressing her opinion against abortion and homosexual
“marriage.” In a letter to the editor of the Springfield News-Leader in
Missouri, Mrs. Pitt stated that Barack Obama is “a liberal who supports
the killing of unborn babies and sameSex marriage,” which is the
undeniable truth. As a state senator in Illinois, Obama even OPPOSED a
bill that would have required that infants who survived abortion be
given medical attention. With the liberal media as their gleeful
helpers, homosexual activists have the objective of quieting every voice
that is opposed to their lifestyle, and any time a prominent person
utters so much as a peep against them, the response is immediate,
outrageous, and vicious. In this case, it worked, as Mrs. Pitt has
reportedly refused to make any further comment.
There should be voices sounding
everywhere in the “land of the free and home of the brave” in defense of
Mrs. Pitt’s constitutional right of freedom of speech and religion, but
even her famous son hasn’t said a word to rebuke his mother’s vile
attackers. Her other son, Doug, though, spoke out in support, as did
actor Jon Voight, the father of Pitt’s girlfriend, Angelina Jolie.
Voight said, “Good for her” and expressed agreement with her point of
view.
In January 2013 Pastor Louie Giglio
was forced to withdraw from delivering the benediction at President
Obama’s inaugural swearing-in ceremony because of his opposition to
homosexuality. In a sermon preached in the 1990s entitled “A Christian
Response to Homosexuality,” Giglio said: “Homosexuality is not an
alternate lifestyle. Homosexuality is not just a sexual preference.
Homosexuality is not gay. Homosexuality is sin. It is sin in the eyes of
God and it is sin according to the word of God.” Giglio also said that
sameSex “marriage” would “run the risk of undermining the whole order
of society.” Because of these true words, Bible-hating homosexual
activists demanded that he not deliver the address at the presidential
inauguration, and the presidential inaugural committee withdraw its
invitation.
The growing power of the homosexual
movement is evident in that four years ago they were not able to stop
Rick Warren from speaking at Obama’s first inauguration, though they
tried for the same reason that they opposed Giglio. Neither Giglio nor
Warren are staunch Bible believers, or they would not have received such
an invitation in the first place, but the vicious opposition even to
milk-toast, rock & roll, ecumenical preachers such as these reveals
the irrationality and intolerance of the homosexual agenda.
And why are the enemies of truth so
empowered today? Because of the milk-toast preachers in the pulpits who
do not preach the fear of God in a scriptural fashion and therefore
have filled the land with a nominal Christianity that has placed the
nation under God’s curse. The solution is for God’s believing people to
pay undivided attention to their individual lives, families, and
churches so that for our sake God will bless instead of curse. We need
to forget the politicking and get serious about obeying God’s Word. “If
my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and
pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I
hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land”
(2 Chron. 7:14).
WHEN HOMOSEXUALITY IS FULLY LEGAL, A BIBLE-BELIEVING CHRISTIAN WON’T BE ABLE TO WORK IN THE FIELD OF COUNSELING
In July 2008 Marcia Walden was
fired from her counseling job with Computer Sciences Corporation after
she referred a homosexual patient to another counselor for sameSex
relationship advice (“Counselor Fired over Christian Beliefs,” OneNewsNow, July 18, 2008).
In 2010, Jennifer Keeton was told
by Augusta State University in Georgia that she would have to change her
Christian beliefs or be expelled from the school’s graduate counseling
program (The Christian Post, July 22, 2010). She was enrolled in
the School Counselor masters degree program since 2009. “She expressed
her Christian beliefs in class discussions and written assignments, but
it was her views regarding gender and sexuality that particularly irked
the faculty. According to the filed complaint, ‘She has stated that she
believes sexual behavior is the result of accountable personal choice
rather than an inevitability deriving from deterministic forces.
She also has affirmed binary
male-female gender, with one or the other being fixed in each person at
their creation, and not a social construct or individual choice subject
to alteration by the person so created. Further, she has expressed her
view that homosexuality is a lifestyle, not a state of being.’ A
Remediation Plan required that Keeton attend workshops on diversity
sensitivity training toward working with GLBTQ [Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual,
and Transgender Queer] populations, work to increase exposure and
interaction with gay populations by attending such events as the Gay
Pride Parade in Augusta, and read more on the topic to improve
counseling effectiveness with GLBTQ populations.
When Keeton asked why her biblical
ethical views would disqualify her competence as a counselor, Mary
Anderson-Wiley [an associate professor who oversees student education
and discipline] at one point responded, ‘Christians see this population
as sinners.’” The Alliance Defense Fund filed suit against the school on
July 21, 2010, but in June 2012 a judge of the Southern District of
Georgia ruled against her.
On July 26, 2010, a federal judge
ruled that Eastern Michigan University was within its rights to dismiss a
graduate student, Julea Ward, from its counseling program “because she
chose not to counsel a homosexual patient” (“Christianity, ‘Gay Rights’
Clash,” Baptist Press, July 30, 2010). “Ward wanted to refer him to
another counselor, but the school found her action insufficient. She was
given three options: 1) going through a ‘remediation program,’ 2)
voluntarily withdrawing, or, 3) going before a university panel. She
chose to appear before the panel, which found she had violated the ACA’s
code of ethics. The panel, made up of three faculty members and a
student representative, even asked Ward if she viewed her ‘brand of
Christianity as superior to that of other Christians who may not agree
with her.’”
WHEN HOMOSEXUALITY IS FULLY LEGAL, YOU WON’T BE ABLE TO CONDUCT MINISTRIES TO HELP HOMOSEXUALS LEAVE THAT LIFESTYLE
The following is excerpted from “Now It’s EX-‘gays’ getting pummeled,” WorldNetDaily, May 28, 2008:
“Regina Griggs, the executive
director of Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays, said her organization and
staff members repeatedly have been attacked simply because of their
message: that there are such individuals as former homosexuals. Some
attacks have been physical, such as the 2007 incident at the Arlington
County Fair. ...
“Griggs said at the time, ‘The gays
became infuriated when our ex-gay volunteers testified about leaving
homosexuality. … One gay man went so far as to hit our ex-gay volunteer
because he refused to recant his ex-gay testimony.’
“The fair was one of the events to
which PFOX was admitted. Several other major influences in America
today, including the National Education Association, and the
Parent-Teachers Association, simply refuse to allow PFOX to appear at
their events.
“Those who condemn homosexuality
also face electronic badgering. When Sally Kern, an Oklahoma lawmaker,
vocally rejected the homosexual lifestyle choice as a threat, she was
inundated with tens of thousands of e-mails in a coordinated attack on
her beliefs. Some of the e-mails threatened her. ...
“Griggs told WND the movement is
becoming more aggressive in teaching that homosexuality is something
people are born with, not something they choose for whatever reasons.
“‘We have a school board teaching
homosexuality is innate. We have judges ruling schools are not required
to teach fact-based [sexual education] information. Basically they are
silencing anyone who holds a different opinion. Their sole concern is
about advancing that homosexuality is normal, natural and healthy and
should have all the equal benefits of marriage. If you come at it from a
Christian perspective, that makes you a homophobe,’ she said, citing
the case of a University of Toledo administrator who was fired for
expressing her personal Christian testimony regarding homosexuality.
‘They're not seeking equality; they're seeking total control,’ she said.
...
“‘Each year thousands of men and
women with sameSex attractions make the personal decision to leave
homosexuality by means of reparative therapy, ex-gay ministry or group
counseling. Their choice is one only they can make. However, there are
others who refuse to respect that choice, and endeavor to attack the
ex-gay community. Consequently, ex-gays are subject to an increasingly
hostile environment where they are reviled or attacked as perpetrators
of hate and discrimination simply because they dare to exist,’ Griggs
said.”
In Brazil, where the homosexual
rights movement is very advanced, the Association of Gays, Lesbians,
Bisexuals, and Transgender People (ABGLT) filed a suit against Rozangela
Alves Justino, a psychologist who offers therapy to homosexuals who
want to change their orientation (“Flurry of Lawsuits,” LifeSiteNews, Aug. 29, 2007).
In August 2012 the California
Assembly voted 51-22 to approve a bill that would forbid those under 18
to undergo sexual orientation change efforts “regardless of the
willingness of a patient” or a “patient’s parent” (“Calif. Lawmakers
Approve Ban,” Christian Post, Aug. 29, 2012). The bill must be voted on by the California Senate and signed by Democratic Governor Jerry Brown.
WHEN HOMOSEXUALITY IS FULLY LEGAL YOU WON’T BE ABLE TO USE THE TERMS FATHER/MOTHER, HUSBAND/WIFE
The legalization of homosexuality is already beginning to destroy the concept of father and mother, husband and wife.
The new marriage licenses in California replace “husband and wife” with “Party A and Party B.”
In Scotland, teachers in some major
cities have banned Father’s Day cards this year so as not to offend
students who live with single mothers and lesbians. The London Telegraph
reports, “The politically correct policy was quietly adopted at schools
‘in the interests of sensitivity’ over the growing number of
lone-parent and sameSex households” (“Father’s Day Cards Banned,” June
20, 2008).
Last year Scotland’s National
Health Service approved a policy for hospital workers mis-titled “Fair
For All.” In fact, the policy is “fair” for no one, because it destroys
the right of free speech and forbids the use of historic and biblical
terms such as “mother” and “father” (since some patients might have two
mothers or two fathers) and “husband” and “wife,” labeling this
“homophobic language.” Such terms must be replaced with “partner” or
“they/them” (Ed Vitagliano, “There is only one acceptable way to talk
about homosexuality -- SILENCE!” OneNewsNow.com, May 31, 2007). The
policy is to be strictly enforced.
In May 2007 the California state
senate passed bill SB 777. If approved by the state assembly and signed
by the governor, it will ban any speech in the public school system that
“reflects or promotes bias against” homosexuality, transgenders,
bisexuals, or those who “perceived” gender issues. The ban would apply
even to discussions. Randy Thomasson of the Campaign for Children and
Families warns that references to “mother” and “father” would probably
be banned if this idiotic policy becomes law (“Lawmakers Pass
Redefinition [ofSex],” The Berean Call, June 8, 2007).
The following is excerpted from
“‘Mother’ and ‘Father’ to Be Scrapped,” christian.org.uk, Feb. 11, 2013:
“The words ‘mother’ and ‘father’ will be dropped from Scottish
matrimonial law under First Minister Alex Salmond’s plans to redefine
marriage. Official consultation documents which accompany the Scottish
Government’s draft Bill spell out the changes to terminology. Where
current matrimonial law refers to ‘mother’ and ‘father,’ the Scottish
Government plans for legislation to use the gender-neutral term
‘parent.’ The proposals have been described as “politically stupid” by
Gordon Wilson, the former leader of the Scottish National Party.
Mr Wilson said: ‘The politically
correct elite are going mad. They are going far beyond what people
envisage.’ Norman Wells of the Family Education Trust said: ‘The
Scottish Government’s plan to introduce a new lexicon for family
relationships shows just how far its proposals to redefine marriage
extend. It is engaging in a linguistic revolution to accommodate the
wishes of a tiny minority of sameSex couples who want their
relationships to be recognised as a marriage. Under these proposals,
marriage is not so much being extended to sameSex couples as being taken
over by them.’”
WHEN HOMOSEXUALITY IS FULLY LEGAL, YOU WON’T BE ABLE TO REFUSE TO SERVE HOMOSEXUALS IN YOUR BUSINESS.
In 2001 in Toronto, Ontario,
printer Scott Brockie was fined $5,000 for refusing to print
homosexual-themed stationery for the Canadian Gay and Lesbian Archives.
The human rights commissioner in this case was Heather MacNaughton.
In 2001 a Christian gynecologist at
the North Coast Women’s Care Medical Group in Vista, California, was
sued by a lesbian for refusing to provide in vitro fertilization
treatment due to his religious convictions. Dr. Christine Brody has
religious objections to pregnancy and childbirth outside of marriage,
but a fellow physician referred Benitez to an outside specialist and the
clinic agreed to pay any cost involved in the fact that the specialist
was not covered by the lesbian’s health insurance (“Another Type of
Conscientious Objector,” American Civil Rights Union Blog, April 30,
2007).
In spite of that and in spite of
the fact that she became pregnant and bore a healthy son, Guadalupe
Benitez sued. In May 2008 the California Supreme Court heard oral
arguments on the case. “Legal experts believe that the woman’s right to
medical treatment will trump the doctor’s religious beliefs. One justice
suggested that the doctors take up a different line of business” (“When
Gay Rights and Religious Liberties Clash,” National Public Radio, June
13, 2008).
In 2005 a British Columbia Knights
of Columbus council was ordered to pay $2,000 to two lesbians, plus
their legal costs, for refusing to allow its facility to be used for
their “wedding.” The human rights commissioner in this case was Heather
MacNaughton.
In 2007, after a Methodist
organization in New Jersey refused to rent its facility to a lesbian
couple for their civil union ceremony, a complaint was filed with the
state Division of Civil Rights. It ruled against the Ocean Grove Camp
Meeting Association, saying that since the property was open for public
use, it could not discriminate against homosexuals. The state revoked
their tax exemption for the property. Pastor Scott Hoffman,
administrator for the Association, says they refused to rent the
facility because of the theological principle that marriage is between a
man and a woman. They are appealing to the state court system. The
complaint came soon after New Jersey legalized sameSex civil unions.
In April 2008 the New Mexico Human
Rights Commission fined a Christian photography studio $6,600 for
discriminating against homosexuals. Elaine Huguenin and her husband Jon,
co-owners of Elane Photography in Albuquerque, politely refused to
photograph a lesbian couple’s “commitment ceremony.” One of the
lesbians, Vanessa Willock, filed a complaint with the New Mexico Human
Rights Commission claiming the Huguenins discriminated against her
because of her “sexual orientation.”
Jordan Lorence, a lawyer with the
Alliance Defense Fund that is representing the Huguenins, said: “This
decision is a stunning disregard for religious liberty and First
Amendment freedoms of people of faith, of Christians, and those who
believe in traditional marriage defined as one man and one woman.
This shows the very disconcerting,
authoritarian face of the homosexual activists, who are using these
non-discrimination laws as weapons against Christians in the business
world and Christians in their churches” (“New Mexico Commission Orders
Fine,” OneNewsNow, April 11, 2008). Lorence warns this is how
similar laws in 19 other states, and the proposed federal Employment
Non-Discrimination Act, can be misused to silence biblical beliefs.
In June 2012 the New Mexico Court
of Appeals ruled against Elane Photography, rejecting their appeal. The
judge plainly stated that the state could discriminate against religious
belief, writing, “The owners of Elane Photography must accept the
reasonable regulations and restrictions imposed upon the conduct of
their commercial enterprise despite their personal religious beliefs
that may conflict with these governmental interests.”
Due to civil rights complains and
lawsuits brought by homosexuals, the eHarmony online dating service was
forced to establish a sameSex service and pay heavy financial penalties.
A settlement with the New Jersey Division on Civil Rights requires the
company to establish a matching service for homosexuals, give the first
10,000 registrants a free six-month subscription, advertise the new
service, and pay $5,000 to the homosexual who brought the complaint and
$50,000 to the state for legal expenses (Christian News, Nov. 19, 2008).
This does not include the hundreds
of thousands of dollars that the company spent to defend itself against
the unjust charges over a three-year period. You would think that the
homosexuals would be satisfied, but that is far from the case. They want
to bleed the company even more, and the confused judges in the state of
California are their abettors.
The Los Angeles Superior Court
ruled on November 20 that a class action lawsuit against eHarmony can go
forward. Thus, every “gay, lesbian, and bisexual individual” that has
attempted to use eHarmony since May 2004 can seek damages, and Judge
Victoria Chaney said they do not need to demonstrate actual injury. They
only have to assert that they visited the company’s web site to see a
sameSex match and were turned away (“Class Action Lawsuit,” Online Dating Magazine, Nov. 20, 2008).
When the Wildflower Inn in
Lyndonville, Vermont, refused to host a wedding reception for a lesbian
couple in 2011 because of religious convictions against homosexual
“marriage,” it was sued by the couple. The ACLU and the Vermont Human
Rights Commission joined the suit. In August 2012, the resort agreed to
pay $10,000 to the Human Rights Commission and to create a $20,000
charitable trust to be disbursed by Kate and Ming Linsley, the lesbian
couple (“Lesbian Brides Win Settlement from Vermont Inn,” Reuters, Aug.
23, 2012).
The resort also agreed not to host
wedding receptions. Vermont legalized civil unions between sameSex
couples in 2000 and legalized homosexual “marriage” in 2009, and the
Vermont Fair Housing and Public Accommodations Act “prohibits public
accommodations from denying goods and services based on customers’
sexual orientation.”
WHEN HOMOSEXUALITY IS FULLY LEGAL, YOU WON’T BE ABLE TO TURN DOWN A HOMOSEXUAL FOR A JOB.
In January 2002 the British
Columbia Human Rights Tribunal levied a fine of $7500 against the
Vancouver Rape Relief Society for its refusal to allow a male-to-female
“transsexual” named Kimberly Dawn to train as a rape and abuse hotline
counsellor. In an article at its web site dated April 16, 2000, the
society argued that it operates as a women-only society and that it is
not wrong to exclude an individual who has grown up as a man and who its
clients might not accept as a woman. The original complaint was brought
in 1995. The tribunal commissioner who imposed the heavy-fisted
sentence was Heather MacNaughton.
In July 2007 a homosexual man won a
job discrimination claim against the Church of England. After John
Reaney was turned down for a youth worker’s post in Cardiff, Wales, he
complained to the government that he was being unlawfully discriminated
against on the basis of his sexual orientation. The employment tribunal
agreed. Homosexual activists rejoiced at the ruling. One said that the
“church must learn that denying people jobs on the ground of their
sexuality is no longer acceptable” (“Gay Christian Wins Job Tribunal
against Church of England,” Daily Mail, July 18, 2007).
WHEN HOMOSEXUALITY IS FULLY LEGAL, YOU WON’T BE ABLE TO ENFORCE PUBLIC NUDITY LAWS.
In June 2008 transgender activists
removed their clothing in a public rally in Northampton, Massachusetts.
The chose Northampton, because it is one of three cities in
Massachusetts that have ordinances forbidding discrimination against
transsexuals. Amy Contrada, a leader in the pro-family movement
MassResistance, explained:
“With anti-discrimination
ordinances in place, there’s no way a policeman would arrest a woman for
being shirtless, because she could say she’s not a woman, and under the
ordinance, she gets to determine whether she’s female or not”
(“Transgender Activists Remove Clothing in Public,” WorldNetDaily, June 17, 2008).
Already in some American cities the
public nudity laws are overlooked during homosexual fests. This is
happening in San Francisco, for example. There are acts not only of
public nudity but also of publicSex during the annual Folsom Street Fair
and other “gay pride” festivals, and the police simply stand by and
observe.
“Nude men engaged in multiple
instances of publicSex on a municipal street while police officers, on
foot and bicycle, congregated nearby making no attempt to enforce public
indecency regulations, according to a report on the latest
homosexual-fest in San Francisco.
“The behavior was documented in
photographs of an event called ‘Up Your Alley,’ which is sponsored by
the same group that organizes the city’s fall ‘gay’-fest, the Folsom
Street Fair, on which WND has reported.
“‘Consider how liberal government
authorities like Mayor [Gavin] Newsom have corrupted the men in blue by
stipulating that police not prosecute public nudity and indecency at
homosexual festivals,’ said a report from Americans for Truth on the
graphic activities documented at the event.
“‘What honor can there be in
protecting the public practice of heinous perversions and nudity in the
city's streets? The shame of pandering politicians is transferred to the
cops who were intended to be guardians of the law and public order,"
said the organizer's chief, Peter LaBarbera” (“San Francisco Fest
Features PublicSex with No Arrests,” WorldNetDaily, Aug. 7, 2008).
WHEN HOMOSEXUALITY IS FULLY LEGAL, YOU WON’T BE ABLE TO TELL THE TRUTH ABOUT THE MORAL DEGRADATION OF HOMOSEXUALS
The Brazilian Association of Gays,
Lesbians, Bisexuals, and Transgender People (ABGLT) filed a flurry of
lawsuits against websites that exposed the fact that the leader of
Brazil’s homosexual movement, Luiz Mott, is a promoter of pedophilia and
pederasty (“Flurry of Lawsuits,” LifeSiteNews, Aug. 30, 2007). “The
sites, Media Without a Mask, the Christian Apologetics Research Center,
and Jesussite, are accused of ‘charlatanism, infamy, defamation, and
calumny,’ for having quoted Mott’s numerous statements endorsing [sexual
activity] with children and adolescents. The Association is asking for
criminal prosecution as well as monetary damages.”
WHEN HOMOSEXUALITY IS FULLY LEGAL, YOU WON’T BE ABLE TO HAVE WOMEN ONLY PUBLIC RESTROOMS.
In June 2008 Gov. Bill Ritter of
Colorado signed a law making it illegal to deny a person access to
public accommodations, including restrooms and locker rooms, based on
gender identity or even the “PERCEPTION” of gender identity (“Biblical
Message Now Criminalized,” WorldNetDaily, June 12, 2008). James Dobson
said: “Who would have believed that the Colorado state legislature and
its governor would have made it fully legal for men to enter and use
women’s restrooms and locker-room facilities without notice or
explanation? Henceforth, every woman and little girl will have to fear
that a predator, bisexual, cross-dresser or even a homosexual or
heterosexual male might walk in and relieve himself in their presence.”
This type of thing is already
happening in Massachusetts. Consider the public hearing at the State
House on March 4, 2008. The hearing was of the Joint Committee of the
Judiciary on the “transgender rights and hate crimes bill” and it was
dominated by homosexual activists. MassResistance reported: “We watched
as a parade of men dressed as women going into the State House ladies’
restroom, and women into the men’s room--while inside the hearing the
activists were unusually honest about their belief that transgender
‘rights’ will trump the public’s comfort with their behavior” (“When the
Wicked Seize a State,” http://www.sliceoflaodicea.com).
In 2013 the Massachusetts
Department of Education issued a directive stating that public schools
must allow boys and girls who identify as the oppositeSex to utilize
whichever restroom and/or locker room they feel most comfortable using
(“Boys Allowed in Girls’ Restrooms,” Baptist Press, March 1, 2013).
On February 26, 2013, the Phoenix
City Council passed the so-called “Bathroom Bill,” which will allow not
only “transgendered” men, but also any man who thinks he is a women to
use many of the same public restrooms that women and young girls use
(“Phoenix Mayor, Council Open the Women’s Bathroom Door for Men,” American Thinker, March 9, 2013).
WHEN HOMOSEXUALITY IS FULLY LEGAL, YOU WON’T BE ABLE TO REFUSE TO PLACE CHILDREN WITH HOMOSEXUAL COUPLES.
“Catholic Charities in
Massachusetts refused to place children with sameSex couples as required
by Massachusetts law. After a legislative struggle--during which the
Senate president said he could not support a bill ‘condoning
discrimination.’ Catholic Charities pulled out of the adoption business
in 2006” (“When Gay Rights and Religious Liberties Clash,” National
Public Radio, June 13, 2008).
“A sameSex couple in California
applied to Adoption Profiles, an Internet service in Arizona that
matches adoptive parents with newborns. The couple’s application was
denied based on the religious beliefs of the company’s owners. The
couple sued in federal district court in San Francisco. The two sides
settled after the adoption company said it will no longer do business in
California” (National Public Radio, June 13, 2008).
WHEN HOMOSEXUALITY IS FULLY LEGAL, YOU WON’T BE ABLE TO STOP HOMOSEXUALS FROM HAVING PUBLIC [SEXUAL ACTIVITY].
When the mayor of Fort Lauderdale,
Florida, proposed in July 2007 that the city spend $250,000 on robotic
toilets for the beach to curb homosexual [sexual activity] in public
restrooms and parks, homosexual activists were up in arms. (The doors of
the toilets automatically open after a certain period.) The homosexuals
accused Mayor Jim Naugle of “hatred” and demanded an apology.
In response he did apologize, but
not to the homosexuals. He said: “I was not aware of how serious the
problem was of the sexual activity that’s taking place in bathrooms and
public places and parks in Broward County and particularly the city of
Fort Lauderdale. I’ve been educated on that, and I want to apologize to
the parents and the children of our community for not being aware of the
problem. This to me is totally unacceptable. I don’t think that in the
name of being inclusive or tolerant any of us in the community should
tolerate this” (“Fort Lauderdale Mayor Criticized,” Florida Baptist Witness, Aug. 2, 2007).
This further enraged the
homosexuals, and they held a rally at city hall. Matt Foreman of the
National Gay and Lesbian Task Force called the mayor a “bigot” and said
he should be “shunned everywhere he goes and not allowed at any
gathering where decent people are.” City Commissioner Carlton Moore
shouted, “We as a community must unite against hatred.”
Some public parks are listed on
homosexual websites as recommended locations for immoral liaisons. In
June 2008 Pennsylvania state park rangers arrested three men at such a
park and accused them of lewd acts (“PA Park Rangers Crack Down,”
OneNewsNow.com, June 18, 2008).
If homosexual activists get their way, and homosexuals are given license to act out their
“lifestyle” as they please, the response given by the Fort Lauderdale
mayor and the actions of the park rangers will be illegal.
WHEN HOMOSEXUALITY IS FULLY LEGAL, YOU WON’T BE ABLE TO RECOMMEND BOOKS THAT CRITICIZE HOMOSEXUALS.
In 2006 a librarian at Ohio State
University’s Mansfield campus was condemned by the faculty for simply
recommending that the book The Marketing of Evil be placed on the
required reading list for incoming freshmen. The librarian, Scott
Savage, made the recommendation while holding serving on the First Year
Reading Experience Committee. After a homosexual professor, J.F.
Buckley, reacted to Savage’s recommendation by sending out “an
obscenity-filled diatribe” in which he claimed that he felt threatened
and intimidated, the faculty voted 21-0 to open a formal investigation
of “sexual harassment” against the librarian (“Judge Rebuffs Christian,”
WorldNetDaily, June 8, 2010). Though the university backed down
and informed Savage that he was not guilty, the climate of intimidation
continued and Savage felt it was necessary to resign.
CONCLUSION
In a nutshell, the thing that will
be illegal when homosexuality is fully legal is Bible-believing
Christianity, but none of this is surprising to the Bible believer. The
Lord Jesus Christ likened the last days to that of Sodom and Gomorrah
(Luke 17:28-30). And the apostle Paul prophesied:
“This know also, that in the last
days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own
selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents,
unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false
accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of
God; Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from
such turn away” (2 Timothy 3:1-5).
We are not surprised at the
wickedness that is sweeping across the world, but it is our
responsibility to take a stand for God’s Word until Jesus comes.
If we take freedom of speech and religion for granted and do not use it to proclaim God’s Word, we don’t deserve it.
And no matter how evil the hour is,
we must not despair. We have all of the glorious promises of a God that
cannot lie. Any trouble we face in this life is very brief and
fleeting. Eternity is what matters.
“I exhort therefore, that, first of
all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be
made for all men; For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we
may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. For
this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; Who will
have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth”
(1 Timothy 2:1-4).
“But the same day that Lot went out
of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them
all. Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed”
(Luke 17:29-30).
1 Fret not thyself because of evildoers, neither be thou envious against the workers of iniquity.
2 For they shall soon be cut down like the grass, and wither as the green herb.
3 Trust in the Lord, and do good; so shalt thou dwell in the land, and verily thou shalt be fed.
4 Delight thyself also in the Lord: and he shall give thee the desires of thine heart.
5 Commit thy way unto the Lord; trust also in him; and he shall bring it to pass.
6 And he shall bring forth thy righteousness as the light, and thy judgment as the noonday.
7 Rest in the Lord,
and wait patiently for him: fret not thyself because of him who
prospereth in his way, because of the man who bringeth wicked devices to
pass.
8 Cease from anger, and forsake wrath: fret not thyself in any wise to do evil.
9 For evildoers shall be cut off: but those that wait upon the Lord, they shall inherit the earth.
10 For yet a little while, and the wicked shall not be: yea, thou shalt diligently consider his place, and it shall not be.
11 But the meek shall inherit the earth; and shall delight themselves in the abundance of peace.
12 The wicked plotteth against the just, and gnasheth upon him with his teeth.
13 The Lord shall laugh at him: for he seeth that his day is coming.
14 The
wicked have drawn out the sword, and have bent their bow, to cast down
the poor and needy, and to slay such as be of upright conversation.
15 Their sword shall enter into their own heart, and their bows shall be broken.
16 A little that a righteous man hath is better than the riches of many wicked.
Psalms 37:1-16 (King James Bible)
____________________________
Distributed
by Way of Life Literature's Fundamental Baptist Information Service, an
e-mail listing for Fundamental Baptists and other fundamentalist,
Bible-believing Christians. OUR GOAL IN THIS PARTICULAR ASPECT OF OUR
MINISTRY IS NOT DEVOTIONAL BUT IS TO PROVIDE INFORMATION TO ASSIST
PREACHERS IN THE PROTECTION OF THE CHURCHES IN THIS APOSTATE HOUR. This
material is sent only to those who personally subscribe to the list. If
somehow you have subscribed unintentionally, following are the
instructions for removal. The Fundamental Baptist Information Service
mailing list is automated.
TO
UNSUBSCRIBE OR CHANGE ADDRESSES, go to the very bottom of any email
received from us and click "Manage My Subscription." If you have any
trouble with this, please let us know. We take up a quarterly offering
to fund this ministry, and those who use the materials are expected to
participate (Galatians 6:6) if they can. Some of the articles are from O
Timothy magazine, which is in its 27th year of publication.
Way
of Life Literature, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061.
866-295-4143, fbns@wayoflife.org. We do not solicit funds from those who
do not agree with our preaching and who are not helped by these
publications, but only from those who are. OFFERINGS can be made at www.wayoflife.org/offering/
WAY OF LIFE LITERATURE SHARING POLICY: Much
of our material is available for free, such as the hundreds of articles
at the Way of Life web site. Other items we sell to help fund our
expensive literature, video, and foreign church planting ministry. Way
of Life’s content falls into two categories: sharable and non-sharable.
Things that we encourage you to share include the audio sermons, O
Timothy magazine, FBIS articles, and the free eVideos and free eBooks.
You are welcome to make copies of these at your own expense and share
them with friends and family, but they cannot be posted to web sites.
You are also welcome to use excerpts from the articles in your own
writings, in sermons, in church bulletins, etc. All we ask is that you
give proper credit.
Things we do not want copied and
distributed freely are items like the Fundamental Baptist Digital
Library, print edition of our books, PDFs and other electronic editions
of the books that we sell, the eVideos that we sell, etc. The items have
taken years to produce at enormous expense in time and money, and we
need the income from sales to help fund the ministry. We trust that your
Christian honesty will preserve the integrity of this policy. “For the
scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the
corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward” (1 Timothy 5:18).
...
...
...
[Thanks and Amen, Helga. Saw this snippet on the net. Enjoy.]
ReplyDelete(The following paper was inspired by Bill O'Reilly whose TV show favors God Dumpers and not "Bible Thumpers." Quotes are from "Vital Quotations" by Emerson West.)
DANGEROUS BIBLE THUMPERS OF AMERICA
ROBERT E. LEE: "In all my perplexities and distresses, the Bible has never failed to give me light and strength." (p. 21)
DANIEL WEBSTER: "If we abide by the principles taught in the Bible, our country will go on prospering and to prosper." (p. 21)
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS: "I have made it a practice for several years to read the Bible through in the course of every year." (p. 22)
ABRAHAM LINCOLN: "I believe the Bible is the best gift God has ever given to man. All the good from the Saviour of the world is communicated to us through this book." (p. 22)
GEORGE WASHINGTON: "It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible." (p. 22)
HORACE GREELEY: "It is impossible to mentally or socially enslave a Bible-reading people." (p. 23)
THOMAS JEFFERSON: "I hold the precepts of Jesus as delivered by himself to be the most pure, benevolent, and sublime which have ever been preached to man. I adhere to the principles of the first age; and consider all subsequent innovations as corruptions of this religion, having no foundation in what came from him." (p. 45)
THOMAS JEFFERSON: "Had the doctrines of Jesus been preached always as pure as they came from his lips, the whole civilized world would by now have become Christian." (p. 47)
BENJAMIN FRANKLIN: "As to Jesus of Nazareth, my opinion of whom you particularly desire, I think the system of morals and his religion, as he left them to us, is the best the world ever saw, or is likely to see." (p.49)
WOODROW WILSON: "The sum of the whole matter is this----that our civilization cannot survive materially unless it be redeemed spiritually. It can only be saved by becoming permeated with the spirit of Christ and being made free and happy by practices which spring out of that spirit." (p. 143)
PATRICK HENRY: "There is a just God who presides over the destiny of nations." (p. 145)
THOMAS JEFFERSON: "Material abundance without character is the surest way to destruction." (p. 225)
THOMAS JEFFERSON: "Of all the systems of morality, ancient or modern, which have come under my observation, none appear to me so pure as that of Jesus." (p. 237)
GEORGE WASHINGTON: "The foolish and wicked practice of profane cursing and swearing is a vice so mean and low, that every person of sense and character detests and despises it." (p. 283)
BENJAMIN FRANKLIN: "Here is my creed. I believe in one God, the Creator of the universe. That he governs it by his Providence. That he ought to be worshiped." (p. 301)
CALVIN COOLIDGE: "The strength of a country is the strength of its religious convictions." (p. 305)
GEORGE WASHINGTON: "The perpetuity of this nation depends upon the religious education of the young." (p. 306)
Prior to our increasingly "Hell-Bound and Happy" era, America's greatest leaders were part of the (gulp) Religious Right! Today we've forgotten God's threat (to abort America) in Psa. 50:22----"Now consider this, ye that forget God, lest I tear you in pieces, and there be none to deliver." Memo to God Dumpers: In light of Rev. 16:19, can you be sure you won't be in a city that God has already reserved for destruction?
Oh, my! What a treat to wake up to this marvelous comment of yours, Rocky2! Thank you, so very much!
DeleteIndeed, Bill O'Reilly, the pathetic Roman Catholic who believes not in the deity of Christ (what a surprise, eh?) lives inebriated with his own fame, ceaselessly mentioning his ratings!
Yes, and it is the word of God which gave these our past leaders the moral ethics they sought to have shine through that great artwork wrought by them for the generations to come, our Constitution!
Thank you, Rocky2! I will be posting this your great reply as a post, which I am sure, you would approve!
Nevertheless, as we are assured in God's word, we who believe He died for the full payment of our sins, and in His glorious resurrection will not experience His wrath, for we will have been met by Jesus himself well before that!
For God hath not appointed us to wrath,
but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ,
1 Thessalonians 5:9 (King James Bible)
May the Holy Spirit prick many a heart in this our beloved land and draw them to Christ very soon!
May God bless you and yours, Rocky2,
Helga