Today homoexual activist liberal Bush appointee San Francisco Judge Walker announced that “gay marriages” may begin in California next week.

What is this guy the Emperor of California?

This is Groundhog Day all over again.

As I have written numerous times on this site, judges can’t make law!

Prop 8 which amended the California Constitution limiting marriage to one man-one woman can’t, according to the Supreme Law of California, the California Constitution, be “overturned,” “struck down” or “repealed” but by another constitutional amendment passed by the sovereign people of the state of California.

Furthermore, marriage licences can’t be altered in any way or issued to same sex couples without a binding, enabling, accompanying statute.

And the law has not changed and can’t no matter what sodomite judges in San Francisco say.

Once again, Governor Schwarzenegger is staying true to his father’s Nazi colors by promising to authorize the changes to and issuance of marriage licenses to same sex couples in direct violation of his oath to uphold the California Constitution and only enforce and administer the laws and statutes on the books in California (as opposed to a judge’s illegal and unconstitutional pronouncement).

And sadly enough, once again, our leading “Christian” and “conservative” leaders and organizations such as Focus on the Family, ACLJ, Pacific Justice, AFA, Liberty, ADF, FRC etc…, will cede the toxic liberal lie that courts can make law. None of these “watchdog” organizations and organizational leaders held Mitt Romney responsible when he unilaterally, illegally and unconstitutionally instituted same-sex “marriage” in Massachusetts. In fact many of them supported or endorsed him for president of the United States. And none of these groups held Governor Schwarzenegger responsible for pulling a Romney when he initially authorized the 20,000 plus marriage licenses to be illegally altered and issued to homosexual couples from California two years ago.

And sadly enough, all of these groups have complained about “judicial tyranny” and have sent out donation letters and e-mails begging for money to “fight this battle in court” instead of drawing attention to the obvious fact that the executive branch may never enforce a judges opinion in an individual matter before him and that, by doing just that, Schwarzenegger is violating his oath and the inalienable right of the sovereign people of California to govern themselves.

As the founder of the “conservative and Christian right” in America, Paul Weyrich wrote (which was ghost written by Oxford educated, John Haskins) shortly before he died a few years ago:

Lincoln acknowledged that court opinions are binding on the specific parties named and “entitled to very high respect and consideration (by) other departments of the government.” But like the Founding Fathers, he utterly rejected the claim that judges’ opinions are the law of the land:

“..if the policy of the government, upon vital questions, affecting the whole people, is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, the instant they are made, in ordinary litigation between parties, in personal actions, the people will have ceased, to be their own rulers, having, to that extent, practically resigned their government, into the hands of that eminent tribunal.”

The sad reality is that we get “judicial tyranny” because we (Christians and conservatives) have allowed the judiciary to excercise constitutional legislative powers they don’t possess.

Our leading “conservative” and “Christian” organizations and leaders continue to score goals for the other team.

Today, homosexual activist San Francisco U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker (George H.W. Bush appointee) issued an opinion that Prop 8, amended into law by California Voters in 2008, which defines marriage as limited to one man-one woman, is “unconstitutional.”

Here we go again.

Most headlines cite how Judge Walker “struck down” the so-called “gay marriage ban.”

For starters, judges can’t “strike down” any law whether it be a statute or constitutional amendment such as Prop 8. And it is a shame that so many “conservative” lawyers continue to parrot this toxic liberal lie. Judges may hear individual cases and rule on them as long as they have jurisdiction. But judges don’t possess any legislative authority. Period!

The judge did have subject matter jurisdiction to hear the case and issue a ruling. But a judge’s opinion isn’t law.

The only way the actual constitutional amendment, Prop 8,may be altered or overturned in any way is via another constitutional amendment, according to the California Constitution itself. Only the voters may revoke or overturn a constitutional amendment or initiative statute.

Thus, one man-one woman marriage is still the law of the land unless and until the voters amend the constitution to revoke it.

Schwarzennegger already pulled a “Mitt Romney” once by unilaterally, illegally and unconstitutionally authorizing changes to and issuance of marriage licenses without a binding, enabling, accompanying statute in direct violation of his constitutionally sworn oath to enforce the law (as opposed to unconstitutional court opinions).

For that every pro-family Christian legal organization in America should have called for The Gilie-Man’s impeachment. (Which none of them did since almost all of them from Liberty Council to the ACLJ to ADF believe the lie that judges actually can make law).

If Schwarzenegger again falsely claims that a judge’s utterly absurd opinion that a constitutional amendment is “unconstitutional,” which it OBVIOUSLY isn’t since the generally accepted definition of marriage has always been understood to be exclusive to one man-one woman, he should, without a doubt, be impeached for failing to enforce the law…which has still not changed and still limits marriage to one man-one woman in the state of California!

I am not surprised that this homosexual activist liberal Judge Walker issued this totally absurd unconstitutional opinion.

After all, that’s what activist liberal homosexual activist judges do.

And I predicted that this is exaclty what would happen in a post I wrote on Feb 14th of this year.

But sadder and more frustrating to me is that fact that our so-called “Christian” “conservative” “constitutionalist” lawyers, pro-family leaders, pundits and politicians will almost without exception cede and perpetuate the toxic liberal lie that the judge “struck down” the marriage amendment and that the only recourse is to fight it out in court instead of calling on Scwarzegger to uphold his oath and ignore the activist and totally unconstitutional ruling as is Scwarzenegger’s solemn duty as the chief law enforcement officer of the state of California.

The reason that liberal judges are able to “legislate from the bench” and “strike down laws” with impugnity is because “conservatives” have speciously conceded the lie that they possess the right to do so.

Is there not one single Christian conservative leader who will denounce this joke of a ruling as the legally null and void farce that it obviously is and demand that Governor Swarzenegger uphold his sworn oath and ignore it?

Obviously pro-homosexual, pro-abortion, “conservative” “Republican” Aaanald, will never uphold the Constitution (since we know liberals instinctively loathe the Supreme Law of the Land).

But wouldn’t it be nice if even one “rule of law conservative” at least attempted to demand that the rule of law actually be upheld instead of ceding imaginary powers the judiciary doesn’t possess?

Yesterday I posted a blog entitled, “Fake Celebrity ‘Christian’ and ‘Conservative’ pro-life and pro-family leaders have only themselves to blame for Obama’s tax subsidized abortions!”

One of the counterfeit “pro-family” “Christian” groups I cited was Jay Sekulow’s American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ.)

Minutes after I sent out the post to over 500 consevative and Christian pro-family and pro-life lawyers, leaders and pundits, I received an indignant request from Jay’s son, Jordan Sekulow to be “removed from the list.”

I don’t believe that I have to add to our subsequent exchange below.

I believe it is pretty self-explanatory…

As you read our exchange, ask yourself if you consider yourself to be a pro-life, pro-family constitutional Christian conservative if the Sekulow’s represent your core values and beliefs…

Jordan Sekulow

Remove me from the list Gregg

And by the way, we were against the Stupak compromise deal - very clearly, do some research Gregg - I know you have the time on your hands…

Me: No, Jordan.

You were copied for a reason. You are not on a “list.” And I won’t stop cc’ing you when I feel it is appropriate irregardless of your indignant and petulant requests.

I know this post I wrote must hit close to home since you worked for the man who unilaterally, illegally and unconstitutionally implemented sodomy-based “marriage” and signed into law $50 abortions (2 years AFTER his “pro-life conversion.”) Mitt Romney. His entire fully documented far left wing record is documented here. http://greggjackson.com/blog/?p=471 Anything not accurate in it, Jordan? How could you and your dad continue to support this man who signed the death warrants of thousands of babies in Massachusetts at $50 dollars each and claim to be a “pro-family Christian” as you and your dad claim?

And what reason do you have to be critical of ObamaCare’s subsidization of abortion given the fact that you are a proud supporter of the man who ushered in tax subsidized elective surgical abortions into law in his quasi-socialist healthcare plan, Mitt Romney?

P.S. As to your little snide comment about my having so much “time on my hands”: I actually don’t as I am keeping myself quite busy, you’ll be pleased to know, writing my next book on the counterfeit conservative and Christian movement in America and you and your father will have your own chapter dedicated to you so all grassroots Christians and conservatives can learn the truth about how you have lied and deceived millions (like when you both portrayed Mitt Romney as a pro-life, pro-family conservative for example) while you simultaneously enriched yourselves buying fancy homes and flying around the world on private jets, etc…So, between that and running my own business (not leaching off my father like some people) and raising a family, I am keeping pretty busy but appreciate your concern, Jordan. We can’t all be as fortunate as you, Jordan. After all, not everybody has a rich daddy like you do who can buy his son air time that he can use to rip off retired women on Social Security every day as you and your father do.

Jordan Sekulow: Remove from list or we’ll do our job. I’ve had enough of this, asked to be removed from this spam many times.

Anyone on this list 1) had a team in Pakistan defending christians against the death penalty 2) had bombs go off at rallies in Kenya because you’re fighting for the life of the unborn? 3) anyone ever been outside the US and seen the battles we’re facing against the pro-abortion establishment and radical islam?

Until you have, don’t criticize those who risk their lives on the front lines for these issues.

Remove me from the list or I take other steps.
Night all.

Me: You’ll “do your job” Jordan?

Yeah, I wish you would Jordan.

Really, I do.

I really wish you would stop lying and deceiving millions of Christians and conservatives by claiming to be “pro-family” “Christians” while portraying the Founding Father of sodomy-based “marriage” and the 50 dollar Romneybort as an authentic pro-family conservative. Will you start doing your job instead of compromising Biblical Truth and lying to millions of Christians?

You still have not answered my questions:

Why did you claim that you never supported the Stupak Amendment when a simple Google Search demonstrates that you and your dad did?

Your dad, Jay Sekulow said of the Stupak Amendment:

“The American Center for Law and Justice, a pro-life legal group, also applauded the vote.

“The passage of this pro-life amendment represents the only bright spot in an otherwise troubling government-run health care package put forth by House Speaker Pelosi,” ACLJ chief counsel Jay Sekulow told LifeNews.com.

“Sekulow gave kudos to Bart Stupak and Joseph Pitts “for their unrelenting efforts in protecting the unborn” but said, “Unfortunately, the leadership in the House has produced a disturbing and flawed health care package that not only fails to meet the needs of most Americans, but interjects an unprecedented level of government intrusion and bureaucracy into health care.”

You and your dad “opposed the Stupak Amendment, Jordan?” Seriously? That’s an outright lie. Do you have any clue what you are talking about?

And how can you criticize ObamaCare’s tax funded abortions when you still support the man who signed 50 dollar elective surgical abortions into law (Mitt Romney)?

Come on Jordan. Have the guts to debate and defend your position instead of threatening to sue or whatever it is you claim “you’ll do” when confronted with uncomfortable truths that reveal your duplicity and hypocrisy.

And by the way, anti-spam laws don’t apply to personal e-mails where you are cc’d. A simple google search would reveal that too.

Be a man and answer the questions asked honestly. Would think a public figure like yourself would not have a problem with that. Or will you only debate when you can control the mic?

Jordan Sekulow: Amendment. Yes. Compromise. No.

Political reality boys and girls - the pro-aborts outnumbered us and we wanted to do what we could to save some unborn lives. We have to work in the real world - you spend your time writing emails to people. Spend some time in the West Bank, Zimbabwe, Kenya (Christians being bombed at EACLJ rallies), and Pakistan

After that, you can comment.

Me: So you admit you knew that Mitt Romney signed $50 dollar abortions into law (2 years after his fake “pro-life conversion) when you went to work for him on his presidential campaign and endorse him for president? You mean it was your understanding Romney wasn’t a “pro-abort?”

And how would have supporting the man whose socialist healthcare plan that served as the model for ObamaCare (Mitt Romney) which subsidized elective surgical abortions on demand, “saved some lives, Jordan?”

Not really getting your warped rationale for working for and supporting the Founding Father of sodomy-based “marriage” and the $50 tax-payer funded abortion, for president of the United States, Mitt Romney…

And again, why did you lie when you said that neither you nor your father supported Stupak when you actually did?

Jordan Sekulow: We’ve been getting death threats, nails in our tires, war declared on us since I was a kid. Live in the trenches for a while boys - then comment

Me: Does “living in the trenches” include lying for pro-abort, pro-homosexual politicians like Romney? and does it include living in 3 mansions and flying around in your dad’s private jet? Sounds tough Jordan.

Jordan Sekulow: That jet has been on aclj tv shows since I was a little kid - never been hidden…As for Romney, Gregg it’s 2010 right? Move on to the next battle - don’t get stuck in the past my friend.

Me: No, Jordan. Romney is the leading GOP candidate in many polls and you and your father played a prominent role in elevating and validating his status. So, his candidacy and your support is still very germane.

So how can you reconcile your criticism of Obamacare’s funding for abortion when you supported the man who signed 50 dollar abortions into law, Mitt Romney?

And why did you falsely claim you and your dad never supported Stupak which would have funded abortions when a simple google search proves otherwise?

Jordan Sekulow: Remove me from the list Gregg. I don’t care about your debate between your friends. Remove me from the list - you spam, you know, remove me. It’s such a joke emailing any “sekulow” email you can to try and reach one of us.

Remove me from the list. I expect a reply by am tomorrow.

Me: Jordan, once again: you are not on any “list.”

I intentionally cc’d you since I cited your father on my recent blog post to provide you with an opportunity to respond.

I can understand why you have no further desire to communicate since you were unable to answer some very direct and I believe fair questions regarding your working and ongoing support for Mitt Romney (and hypocritical criticism of ObamaCare’s abortion subsidies) as well as your false statement made tonight that you (and your father) never supported Stupak when the record clearly reveals you did.

I guess your refusal to candidly discuss these issues is all anybody on this thread needs to know about your character and integrity…

If I have said anything untrue, please bring it to my attention and I will gladly correct the record…

Jordan Sekulow: I don’t want another email from you Gregg - you aren’t worth the time to debate with. If I receive another, I’ll move to other options.

Me: If I continue to press you about why you worked for and still support the Founding Father of sodomy “marriage” and the 50 dollar tax-payer funded abortion, Mitt Romney, for President of the United States, you will “move to other options” Jordan?

Give me a break…Grow up…

How about just answering the question as to why you and your dad (Jay Sekulow) still support the man (Mitt Romney) who…

• Illegally & unconstitutionally instituted sodomy “marriage.”
• Signed $50 tax-subsidized abortions into law (2 years AFTER his fake “pro-life conversion.”)
• Boosted funding for homosexual “education” starting in kindergarten.
• Opposes a ban on homosexual scoutmasters.
• Promised the homosexual Republican “Log Cabin Republicans” he wouldn’t oppose “gay marriage” in return for their endorsement.
• Instituted a quasi-socialist healthcare plan endorsed by Hillary Clinton, Teddy Kennedy and Planned Parenthood that destroyed the Massachusetts’ economy.
• Increased taxes and fees by close to a billion dollars which destroyed the Massachusetts’ economy and opposed the Bush Tax Cuts.
• Voted # 8 RINO by Human Events.
• Passed over Republican lawyers for three quarters of the 36 judicial vacancies he faced and nominated 2 open homosexuals.
• Criticized Joint Chief’s of Staff, Peter Pace for saying that homosexual acts were “immoral.”
• Supports passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act which would force churches and other religious organizations to hire homosexuals and transvestites or face criminal fines and prosecution.

Documented Proof Links here:

And if you can’t answer this simple question, perhaps your dad can. Surely he is never at a loss for words and can defend his continued support for Romney and past support for legislation (Stupak) that would have subsidized the deaths of 1000s of babies in the womb with tax-payer dollars…

Jordan Sekulow: You’re not uncovering anything - the support was public and in mainstream media. Gov Romney would and still could make a great candidate (My emphasis)

Remove me from the list - final email

Me: So Jordan you think that the man who compiled the radical far left wing record Romney did (below) would still make a “great candidate” in the future?

My bad, guy.

I thought you, your dad and ACLJ was actually pro-life, pro-marriage, and pro-limited government.

My bad…

I am sure that millions of Christians will want to know this in a national press release. Thanks for the quote…Now we know where you and your dad stand.

Thanks Jordan…Appreciate your candor…

Jordan Sekulow: You use that line, - my quote - please

Don’t forget, we’ve recently spent time with Governor Palin and other leaders of the grassroots conservative movement

Off of the list by am - this is SPAM

Me: Ok, thanks Jordan.

I will quote you in a national press release as saying that in spite of the fact that Romney illegally instituted sodomy-based “marriage” unilaterally, unconstitutionally and illegally and signed $50 dollar elective surgical abortions on demand into law (2 years AFTER his supposed “pro-life conversion”), (which you have not even attempted to dispute) that you and ACLJ still think that Romney “would and still could make a great candidate.” I am sure that millions of Christians will want to know where you stand. Once again, thanks for your candor.

By the way, here are the SPAM laws and you will see that they don’t apply to our e-mail conversation we are having. So you can save your impotent threats…My lawyer friend shared this with me a few months back when another conterfeit conservative public figure like yourself threatened to sue me for e-mailing him about something he had said on the air…

As it turns out, Jordan, accusing somebody of doing something illegal to a number of 3rd parties without any true basis, as you have done, is libel.

Spam is a legal term with a legal meaning. Anti-Spam Laws concern “commercial messages,” “advertisement or solicitation,” etc. Anti-Spam Laws are to prevent Internet marketing - not freedom of speech.

Truth-telling is still permitted in America … at least for the short-term. Your toothless threat to tattletale is silly. It was probably too much of an inconvenience for you, but a 3-second Internet search on Anti-Spam Laws (see below) makes it clear that I am doing nothing “illegal.”

Unlike what I have written, however, falsely accusing someone of doing something illegal to a number of 3rd parties without any true basis, as you have done Jordan, is libel.

Is your only response to the substantive issues I have raised simply to whine about receiving “spam” e-mails?

Don Hank: Gregg,
If what you say is true, then the whole Sekulow empire is based on a hoax and these people are taking people’s money based on a fraud. I wonder if that is legal? Particularly now that we all are witnesses to the fact that Jordan KNOWS the facts about the Stupak legislation and about Mitt Romney. He certainly can’t say “oh, gosh, Judge, I had no idea I was using false information to make my father’s organization look like it was pro-life. I actually thought Mitt was a real pro-lifer.”
At any rate, it would be good to have a brief article on this, with links etc. However, I know your book will give the details.
This is despicable.
Don

Don Hank: Jordan,
If I recall correctly, I gave money to your rich father believing he was a good man who was sincerely supporting a pro-life platform, among other things. His support for Romney makes me really angry, and also ashamed of myself for being so naïve.
When you say “move on to the next battle,” it seems like you want all of us whom you have conned over the years to forgive and forget.
I can forgive, but if I forget, then I am being irresponsible, because I have a duty to warn others about this scam.
As for the money you took, you really owe a lot of people and should pay it back.
Don Hank
http://laiglesforum.com

Here is a sampling of what I would have to say about some of the major topics of the day…

Abortion: Killing babies is always wrong because God says “thou shalt not murder” and any law contrary to God’s Supreme Law which under-girds the Constitution is no law at all. Shame on so many “pro-life” “Christians” for continually ceding the lie that there is a constitutional right to kill babies and that abortion is the “supreme law of the land” and that in order to end abortion it’s ok to support legislation that regulates and subsidizes it in select circumstances. No “Christian nation” can ever expect God’s blessings when they allow 3,000 innocent defenseless babies to be murdered daily (over 50,000,000 since 1973). The abortion issue is the elephant in the room that nobody wants to talk about. But until we recognize the inherent Personhood in every human baby in the womb made in the image of God by God and stop allowing babies to be killed, God’s wrath and Divine Judgment will only increase. If I were president my first official act would be to close down every abortuary in America in compliance with my sworn oath to protect and defend the Supreme Law of the Land which guarantees the inalienable right to life for every American citizen.

“Same-sex marriage”: “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.” Period. Marriage between one man and one woman is God’s standard. Any other variation is contrary to God’s Natural Law and is therefore by definition neither moral nor legal. Whether “pro-family” “conservatives” such as Mitt Romney choose to unilaterally and unconstitutionally issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples still doesn’t change the fact that there is only one definition for marriage: one man and one woman. If I were president I would support a federal marriage amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman and issue an executive order halting the illegal issuance of marriage licenses in Massachusetts and Iowa where no laws have ever been passed to legalize sodomy based “marriages.”

Public Schools: The founder of the N.Y. Humanist Society, C.F. Potter said of tax-payer funded public schools in 1930:

Education is a most powerful ally of Humanism & every American school is a school of Humanism. What can the theistic Sunday schools, meeting for an hour once a week, & teaching only a fraction of the children do to stem the tide of a five-day program of Humanistic religion teaching? So very Humanistic is modern education that no religion has a future unless it be Humanism. The religion of tomorrow in America & all the world may not be in all respects identical with the religious Humanism we are advocating in this book, but it will be mightily like it & of the same spirit.”

Indeed, Potter and his colleague John Dewey who founded public education in America have realized their vision. Tax payer dollars have subsidized the religion of Humanism for the last 80 years in violation of the “separation of church and state” liberals are so fond of referencing. Public schools are Humanist indoctrination factories designed to take every ounce of religious (Christian) faith out of children. If elected president I would urge every Christian parent to take their children out of the godless atheistic Marxist Madrassas and would issue an executive order shutting down the Department of Education. Shame on Bush and other “conservative” “Republicans” for increasing funding for public education.

Barack Hussein Obama (aka Barry Soetoro): Obama (until he releases his long form birth certificate showing the hospital in Hawaii he was born in and the doctor who delivered him with the date and time) is in my mind a foreign born rabid Marxist who is illegally occupying the People’s House. No law that he has ever signed is valid since he has not demonstrated that he is constitutionally eligible to be POTUS. Sad that very few “law and order” “conservatives” have demanded Obama prove his natural born citizenship as a full Congressional committee demanded of McCain. As president I would issue executive orders rescinding any legislation he signed into law and have him deported back to his country of origin.

ObamaCare: The entire law is totally unconstitutional and no conservative or Christian or “pro-life” “conservative” should have supported any part of it much less amendments which subsidized select abortions (Nelson and Stupak). Christians and conservatives should have rejected the entire totalitarian Communist monstrosity en toto from the very beginning. No wonder the godless Lefties are winning the Culture War and pushing American into World Government. As president I would immediately issue an executive order rescinding Obamacare in accordance with my constitutional oath to not enforce any laws which are not in accordance with the Supreme Law of the Land.

The Supreme Court: The Founders believed that the Judiciary was by design the “weakest of the 3 branches” since judges were not elected and directly accountable to the sovereign people. Court’s opinions are not law. Only the people possess the constitutional authority to make laws directly via constitutional amendments or citizen initiatives or indirectly via their elected representatives. Any court opinion that is contrary to the Constitution is anti-constitutional and illegal and no judge possesses the right to issue illegal court opinions. The judges who issued Roe, Lawrence, Kelo, Goodridge, California re:marriage, and the Iowa “gay marriage” opinion (to name but a few of the most flagrantly unconstitutional opinions belched forth in the past 40 years), should have all been impeached. Shame on “constitutional conservatives” who perpetuate the lie that courts can make and “strike down” laws. As president I will ignore and reject any opinion issued by the Supreme Court that is contrary to the plain words of the United States Constitution and call for the impeachment of any judges who issue opinions contrary to the Supreme Law of the Land.

Illegal Immigration: Anybody who enters our country illegally should be immediately detained and deported back to their country of origin. Period. Either our federal immigration laws mean something or they don’t. Shame on our so-called “conservative” leaders (Bush, McCain, Romney etc…) who supported McCain-Kennedy “comprehensive immigration reform” which would have given 30 million illegals amnesty. If I were president, every illegal alien in our prisons (almost a third of all federal inmates are illegal aliens) would be deported back to their country of origin and I would have the Hunter border fence constructed within my first 3 months in office.

Islam: Islam is a religion (political system) of pure evil based on the teachings of its rapist, child molesting, murderous founder Muhammad whose primary goal is to establish Sharia Law and a Global Caliphate over the entire world. As president I would deport any Muslim preaching Jihad against America. Let them spew their anti-Semitic, anti-Christian, anti-American garbage elsewhere but not in America.

America: America was founded on Christian principles and it is specifically adherence to those principles which has made our country the greatest nation in the history of the world for over 300 years. The Humanists and atheists who claim otherwise ignore the overwhelming factual evidence to the contrary. If America is to be restored to her former greatness in the 21st Century and saved from the Democrat-Socialists and Globalists who seek to push America into world government, there is only one way to accomplish this task: American Christians must rededicate ourselves and our nation to God. The Founders beleived, “No King but King Jesus.” American Christians by and large have forsaken our First Love. Only Christian reformation and revival can save America at this point. As president I would work to do everything in my power to rededicate our nation back to God.

Today some leading “conservatives” released what they are calling, “The Mount Vernon Statement: Conservative, Values, Beliefs and Principles.”

If you have not read it yet, I will save you the time. While the group of self-styled “conservatives” talk about the importance of “limited government” and “individual liberty” blah blah blah, the fact is that many of the leading signers listed either directly or indirectly supported the Founding Father of the $50 co-pay abortion and the man who ushered in sodomy-based “marriage” (illegally) to America, Mitt Romney, in the 08′ election.

Where they have the gall to lecture the grassroots on the principles of “constitutional conservatism” is beyond me.

Tony Perkins, President of the Family Research Council, for example, considers Mitt Romney to be a “friend to the pro-family movement,” has taken $ from Romney surrogates, and featured Romney a few months ago at his “Values Voters Summit.” (for the 3rd year in a row) in spite of the FACT that I possess a plethora of evidence which demonstrates that Mr. Perkins has been intimately aware of Mitt Romney’s fully documented far left wing social and fiscal record for quite some time.

Wendy Wright, the President of Concerned Women of America, actually has an autographed chair in her office in Washington D.C. that I sat in a few years ago (unknowingly until the end of our hour long conversation when she pointed it out to me) that she accepted as a gift from Mitt Romney in spite of the fact that she too was intimately aware of Mitt Romney’s far left wing social and fiscal record (that we discussed in her office that day).

David Keene, President of the American Conservative Union, has featured Mitt Romney 3 years in a row at Keene’s, “Conservative Political Action Conference” in Washington D.C. and has worked behind the scenes with other prominent “conservative” leaders to keep Romney’s name alive and viable for the 2012 election. Keene is also featuring Romney prominently this year at CPAC as a keynote speaker in spite of the fact that I possess a multitude of evidence that Keene too has been intimately aware of Mitt Romney’s far left wing social and fiscal record since Keene had me emcee the presidential sessions two years in a row at his event.

Ed Feulner, the President of the “conservative” Heritage Foundation has also featured Mr. Romney prominently in many of Heritage’s fundrasing efforts and has portrayed Romney as a Reaganesque conservative in spite of the fact that Mr. Feulner surely has done his homework and is intimately aware of Mitt Romney’s far left-wing social and fiscal record.

Kathryn Lopez of National Review also endorsed Romney for president and is still a staunch supporter despite the fact that I have the evidence that Ms. Lopez of National Review who endorsed “conservative” Mitt for President knows Romney’s entire far left wing social and fiscal record and has gone to great lengths to white-wash and suppress it in her regular nationally syndicated columns.

This so-called “statement of conservative values and beliefs” is merely more hot air from a bunch of self-important hypocritical and compromised inside the belt-way pseudo-conservative elite power brokers who have yet to realize how totally disconnected they really are from the true conservative grassroots base who actually believes in much of what the document purports to champion.

It’s obvious to me that the homosexual activist “judge” Walker in San Francisco will rule for the homosexual plaintiffs who claim Prop 8, legally defining marriage as limited to one man and one woman in the California Constitution, to be “discriminatory” and “unconstitutional.”

If Judge Walker issues a ruling that Prop 8 is “unconstitutional,” he should be impeached immediately by Governor Schwarzenegger. No judge possesses the authority to “overturn” a constitutional amendment passed via the proscribed legislative process by the sovereign voters of the state.

But is there any doubt that “conservative” “Republican” Governor Arnold will pull a Mitt Romney and assert that he “has no choice but to uphold the court’s ruling?”

Of course he will.

And when he does he will have once again abnegated his sworn duty to uphold the federal and state constitution he swore an oath in front of God Almighty to protect and defend.

The only way a citizen initiative or constitutional amendment can be changed, in any way, according to the California Constitution, is by another citizen initiative or amendment. So for Prop 8 in the California Constitution, which has enshrined into statutory law the legal definition of marriage as “one man and one woman,” to be “overturned,” another constitutional amendment would have to be passed by a majority of voters in California. That is the only way the law can change. End of story. Case closed!

Therefore, if Schwarzenegger allows an unelected judge’s toothless, unconstitutional and illegal opinion to become, in essence, the supreme law of the land (abolishing in effect, Proposition 8), conservative, pro-family, and Christian politicians, lawyers, activists and leaders should call for Schwarzenegger to be removed from office for violating his sworn oath to only enforce the laws and statutes of the state of California (as opposed to unconstitutional court opinions belched forth from radical homosexual activist judges on the 9th Circuit.)

If the people’s right to govern themselves and define marriage is “overturned” by a branch of government (the judicial branch) which doesn’t possess the authority to make or “overturn” any laws or constitutional amendments, it will only be because “our side’s” “conservative” “pro-family” and “Christian” politicians, lawyers, leaders and pundits, once again ceded the toxic liberal lie that courts possess the authority to make law.

Here are some questions (in bold) I have posed to the signers of the “Manhattan Declaration,” a manifesto on Christian political action co-signed by 140 of the most noteworthy Christian “leaders” in the Protestant, Catholic, and Orthodox traditions. I sent these questions in a private e-mail to many of the signatories as well as 100s of Christian and conservatives lawyers, leaders and pundits. Still not one response from the man who co-ordinated this “manifesto,” Romney political hack, GOP operative Mark DeMoss or any of the other pro-family prostitutes such as Tony Perkins/FRC, Tom Minnery/Focus, Jim Dobson/Focus, Richard Land/SBC, Jim Bopp/NRTL, Stu Epperson/Salem Radio, etc…

While I agree with almost everything contained in the document itself, the words are mere platitudes in my humble opinion without major repentence from many of these leaders/signers for their gross hypocrisy in supporting many pro-abortion, pro-homosexual “marriage,” anti-Christical/anti-family candidates for a seat at the proverbial “table.”

My comments/questions are in bold:

Manhattan Declaration: A Call of Christian Conscience

Drafted on October 20, 2009

Released on November 20, 2009

Preamble
Christians are heirs of a 2,000-year tradition of proclaiming God’s word, seeking justice in our societies, resisting tyranny, and reaching out with compassion to the poor, oppressed and suffering.

While fully acknowledging the imperfections and shortcomings of Christian institutions and communities in all ages, we claim the heritage of those Christians who defended innocent life by rescuing discarded babies from trash heaps in Roman cities and publicly denouncing the Empire’s sanctioning of infanticide. We remember with reverence those believers who sacrificed their lives by remaining in Roman cities to tend the sick and dying during the plagues, and who died bravely in the coliseums rather than deny their Lord.

After the barbarian tribes overran Europe, Christian monasteries preserved not only the Bible but also the literature and art of Western culture. It was Christians who combated the evil of slavery: Papal edicts in the 16th and 17th centuries decried the practice of slavery and first excommunicated anyone involved in the slave trade; evangelical Christians in England, led by John Wesley and William Wilberforce, put an end to the slave trade in that country. Christians under Wilberforce’s leadership also formed hundreds of societies for helping the poor, the imprisoned, and child laborers chained to machines.

In Europe, Christians challenged the divine claims of kings and successfully fought to establish the rule of law and balance of governmental powers, which made modern democracy possible. And in America, Christian women stood at the vanguard of the suffrage movement. The great civil rights crusades of the 1950s and 60s were led by Christians claiming the Scriptures and asserting the glory of the image of God in every human being regardless of race, religion, age or class.

This same devotion to human dignity has led Christians in the last decade to work to end the dehumanizing scourge of human trafficking and sexual slavery, bring compassionate care to AIDS sufferers in Africa, and assist in a myriad of other human rights causes - from providing clean water in developing nations to providing homes for tens of thousands of children orphaned by war, disease and gender discrimination.

Like those who have gone before us in the faith, Christians today are called to proclaim the Gospel of costly grace, to protect the intrinsic dignity of the human person and to stand for the common good. In being true to its own calling, the call to discipleship, the church through service to others can make a profound contribution to the public good.

Declaration

We, as Orthodox, Catholic, and Evangelical Christians, have gathered, beginning in New York on September 28, 2009, to make the following declaration, which we sign as individuals, not on behalf of our organizations, but speaking to and from our communities. We act together in obedience to the one true God, the triune God of holiness and love, who has laid total claim on our lives and by that claim calls us with believers in all ages and all nations to seek and defend the good of all who bear his image. We set forth this declaration in light of the truth that is grounded in Holy Scripture, in natural human reason (which is itself, in our view, the gift of a beneficent God), and in the very nature of the human person. We call upon all people of goodwill, believers and non-believers alike, to consider carefully and reflect critically on the issues we here address as we, with St. Paul, commend this appeal to everyone’s conscience in the sight of God.

While the whole scope of Christian moral concern, including a special concern for the poor and vulnerable, claims our attention, we are especially troubled that in our nation today the lives of the unborn, the disabled, and the elderly are severely threatened; that the institution of marriage, already buffeted by promiscuity, infidelity and divorce, is in jeopardy of being redefined to accommodate fashionable ideologies; that freedom of religion and the rights of conscience are gravely jeopardized by those who would use the instruments of coercion to compel persons of faith to compromise their deepest convictions.

Because the sanctity of human life, the dignity of marriage as a union of husband and wife, and the freedom of conscience and religion are foundational principles of justice and the common good, we are compelled by our Christian faith to speak and act in their defense. In this declaration we affirm: 1) the profound, inherent, and equal dignity of every human being as a creature fashioned in the very image of God, possessing inherent rights of equal dignity and life; 2) marriage as a conjugal union of man and woman, ordained by God from the creation, and historically understood by believers and non-believers alike, to be the most basic institution in society and; 3) religious liberty, which is grounded in the character of God, the example of Christ, and the inherent freedom and dignity of human beings created in the divine image.

We are Christians who have joined together across historic lines of ecclesial differences to affirm our right - and, more importantly, to embrace our obligation - to speak and act in defense of these truths. We pledge to each other, and to our fellow believers, that no power on earth, be it cultural or political, will intimidate us into silence or acquiescence. It is our duty to proclaim the Gospel of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ in its fullness, both in season and out of season. May God help us not to fail in that duty.

Life

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. Genesis 1:27

I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full. John 10:10

Although public sentiment has moved in a pro-life direction, we note with sadness that pro-abortion ideology prevails today in our government. Could that possibly be the result of “conservative” “Republicans” like Bush who increased funding for Planned Parenthood at a greater rate than Clinton did? Or the fact that so many “pro-family” and “conservative” leaders are currently advocating the “80-20 rule” (that it’s ok for pro-lifers to support the “lesser of two evils” pro-abort Republicans if they are fiscally conservative)? The present administration is led and staffed by those who want to make abortions legal at any stage of fetal development, and who want to provide abortions at taxpayer expense. But tax-payers already fund abortions don’t they thanks to “pro-life” “conservative” “Republicans” like Bush who increased funding for Planned Parenthood right? And didn’t many of you signers support Mitt Romney for president…the man who established $50 co-pay elective surgical abortions on demand as a “healthcare benefit” in his quasi-socialist healthcare plan? And didn’t many of you support and endorse the man, John McCain, for president who supports the right of individual states to kill babies and for tax-payer funded scientific experimentation on human embryos? Majorities in both houses of Congress hold pro-abortion views. The Supreme Court, whose infamous 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade stripped the unborn of legal protection, continues to treat elective abortion as a fundamental constitutional right, though it has upheld as constitutionally permissible some limited restrictions on abortion. How can a court opinion, especially a totally toothless unconstitutional one like Roe, “strip the unborn of legal protection?” Don’t both the Declaration and Constitution both guarantee the inalienable right to life? Why are you perpetuating a lie that an illegal court opinion somehow trumped the Supreme Law of the Land? And if abortion is not a “constitutional right,” why have so many of you accepted the faulty premise for so long that it is? The President says that he wants to reduce the “need” for abortion - a commendable goal. But he has also pledged to make abortion more easily and widely available by eliminating laws prohibiting government funding, requiring waiting periods for women seeking abortions, and parental notification for abortions performed on minors. The elimination of these important and effective pro-life laws cannot reasonably be expected to do other than significantly increase the number of elective abortions by which the lives of countless children are snuffed out prior to birth. Our commitment to the sanctity of life is not a matter of partisan loyalty, for we recognize that in the thirty-six years since Roe v. Wade, elected officials and appointees of both major political parties have been complicit in giving legal sanction to what Pope John Paul II described as “the culture of death.” We call on all officials in our country, elected and appointed, to protect and serve every member of our society, including the most marginalized, voiceless, and vulnerable among us. So does this mean that you are all demanding that every elected official uphold their constitutionally sworn oath to protect, defend and uphold the inalienable right to life as guaranteed to every human being? If so, do we have your word that you will never support any candidate for public office who would violate their oath by not defending the inalienable right to life?

A culture of death inevitably cheapens life in all its stages and conditions by promoting the belief that lives that are imperfect, immature or inconvenient are discardable. As predicted by many prescient persons, the cheapening of life that began with abortion has now metastasized. For example, human embryo-destructive research and its public funding are promoted in the name of science and in the cause of developing treatments and cures for diseases and injuries. True, so why did so many of you endorse and support McCain who supports tax-payer funded embryonic stem cell research? Would the embryos that would have died felt any less pain because a Republican was responsible for their death? The President and many in Congress favor the expansion of embryo-research to include the taxpayer funding of so-called “therapeutic cloning.” Again, McCain did too and many of you supported his candidacy. Kind of hypocritical no? This would result in the industrial mass production of human embryos to be killed for the purpose of producing genetically customized stem cell lines and tissues. At the other end of life, an increasingly powerful movement to promote assisted suicide and “voluntary” euthanasia threatens the lives of vulnerable elderly and disabled persons. Eugenic notions such as the doctrine of lebensunwertes Leben (”life unworthy of life”) were first advanced in the 1920s by intellectuals in the elite salons of America and Europe. Long buried in ignominy after the horrors of the mid-20th century, they have returned from the grave. The only difference is that now the doctrines of the eugenicists are dressed up in the language of “liberty,” “autonomy,” and “choice.”

We will be united and untiring in our efforts to roll back the license to kill that began with the abandonment of the unborn to abortion. We will work, as we have always worked, to bring assistance, comfort, and care to pregnant women in need and to those who have been victimized by abortion, even as we stand resolutely against the corrupt and degrading notion that it can somehow be in the best interests of women to submit to the deliberate killing of their unborn children. Our message is, and ever shall be, that the just, humane, and truly Christian answer to problem pregnancies is for all of us to love and care for mother and child alike. Great. So why did so many of you support and continue to support the man, Mitt Romney, who signed $50 tax-payer funded surgical elective abortions into law 2 years after his supposed “pro-life conversion?”

A truly prophetic Christian witness will insistently call on those who have been entrusted with temporal power to fulfill the first responsibility of government: to protect the weak and vulnerable against violent attack, and to do so with no favoritism, partiality, or discrimination. The Bible enjoins us to defend those who cannot defend themselves, to speak for those who cannot themselves speak. And so we defend and speak for the unborn, the disabled, and the dependent. What the Bible and the light of reason make clear, we must make clear. We must be willing to defend, even at risk and cost to ourselves and our institutions, the lives of our brothers and sisters at every stage of development and in every condition. Agreed. But it again begets the question why so many of you supported either McCain or Romney in the last election given their pro-abortion/anti-life records? Can we really hold Obama’s feet to the fire when so many of you supported pro-aborts like McCain and Romney for POTUS?

Our concern is not confined to our own nation. Around the globe, we are witnessing cases of genocide and “ethnic cleansing,” the failure to assist those who are suffering as innocent victims of war, the neglect and abuse of children, the exploitation of vulnerable laborers, the sexual trafficking of girls and young women, the abandonment of the aged, racial oppression and discrimination, the persecution of believers of all faiths, and the failure to take steps necessary to halt the spread of preventable diseases like AIDS. We see these travesties as flowing from the same loss of the sense of the dignity of the human person and the sanctity of human life that drives the abortion industry and the movements for assisted suicide, euthanasia, and human cloning for biomedical research. And so ours is, as it must be, a truly consistent ethic of love and life for all humans in all circumstances. Agreed. So does that mean that none of you will ever again support any pro-abortion politician for elected office regardless who they are running against? Do we have your word that you will never again support men like Giuliani, Thompson, McCain or Romney?

Marriage

The man said, “This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called woman, for she was taken out of man.” For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh. Genesis 2:23-24

This is a profound mystery - but I am talking about Christ and the church. However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband. Ephesians 5:32-33

In Scripture, the creation of man and woman, and their one-flesh union as husband and wife, is the crowning achievement of God’s creation. In the transmission of life and the nurturing of children, men and women joined as spouses are given the great honor of being partners with God Himself. Marriage then, is the first institution of human society - indeed it is the institution on which all other human institutions have their foundation. In the Christian tradition we refer to marriage as “holy matrimony” to signal the fact that it is an institution ordained by God, and blessed by Christ in his participation at a wedding in Cana of Galilee. In the Bible, God Himself blesses and holds marriage in the highest esteem. Right so far…

Vast human experience confirms that marriage is the original and most important institution for sustaining the health, education, and welfare of all persons in a society. Where marriage is honored, and where there is a flourishing marriage culture, everyone benefits - the spouses themselves, their children, the communities and societies in which they live. Where the marriage culture begins to erode, social pathologies of every sort quickly manifest themselves. Unfortunately, we have witnessed over the course of the past several decades a serious erosion of the marriage culture in our own country. Perhaps the most telling - and alarming - indicator is the out-of-wedlock birth rate. Less than fifty years ago, it was under 5 percent. Today it is over 40 percent. Our society - and particularly its poorest and most vulnerable sectors, where the out-of-wedlock birth rate is much higher even than the national average - is paying a huge price in delinquency, drug abuse, crime, incarceration, hopelessness, and despair. Other indicators are widespread non-marital sexual cohabitation and a devastatingly high rate of divorce. Yup…All true…

We confess with sadness that Christians and our institutions have too often scandalously failed to uphold the institution of marriage and to model for the world the true meaning of marriage. Insofar as we have too easily embraced the culture of divorce and remained silent about social practices that undermine the dignity of marriage we repent, and call upon all Christians to do the same. Do those of you such as Wayne Grudem, Tony Perkins, James Dobson, Mark DeMoss, Stu Epperson, Jim Bopp, and Richard Land who either endorsed, supported, or white-washed the far left wing record of Mitt Romney for president have any plans in the near future to “repent” for deceiving millions of Christians by portraying Romney as a “pro-life” and “pro-family” “conservative” candidate?
To strengthen families, we must stop glamorizing promiscuity and infidelity and restore among our people a sense of the profound beauty, mystery, and holiness of faithful marital love. We must reform ill-advised policies that contribute to the weakening of the institution of marriage, including the discredited idea of unilateral divorce. We must work in the legal, cultural, and religious domains to instill in young people a sound understanding of what marriage is, what it requires, and why it is worth the commitment and sacrifices that faithful spouses make.

The impulse to redefine marriage in order to recognize same-sex and multiple partner relationships is a symptom, rather than the cause, of the erosion of the marriage culture. It reflects a loss of understanding of the meaning of marriage as embodied in our civil and religious law and in the philosophical tradition that contributed to shaping the law. Yet it is critical that the impulse be resisted, for yielding to it would mean abandoning the possibility of restoring a sound understanding of marriage and, with it, the hope of rebuilding a healthy marriage culture. It would lock into place the false and destructive belief that marriage is all about romance and other adult satisfactions, and not, in any intrinsic way, about procreation and the unique character and value of acts and relationships whose meaning is shaped by their aptness for the generation, promotion and protection of life. In spousal communion and the rearing of children (who, as gifts of God, are the fruit of their parents’ marital love), we discover the profound reasons for and benefits of the marriage covenant.

We acknowledge that there are those who are disposed towards homosexual and polyamorous conduct and relationships, just as there are those who are disposed towards other forms of immoral conduct. We have compassion for those so disposed; we respect them as human beings possessing profound, inherent, and equal dignity; and we pay tribute to the men and women who strive, often with little assistance, to resist the temptation to yield to desires that they, no less than we, regard as wayward. We stand with them, even when they falter. We, no less than they, are sinners who have fallen short of God’s intention for our lives. We, no less than they, are in constant need of God’s patience, love and forgiveness. We call on the entire Christian community to resist sexual immorality, and at the same time refrain from disdainful condemnation of those who yield to it. Our rejection of sin, though resolute, must never become the rejection of sinners. For every sinner, regardless of the sin, is loved by God, who seeks not our destruction but rather the conversion of our hearts. Jesus calls all who wander from the path of virtue to “a more excellent way.” As his disciples we will reach out in love to assist all who hear the call and wish to answer it.

We further acknowledge that there are sincere people who disagree with us, and with the teaching of the Bible and Christian tradition, on questions of sexual morality and the nature of marriage. Some who enter into same-sex and polyamorous relationships no doubt regard their unions as truly marital. They fail to understand, however, that marriage is made possible by the sexual complementarity of man and woman, and that the comprehensive, multi-level sharing of life that marriage is includes bodily unity of the sort that unites husband and wife biologically as a reproductive unit. This is because the body is no mere extrinsic instrument of the human person, but truly part of the personal reality of the human being. Human beings are not merely centers of consciousness or emotion, or minds, or spirits, inhabiting non-personal bodies. The human person is a dynamic unity of body, mind, and spirit. Marriage is what one man and one woman establish when, forsaking all others and pledging lifelong commitment, they found a sharing of life at every level of being - the biological, the emotional, the dispositional, the rational, the spiritual - on a commitment that is sealed, completed and actualized by loving sexual intercourse in which the spouses become one flesh, not in some merely metaphorical sense, but by fulfilling together the behavioral conditions of procreation. That is why in the Christian tradition, and historically in Western law, consummated marriages are not dissoluble or annullable on the ground of infertility, even though the nature of the marital relationship is shaped and structured by its intrinsic orientation to the great good of procreation.

We understand that many of our fellow citizens, including some Christians, believe that the historic definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman is a denial of equality or civil rights. They wonder what to say in reply to the argument that asserts that no harm would be done to them or to anyone if the law of the community were to confer upon two men or two women who are living together in a sexual partnership the status of being “married.” It would not, after all, affect their own marriages, would it? On inspection, however, the argument that laws governing one kind of marriage will not affect another cannot stand. Were it to prove anything, it would prove far too much: the assumption that the legal status of one set of marriage relationships affects no other would not only argue for same sex partnerships; it could be asserted with equal validity for polyamorous partnerships, polygamous households, even adult brothers, sisters, or brothers and sisters living in incestuous relationships. Should these, as a matter of equality or civil rights, be recognized as lawful marriages, and would they have no effects on other relationships? No. The truth is that marriage is not something abstract or neutral that the law may legitimately define and re-define to please those who are powerful and influential.

No one has a civil right to have a non-marital relationship treated as a marriage. Marriage is an objective reality - a covenantal union of husband and wife - that it is the duty of the law to recognize and support for the sake of justice and the common good. If it fails to do so, genuine social harms follow. First, the religious liberty of those for whom this is a matter of conscience is jeopardized. Second, the rights of parents are abused as family life and sex education programs in schools are used to teach children that an enlightened understanding recognizes as “marriages” sexual partnerships that many parents believe are intrinsically non-marital and immoral. Third, the common good of civil society is damaged when the law itself, in its critical pedagogical function, becomes a tool for eroding a sound understanding of marriage on which the flourishing of the marriage culture in any society vitally depends. Sadly, we are today far from having a thriving marriage culture. But if we are to begin the critically important process of reforming our laws and mores to rebuild such a culture, the last thing we can afford to do is to re-define marriage in such a way as to embody in our laws a false proclamation about what marriage is.

And so it is out of love (not “animus”) and prudent concern for the common good (not “prejudice”), that we pledge to labor ceaselessly to preserve the legal definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman and to rebuild the marriage culture. How could we, as Christians, do otherwise? The Bible teaches us that marriage is a central part of God’s creation covenant. Indeed, the union of husband and wife mirrors the bond between Christ and his church. And so just as Christ was willing, out of love, to give Himself up for the church in a complete sacrifice, we are willing, lovingly, to make whatever sacrifices are required of us for the sake of the inestimable treasure that is marriage. All of this is true. So why did so many of you support the man who illegally, unconstitutionally and unilaterally installed sodomy-based “marriage” in Massachusetts, Mitt Romney, and the man, John McCain, who opposed a federal marriage amendment? Kind of hypocritical to rail against gay “marriage” when many of you supported either Romney or McCain. No?

Religious Liberty

The Spirit of the Sovereign LORD is on me, because the LORD has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim freedom for the captives and release from darkness for the prisoners. Isaiah 61:1

Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s. Matthew 22:21

The struggle for religious liberty across the centuries has been long and arduous, but it is not a novel idea or recent development. The nature of religious liberty is grounded in the character of God Himself, the God who is most fully known in the life and work of Jesus Christ. Determined to follow Jesus faithfully in life and death, the early Christians appealed to the manner in which the Incarnation had taken place: “Did God send Christ, as some suppose, as a tyrant brandishing fear and terror? Not so, but in gentleness and meekness…, for compulsion is no attribute of God” (Epistle to Diognetus 7.3-4). Thus the right to religious freedom has its foundation in the example of Christ Himself and in the very dignity of the human person created in the image of God - a dignity, as our founders proclaimed, inherent in every human, and knowable by all in the exercise of right reason.

Christians confess that God alone is Lord of the conscience. Immunity from religious coercion is the cornerstone of an unconstrained conscience. No one should be compelled to embrace any religion against his will, nor should persons of faith be forbidden to worship God according to the dictates of conscience or to express freely and publicly their deeply held religious convictions. What is true for individuals applies to religious communities as well.

It is ironic that those who today assert a right to kill the unborn, aged awered disabled and also a right to engage in immoral sexual practices, and even a right to have relationships integrated around these practices be recognized and blessed by law - such persons claiming these “rights” are very often in the vanguard of those who would trample upon the freedom of others to express their religious and moral commitments to the sanctity of life and to the dignity of marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife.

We see this, for example, in the effort to weaken or eliminate conscience clauses, and therefore to compel pro-life institutions (including religiously affiliated hospitals and clinics), and pro-life physicians, surgeons, nurses, and other health care professionals, to refer for abortions and, in certain cases, even to perform or participate in abortions. We see it in the use of anti-discrimination statutes to force religious institutions, businesses, and service providers of various sorts to comply with activities they judge to be deeply immoral or go out of business. After the judicial imposition of “same-sex marriage” in Massachusetts, for example, Catholic Charities chose with great reluctance to end its century-long work of helping to place orphaned children in good homes rather than comply with a legal mandate that it place children in same-sex households in violation of Catholic moral teaching. This is a BALD FACED LIE!!!! same-sex “marriage” wasn’t “judicially imposed” in Massachusetts. As many of you know (DeMoss, Perkins, Land, Bopp, Sekulow, Grudem, Epperson etc…) Mitt Romney and Mitt Romney alone illegally instituted same sex “marriage.” Why do you continue to perpetuate the lie that the court “judicially imposed gay marriage” when the court issued no such order and admitted it possessed no power or authority to do so? Proof here: http://www.massresistance.org/docs/marriage/romney/dec_letter/letter.pdf In New Jersey, after the establishment of a quasi-marital “civil unions” scheme, a Methodist institution was stripped of its tax exempt status when it declined, as a matter of religious conscience, to permit a facility it owned and operated to be used for ceremonies blessing homosexual unions. In Canada and some European nations, Christian clergy have been prosecuted for preaching Biblical norms against the practice of homosexuality. New hate-crime laws in America raise the specter of the same practice here. And since almost every one of you were dead silent when “conservative” “Republicans” Romney and Schwarzenegger illegally and unconstitutionally imposed “gay marriage,” don’t you bear much of the blame?

In recent decades a growing body of case law has paralleled the decline in respect for religious values in the media, the academy and political leadership, resulting in restrictions on the free exercise of religion. We view this as an ominous development, not only because of its threat to the individual liberty guaranteed to every person, regardless of his or her faith, but because the trend also threatens the common welfare and the culture of freedom on which our system of republican government is founded. Restrictions on the freedom of conscience or the ability to hire people of one’s own faith or conscientious moral convictions for religious institutions, for example, undermines the viability of the intermediate structures of society, the essential buffer against the overweening authority of the state, resulting in the soft despotism Tocqueville so prophetically warned of.1 Disintegration of civil society is a prelude to tyranny.

As Christians, we take seriously the Biblical admonition to respect and obey those in authority. We believe in law and in the rule of law. We recognize the duty to comply with laws whether we happen to like them or not, unless the laws are gravely unjust or require those subject to them to do something unjust or otherwise immoral. The biblical purpose of law is to preserve order and serve justice and the common good; yet laws that are unjust - and especially laws that purport to compel citizens to do what is unjust - undermine the common good, rather than serve it. So why then do you continue to comply with the “law” that says it’s ok to murder babies? Isn’t killing a baby contrary to God’s law? Did any of you ever call on President Bush to uphold his sworn oath to protect and defend the inalienable right to life by closing down every abortion mill in this country? Why not, if in fact you believe, that abortion is contrary to God’s law?

Going back to the earliest days of the church, Christians have refused to compromise their proclamation of the gospel. In Acts 4, Peter and John were ordered to stop preaching. Their answer was, “Judge for yourselves whether it is right in God’s sight to obey you rather than God. For we cannot help speaking about what we have seen and heard.” Through the centuries, Christianity has taught that civil disobedience is not only permitted, but sometimes required. There is no more eloquent defense of the rights and duties of religious conscience than the one offered by Martin Luther King, Jr., in his Letter from a Birmingham Jail. Writing from an explicitly Christian perspective, and citing Christian writers such as Augustine and Aquinas, King taught that just laws elevate and ennoble human beings because they are rooted in the moral law whose ultimate source is God Himself. Unjust laws degrade human beings. Inasmuch as they can claim no authority beyond sheer human will, they lack any power to bind in conscience. King’s willingness to go to jail, rather than comply with legal injustice, was exemplary and inspiring.

Because we honor justice and the common good, we will not comply with any edict that purports to compel our institutions to participate in abortions, embryo-destructive research, assisted suicide and euthanasia, or any other anti-life act; nor will we bend to any rule purporting to force us to bless immoral sexual partnerships, treat them as marriages or the equivalent, or refrain from proclaiming the truth, as we know it, about morality and immorality and marriage and the family. We will fully and ungrudgingly render to Caesar what is Caesar’s. But under no circumstances will we render to Caesar what is God’s. That’s great that you will oppose efforts to compel pro-lifers to take part in abortions or any other anti-life action. But if you believe that every baby possesses an inalienable right to life, will you also pledge to only support 100% pro-life and pro-marriage candidates for public office?

Gregg Jackson
www.greggjackson.com

The vast majority of the leftist mainstream and alternative “conservative” media have repeatedly called any American who has demanded that Barack Hussein Obama release his supposed Hawaiian birth certificate to prove he is a natural-born citizen, as is required under the United States Constitution, a fringe-kook-conspiracy-theorist-wing-nut.

So here is my question with $50,000 cash to anybody in the media who can answer the following 3 part question:

1. What hospital in Hawaii was Barack Hussein Obama born in?

3. What time was BHO born?

Any 12 year-old signing up for Little League would have to provide this information on their BIRTH CERTIFICATE. Yet not one person in the entire media has been able to provide the answers to the very simple questions I have posed above.

$50,000 cold hard cash to anybody in the media who can show me the actual authenticated long-form birth certificate which answers the above questions.

So far NOBODY in the media has.

And until they do, there is no doubt in my mind, we have a foreign-born usurper in the White House.

And that means we, my friends, are living under TYRANNY…

The more I think about the overall moral, cultural, and economic decline of America, the clearer it becomes to me that we are, indeed, a nation under judgment just as Israel was throughout the Bible every time they rejected God.

While I am vehemently opposed to our usurper “president” and his continued effort to bring our nation to its knees and push us into international government, I have come to realize that Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Frank, and the rest of the Democrat-Socialists are merely a symptom of the underlying problem that plagues our nation.

I believe that ultimately, we are getting the government we deserve. Although there is no doubt that our country was founded predominantly by evangelical Christians on Judeo-Christian values and beliefs, I believe that Obama was mostly correct when he asserted that we are “no longer a Christian nation.”

After all, does a “Christian nation’s” “conservative-Christian” leaders:

• Endorse and promote political candidates such as Mitt Romney who illegally imposed sodomy-based “marriage” and established abortion with a $50 co-pay as a “healthcare benefit?”

• Endorse a man for president, Rudy Giuliani, on his third marriage, estranged from his kids, who supports homosexual “marriage” and tax-payer funded abortion-on-demand and embryonic stem-cell research?

• Claim they will never vote for anybody who would ever support “taking the life of even one baby” and then renege on that promise by endorsing a man who believes that it’s ok for individual states to kill babies if a majority says its ok as John McCain has said he believes?

The most important question I believe Christians in our nation need to answer is how we can claim to be a “Christian nation” and expect God’s blessings and protection when we allow 4,000 babies to be violently ripped out of their mother’s wombs, dismembered and thrown away in trash cans every day in America.

The Bible clearly states that God chooses our leaders.

“…for there is no ruling authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.” Romans 13:1

Could it be possible, then, that God has chosen a man who was educated as a Muslim who doesn’t believe in any of the 5 fundamentals of Orthodox Christianity, but claims to be a Christian, who believes it’s ok to kill living breathing babies wiggling around on the delivery table, to rule over a nation whose “Christians” have allowed their government to violate one of God’s most sacred and holy commandments (”Thou Shalt Not Murder”) by condoning and financing the murder of over 50,000,000 babies over the last 35 years?

Not only do I believe this is entirely possible. I believe that it is exactly what has happened!

To me it couldn’t be clearer. We are deluding ourselves if we think that there are any other solutions to the problems we face as a nation aside from ending abortion. Plain and simple.

We have blood on our hands.

And there is only one way to bring genuine healing to our land.

As Christians, we must not only talk about how we are “pro-life” and think that “abortion is murder” etc…

Faith without works is dead.

It’s now time for disciples of Jesus Christ, in my humble opinion, to live out our faith by taking a bold stand to defend those who cannot defend themselves in the womb.

Can you imagine what could happen if every Christian in America engaged in civil disobedience and refused to pay taxes until the Supreme Law of the Land was enforced and every child in the womb’s life was protected?

What would happen if politicians knew that they would not get the Christian vote unless they promised to abide by their oath to protect and defend the constitution and enforce the inalienable right to life it guarantees?

You see folks; we get the government we deserve. We “conservative-Christians” have been the cheapest dates in town supporting nominal pro-lifers like Bush (who increased funding for Planned Parenthood at a faster rate than Clinton did) and outright pro-aborts like Romney, Rudy and McCain (neither of whom believe babies in the womb possess an inalienable right to life or support a human life amendment to the constitution.)

Until we demand that those for whom we cast our votes actually uphold their constitutional oath to defend the inalienable right to life, we will continue to regulate (not end) abortion.

The question is whether or not pro-life Christians will be uncompromisingly dedicated to ENDING abortion outright.

If we aren’t, and the silent holocaust continues unabated, aren’t we kind of silly to presume that God would actually bless a nation whose “pro-life” “Christians” claim to believe that babies in the womb possess an inalienable right to life but support politicians who don’t and passively allow their elected representatives to violate the most fundamental right any human being possesses…the right to his or her own life?

Today, it was reported that Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was quoted as saying in regards to Roe v Wade:

Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.

Ginsberg’s comment, while it may have come as a shock to some, shouldn’t surprise anybody who uderstands what liberals believe.

What should be more of a front-page, above the fold story, should be why so many “Christian” and “conservative” pro-family leaders, lawyers, and pundit-talkers have ceded the lie for over 30 years that “Roe is the law of the land” and continue to support pro-abortion politicians such as Romney, Giuliani, McCain, Thompson and Bush.

Another question is why not one “conservative”/”pro-life” judge who sits on the court with Ginsberg, doesn’t believe that babies in the womb possess an inalienable right to life from the very moment of conception.

The real issue isn’t that the former legal council to the Communist ACLU said that she always thought abortion was to rid undesirables. She is in good company with the founder of Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion provider, Margaret Sanger, who thought the very same thing. In fact, there are many millions of pro-aborts who think the same thing who are not as forthright as Judge Ginsburg was.

The real issue is why so many Christian leaders of churches and other leading pro-family and pro-life organizations have not demanded that our elected representatives (whom we elect and pay and who are supposed to be protecting and defending the U.S. Constitution) uphold the inalienable right to life for every pre-born human baby.

Why are the pastors of every church in America not talking about the fact that 3,000 babies per day are murdered in abortion clinics throughout our “Christian Nation” and attempting to unify tens of millions of Christians to protest the illegal and unconstitutional taking of innocent human life that, again, occurs 3,000 times per day in our nation.

How can we talk about anything else when 3,000 babies per day are murdered in abortion mills around the country?

Has the Church become so self-focussed and “purpose-driven” that we can no longer hear the screams of even one of the 1,500,000 babies per year who are dismembered and discarded like trash in our country?

Atheistic humansists like Ginsburg are supposed to possess Darwinian “survival of the fittest” beliefs.

But aren’t disciples of Jesus Christ supposed to do more to ensure that every one of God’s creations is guaranteed the right to their own lives?