Irena Sendler not Barack Hussein Obama deserves Nobel Peace Prize

Some children were taken out in gunnysacks or body bags. Some were buried inside loads of goods. A mechanic took a baby out in his toolbox. Some kids were carried out in potato sacks, others were placed in coffins, some entered a church in the Ghetto which had two entrances. One entrance opened into the Ghetto, the other opened into the Aryan side of Warsaw. They entered the church as Jews and exited as Christians. "Can you guarantee they will live?" Irena later recalled the distraught parents asking. But she could only guarantee they would die if they stayed. "In my dreams," she said, "I still hear the cries when they left their parents." This is the testimony of Irena Sendler

Obama doesn't want his daughters punished with a baby if they make a "mistake"


In 2007 Mrs Sendler was nominated for The Nobel Peace Prize (along with 1.5 million dollar award) for saving 2500 babies and children from Nazis> Guess who won? ... Hint...NO it was NOT Barack Hussein Obama.

Did Barck Hussein Obama win this year beacause He Declared the War on Terror is Over?

Cultural Mandate: Principles vs. Politics

We The People 5-6pm EST Mondays on www.1320wbob.com
Listen in and call in at 904-854-1320

This evening we discussed the Cultural Mandate and the Christian responsibility to rule and reign on Earth. This is a subject that is rarely discussed amongst the religious folk let alone the politicians. Pastors are apt to flee when confronted regarding the blaise attitude toward issues affecting the community at large and politicians are not going to speak on matters of faith without testing the wind.
Pastors fear losing people and money, not to differ from the politicians who fear losing their prestige and power if they do not tow the politically correct line. Just look at how they address the issue of fundamental islam and the creep of Shariah in America. When is the last time you heard either of the groups mentioned address the issue of Sharia law and it's incompatibility with our U.S. Constitution. Why would we welcome those whose stated goal is to subdue those who do not believe.
The muslim understands the culutral mandate of the Quran and strive zealously to follow it to the T. Yet Christians by and large are afraid to address the issues that effect our very values, beliefs and culture.
When will We The People finally take a stand and say enough is enough!

Faith is the Foundation For Freedom

Jerod

Islam on Capital Hill 2009

Here we go again. I have been in D.C. for the last 3 weekends. We were there for the 912 March on the Capital along with millions of Patriots voicing their discontent with this Administrations divergence from the Constitution.
Last weekend we were at the Values Voter Conference where Patriots gathered to get a strategic picture of 2010 and beyond. Mike Huckabee won the Straw Poll conducted by Family Research Council by a virtual landslide. We were afforded the opportunity to listen to speakers such as Ergun Caner who expressed the extreme conflict between our Constitution and Islamic Sharia Law. Mr. Caner spoke regarding the situation with Rifqa Bary the young Christian girl who converted from Islam to Christ and when her parents mosque discovered her conversion through her facebook account. Young Rifqa had to flee from Ohio and the threat of the Noor Islamic Cultural Center tpo the refuge of Florida. That fight is heating up due to the nature and threat of "Honor Killings." We were also priveledged to preview the film 33 which discussed the implications of the decisions being made regarding our Strategic Defense Initiative and the roll backs of our defense system. I reccomend watching this video.
Now we are crammed in a suburban with cameras and five "full" sized men on a mission to investigate the meaning of "Our Time Has Come" and it's implications as stated on the official website www.islamoncapitalhill.com
notice the statement at the bottom of the website.
This could mean that the fact that their president has refused to acknowledge the National Day of Prayer or America's Judeo Christian heritage, denied the God and Country flyover, and made no mention of Rosh Hoshanna the Jewish New Year last week.
Yet their president has made an official proclamation of the opening of Ramadan and now the call for 50,000 Muslims on the Capital. What say you?

Faith is the Foundation For Freedom!`

911, The March on the Capital and a man named BO

911, The March on the Capital, and a man named B O. What a strange amalgamation you may be saying to yourself. Let me clarify my thinking.
I and five other Patriots are heading to Washington DC to participate in not only commemorating 911 by visiting the site of one of the attacks but will be in the Florida contingency on the March to the Capital. We will also be paying our respects at Walter Reed Memorial Hospital.
Why all the drama, you may be asking? Simple. The Country we love has been hijacked by godless thugs who have a radical agenda.
Now for the facts.
1. This is the First administration since the inception of the National Day of Prayer to refuse not only to take part but even acknowledge the event.
2.The very same administrion, the very next month declared June to be the National Gay and lesbian month on the samee plain as Black History month.
3. B.O. kicks off the Muslim holiday of Ramadan.
4. 50,000 muslims are planning to attend Islam on the Capital on September 26th.

These are the facts. You make the call. Where is this Country heading and who is at the wheel?

Court Orders Christian Child Into Government Education

Court Orders Christian Child Into Government Education: 10-year-old's 'vigorous' defense of her faith condemned by judge
Posted: August 28, 200912:35 am Eastern
By Bob Unruh© 2009 WorldNetDaily

A 10-year-old homeschool girl described as "well liked, social and interactive with her peers, academically promising and intellectually at or superior to grade level" has been told by a New Hampshire court official to attend a government school because she was too "vigorous" in defense of her Christian faith.

The decision from Marital Master Michael Garner reasoned that the girl's "vigorous defense of her religious beliefs to [her] counselor suggests strongly that she has not had the opportunity to seriously consider any other point of view."

The recommendation was approved by Judge Lucinda V. Sadler, but it is being challenged by attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund, who said it was "a step too far" for any court. The ADF confirmed today it has filed motions with the court seeking reconsideration of the order and a stay of the decision sending the 10-year-old student in government-run schools in Meredith, N.H.

The dispute arose as part of a modification of a parenting plan for the girl. The parents divorced in 1999 when she was a newborn, and the mother has homeschooled her daughter since first grade with texts that meet all state standards. In addition to homeschooling, the girl attends supplemental public school classes and has also been involved in a variety of extra-curricular sports activities, the ADF reported.

But during the process of negotiating the terms of the plan, a guardian ad litem appointed to participate concluded the girl "appeared to reflect her mother's rigidity on questions of faith" and that the girl's interests "would be best served by exposure to a public school setting" and "different points of view at a time when she must begin to critically evaluate multiple systems of belief ... in order to select, as a young adult, which of those systems will best suit her own needs."
According to court documents, the guardian ad litem earlier had told the mother, "If I want her in public school, she'll be in public school."

The marital master hearing the case proposed the Christian girl be ordered into public school after considering "the impact of [her religious] beliefs on her interaction with others."

"Parents have a fundamental right to make educational choices for their children. In this case specifically, the court is illegitimately altering a method of education that the court itself admits is working," said ADF-allied attorney John Anthony Simmons of Hampton.

"The court is essentially saying that the evidence shows that, socially and academically, this girl is doing great, but her religious beliefs are a bit too sincerely held and must be sifted, tested by, and mixed among other worldviews. This is a step too far for any court to take."

"The New Hampshire Supreme Court itself has specifically declared, 'Home education is an enduring American tradition and right,'" said ADF Senior Legal Counsel Mike Johnson. "There is clearly and without question no legitimate legal basis for the court's decision, and we trust it will reconsider its conclusions."

The case, handled in the Family Division of the Judicial Court for Belknap County in Laconia, involves Martin Kurowski and Brenda Kurowski (Voydatch), and their daughter.

The ADF also argued that the issue already was raised in 2006 and rejected by the court. "Most urgent … is the issue of Amanda's schooling as the school year has begun and Amanda is being impacted by the court's decision daily," the court filing requesting a stay said. "Serious state statutory and federal constitutional concerns are implicated by the court's ruling and which need to be remedied without delay.

"It is not the proper role of the court to insist that Amanda be 'exposed to different points of view' if the primary residential parent has determined that it is in Amanda's best interest not to be exposed to secular influences that would undermine Amanda's faith, schooling, social development, etc. The court is not permitted to demonstrate hostility toward religion, and particularly the faith of Amanda and Mother, by removing Amanda from the home and thrusting her into an environment that the custodial parent deems detrimental to Amanda."

"The order assumes that because Amanda has sincerely held Christian beliefs, there must be a problem that needs solving. It is a parent's constitutionally protected right to train up their children in the religious beliefs that they hold. It is not up to the court to suggest that a 10-year-old should be 'exposed' to other religious views contrary to the faith traditions of her parents. Could it not be that this sharp 10-year-old 'vigorously' believes what she does because she knows it to be true? The court's narrative suggests that 10-year-olds are too young to form opinions and that they are not yet allowed to have sincerely held Christian beliefs," the ADF said.

"Absent any other clear and convincing evidence justifying the court's decision, it would appear that the court has indeed taken sides with regard to the issue of religion and has preferred one religious view over another (or the absence of religion). This is impermissible," the documents said.

The guardian ad litem had an anti-Christian bias, the documents said, telling the mother at one point she wouldn't even look at homeschool curriculum. "I don't want to hear it. It's all Christian based," she said.

************************************************************************************
In my opinion, this is another example of the insidious assault on Christian values and the fundamental right to freedom of religious practice guaranteed by the US Constitution. The outrageous, shameful actions by this leftist, activist judge should not go unchallenged. Parents everywhere should exercise another right they possess (at least for now) and speak out against this insanity! In addition, the "guardian ad litem" in this case ought to be sued for civil rights violations.

Joshua Warren
www.AmericanDiscussion.blogspot.com

www.FirstCoastTeaParty.org

www.IncomeSysteMax.com

www.RunForTheirLives.org

Rifqa Barry: Flight or Fight

Rifqa Bary may have had to flee to Florida for her life but now she can turn and fight. We are standing by Rifqals side. This will definitely bring some light to the possibilities of "honor killings" on American soil. I am thankful for John Stemberger of the Florida Family Policy Council providing counsel Pro Bono. May America wake up to the threat of fundamental islam creeping up amongst us. Who declared that the War on Terror is "over"? Itls not over...itls not even OVER THERE anymore. It is Here!


Faith is the Foundation For Freedom!

Republicans, Libertarians, and the Republican Liberty Caucus. What's the difference?

Today I took part in The Drive the Discussion forum in Live Oak Florida and was pleased with the overall atmosphere at the event. The event was well attended and the air was charged with energy. It was the perfect environment to germinate healthy discourse and foster a vigorous debate within the Republican Party on a local level.
I was very pleased with the array of speakers such as Marco Rubio, Janet Adkins, Dennis Baxley, Bob Smith and many others who helped to clarify the direction that the GOP is heading.
However, the purpose in attending this event was to define and contrast where we are, where we are going and how we are going to get there. I had the opportunity to ask several questions to the various speakers but the question that provoked the most thought for me was addressed to Sarah Lovett who sat on a panel to discuss States Rights. Sarah is an outspoken member of The Republican Liberty Caucus and as a panel member, I directed my question to her. The question was simply," As a member of the Duval County Republican Executive Committee, I believe a house divided against itself cannot stand. I believe that as Republicans we are fighting for the life of our Republic and am confused with the growing presence of Libertarians in the Republican Party and the division this is causing. Why aren't the Libertarians advancing their agenda in the Libertarian Party rather than the Republican Party?"
To my surprise, the question was not answered by Sarah Lovett nor the other panel members, but was directed toward Will Pitts who answered the question. His answer was that the RLC has worked very hard to bring independents and others who are disgruntled with the Republicans into the fold and that we should not alienate them. This is not an exact quote but immediately following the session, I had the opportunity to discuss the positions of the RLC and the divergence with these ideals and the Traditional Republican Platform. I ardently agree with certain values that Libertarians advocate such as 2nd Amendment advocacy and States rights, however, the Libertarian Platform is in direct opposition to several of the core planks of the Republican Platform.
I have done a little research and would like to present the facts on this issue. I have pulled the Platform of the Republican Party, the Platform of The Libertarian Party and the Issues supported by the Republican Liberty Caucus and was very impressed by the vast contrast that the Republican Party has with the National Libertarian Platform yet the striking similarities the the Libertarian Party and The Republican Liberty Caucus. But what was more appalling was the manner and language which the Republican Liberty Caucus attacked Traditional Republicans and the values that we hold near and dear.
The following is a direct quote from the Republican Liberty Caucus website which addresses the Republican Party Planks of Pro Life and Pro Family values. "The obsession with legislating morality and with opposition to abortion and gay rights is really not part of the core Republican agenda. These ideas and the fanaticism they inspire were brought into the party through its alliance in the post-Reagan era with religious conservatives. Historically, Republicans have had a laissez faire attitude, not just to the economy, but also on moral issues. Republicans used to be dispassionate, leaving moral decisions in the hands of individuals and keeping government out of the picture. It seems like the pendulum might be swinging back in that direction."
I do not know what direction that the Republican Liberty Party thinks they are going to take the Republican Party but I would personally welcome an old fashioned Lincoln Douglas Debate to define the role of Libertarianism in the Republican Party.