The U.S. Army Reserve has issued training materials that identify Evangelical Christians, Catholics, and Mormons as “religious extremists.”  The training document also lists “Islamophobia” as a form of religious extremism.

The Equal Opportunity training presentation lists “Evangelical Christianity” at the top of a list of “hate groups” and “anti-government organizations” that includes the Muslim Brotherhood, Al Quaeda, Hamas, and the Ku Klux Klan.

“Religious extremism is not limited to any single religion, ethnic group, or region of the world,” the materials read.  “Every religion has some followers that believe that their beliefs, customs, and traditions are the only ‘right way’…believing that their faith/religion are superior to all others.”

Ron Crews, executive director of the Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty, calls the PowerPoint presentation “wrongheaded.”  Crews is a retired Army colonel and chaplain.  “Men and women of faith who have served the Army faithfully for centuries shouldn’t be likened to those who have regularly threatened the peace and security of the United States,” Crews commented.

“It is dishonorable for any U.S. military entity to allow this type of characterization,” Crews continued.  “I hope the Department of Defense will reconcile this extraordinary discredit to Christians all over the world.”

The Archdiocese for the Military Services, the Catholic entity that endorses military chaplains, said it was “astounded that Catholics were listed alongside groups that are, by their very nature, violent and extremist.”

Crews criticized the Army Reserve for using the Leftist the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) as its source for the training materials.  The SPLC promotes the homosexual political agenda by attempting to marginalize traditional Christian teaching on sexuality by labeling these groups as “hate” groups.  Ironically, it is the SPLC that promotes bigotry against organizations that support the orthodox Judeo-Christian understanding of sex, marriage and sin.

Written by David Fowler

Yesterday I got a call from a reporter from one of our state’s larger newspapers.  The newspaper wanted a comment from someone in the community to add a local perspective to all the national stories about the Supreme Court’s hearings on marriage.  Since I didn’t live in that community, I wondered why she called me.  What she said shocked me, particularly in view of what Christians will celebrate on Sunday.  

As I listened to her explanation, running through the back of my mind was how often God said to his people, “Don’t be afraid.”

When I hung up, I couldn’t help but think about the fact that it was at this very time of year that Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, said to his disciples, “Do not let your heart be troubled; believe in God, believe also in Me.”

Fear is natural to our present human condition.  It comes to us easily.  Courage is hard to come by.  In fact, in 1978, Russian dissident and winner of a Nobel Prize in Literature, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, told the students at Harvard:

“A decline in courage may be the most striking feature which an outside observer notices in the West in our days.  The Western world has lost its civil courage. . . .  Of course there are many courageous individuals but they have no determining influence on public life.”

If that was his observation in 1978, how much more so could it be said today.  And the newspaper reporter’s call confirmed it.

Here is very close paraphrase of what the reporter said:

“I can’t find anyone locally who wants to say anything in opposition to gay marriage.  I’ve called 30 area ministers and no one has returned my calls.”

She also said they had a hard time the week before finding a minister from a theologically conservative church who would comment on a local gay blessing ceremony.

I was flabbergasted.  And interestingly, she was, too.  She did say that it was possible that nobody had had time to call her back, and the next day she told me someone had called her back that evening, after hours.  But two weeks in a row of virtual silence and only one out of 30?

I couldn’t help but think about the significance at Easter of the number 30.  It is the number of pieces of silver that Judas took in compensation for his betrayal of Jesus.

Please understand I am not saying all 30 of those ministers or the ones called the week before are “Judases.”  Obviously, one of them called back and one did comment the previous week.  And I know some ministers in that community who would have commented in a heartbeat had they been called or even had a moment to return the call.  I know some of them are reading this.  They know who they are, and I thank God for them.

But let’s be honest.  If any of those who did not call back did not do so because they were afraid that something bad would come of their public statement in support of the very institution Scripture says reflects the relationship of Christ to His church, then that minister betrayed the Christ they say they serve.  Is the Living God no longer able to support and sustain those who speak up for His institution?

When those who lead a particular church have no courage, then those in that church who follow them will have no courage, either.  When a minister doesn’t have the courage to speak the truth to those who are ostensibly there to hear the truth or when they don’t know how to speak the truth graciously and redemptively enough to talk about critical issues, then maybe another calling is appropriate.

I know there will be those who would say that it is not the job of the church to talk about politics.  Okay, but they ought to also oppose any teaching about Jesus’ trial before the Sanhedrin, the Jewish ruling body, or his trial before Pilate.  After all, those were political/governmental processes.

In fact, I don’t see much difference contextually — one was a trial almost 2,000 years ago and it was a trial at issue this week.  In the former the “groom” was on trial and in the latter it was His bride.

I also know there are those who will say that talking about politics could turn people off who will not be saved as a result.  To them I would submit that God is able to save whom He chooses to save.  If he’s not the one who saves, then we Christians need to stop wasting time praying for God to save a friend or loved one and just get on with the business of saving that person ourselves.

It is ironic that this apparent demonstration of fear over the last two weeks by at least some ministers took place heading into and on Easter week.  By the resurrection, God demonstrated the power to conquer death and Hell.  There is nothing more that one man can do to another than to take his life.  For those who believe the Easter message, death is therefore no reason for silence.  If death is no reason for silence, then can a lesser consequence justify it?  Oh, Lord, help our unbelief.

He is alive.  He has risen.  Now it is time for the historic, orthodox Church to come alive and rise up, too

David Fowler, president of Family Action Council of Tennessee (FACT), grew up in Chattanooga. He graduated from the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga with a B.S. in accounting, serving as president of the Student Government Association his senior year. He attended the University of Cincinnati College of Law on the Chapin-Thomas Scholarship, receiving his J.D. degree in 1983. In law school, Mr.Fowler directed the Moot Court program and participated on the National Moot Court and Craven Constitutional Law teams. He also clerked for the late Harry J. Klusmeier in the Ohio Court of Appeals.

Bishop RD Edwin Goodwin Sr. leads the Northwest region of the International Church of God in Christ (COGIC).  He speaks for 500 churches in Illinois. 

Motivated by love of God and love of neighbor, Bishop Goodwin wrote to Governor Patrick Quinn on January 31st: 

“We the Bishops of the Northwest Area of the Church of God in Christ in Illinois, and its 500 churches in the state of Illinois, stand united against same sex marriage in this state.” 

He continued, “In the upcoming elections, we will continue to stand united for what we believe in and for candidates who have similar mindsets as ours.” 

Last month I spoke to a group of COGIC pastors on the south side of Chicago who recognize the dangers of “homosexual marriage.”  I’ve been traveling around the greater Chicagoland area meeting with pastors who are concerned about the same-sex “marriage” push.  They are motivated to do what is necessary to confront this evil.  

One such pastor is Keith Williams who recently took time from his busy ministry schedule to attend a the Illinois Senate Executive Committee hearing on this issue.  Williams, a black pastor, confronted the issue head on.  He told the politicians the truth, asserting that same-sex “marriage” is immoral.  He quoted from Genesis in the Bible, “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.”  He predicted divine judgment on the state if it approves this evil. 

I am inspired by the examples of Bishop Goodwin and Pastor Williams and dozens of others.  These are Christian leaders with the courage to confront difficult matters head on.  Christian leaders like Bishop Goodin and Pastor Williams, however, are far too few. 

In a recent presentation to the Hispanic Illinois Republican National Assembly, I expressed my concern over Christian apathy and indifference, a concern shared by Brian Camenker, a Jewish pro-family activist from Massachusetts:

There is a problem in the pro-family movement….Too many white congregations mean well but unfortunately don’t execute. They’re afraid to talk about biblical truth, lest it offend someone. They would often rather ‘pray about it’ than get involved. Individuals often can’t make the time in their busy lives to go out and make a difference. They are well-meaning but don’t have zeal. And as a result they’re usually woefully disorganized and ineffective when it comes to meaningful social action. I’ve had many clergymen lament this to me. This is true even in the Orthodox Jewish community, where often it’s individual rabbis who carry most of the pro-family action load by themselves. 

I told the assembled Hispanic Republicans: 

As a leader of a large state pro family group I wish that I could stand before you today and say that Mr. Camenker’s observations are inaccurate.  Unfortunately, I cannot. 

Much of the blame for the potential looming loss of the institution of civil marriage lies at the feet of the Christian church. 

In recent decades we have deliberately failed to make the case for both Christianity and marriage, choosing to tolerate radical perversions of the idea of freedom.  This has done immeasurable harm to Christian and non-Christian alike. 

Yet I am hopeful and encouraged by the signs of life in the body of Christ.  Over the past few months, in organizing against the effort to redefine marriage, I have had the privilege of working with many African-American and Hispanic pastors and religious leaders.  I am humbled by their dedication and courageous willingness to speak up on this issue – despite the cultural forces that seek to intimidate us into silence. 

In his letter to the Corinthians, St. Paul compares the diverse Christian community to the human body, saying that “the body is not one member but many”:

If the foot should say, “Because I am not a hand, I am not of the body,” is it therefore not of the body? And if the ear should say, “Because I am not an eye, I am not of the body,” is it therefore not of the body?  If the whole body were an eye, where would be the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where would be the smelling? But now God has set the members, each one of them, in the body just as He pleased. And if they were all one member, where would the body be? But now indeed there are many members, yet one body.  (1 Corinthians 12:12-26)

At the end of a recent meeting in Aurora, I watched a Hispanic pastor invite an African-American pastor to a monthly meeting of other pastors. It is a great joy to see that God is at work connecting the body of Christ through the threat to his institutions of marriage and family. 

There is much more work to be done if the body of Christ is going to realize fully its God-given potential to influence the culture for the glory and honor of Christ  in Illinois.  If you haven’t yet spoken out, now is the time to join us!  God is doing a work here in Illinois – but he uses people like you and me to accomplish his goals.  Please join us!

Defend Marriage Lobby Day 
Click HERE for a PDF version of the lobby day instructions.         

When:  Wednesday, February 20th, 2013 
Where:  Illinois State Capitol
Address:  401 S. 2^nd Street, Springfield, IL  62701
Time:  10:30 am – 1:30 pm 
Rally: At the Lincoln statue in front of the Capitol (10:30 AM)

For the few of you who cannot make it, please schedule meetings with your state representatives in their local offices and/or call their Springfield office through the Capitol switchboard at (217) 782-2000  to voice your concern about the effort to redefine God’s institution of marriage..

Click HERE to support the work & ministry of IFI.

Written By Tim Wildmon, President, American Family Association

As you finish up your Christmas shopping, three companies have noticeably reduced their use of “Christmas” in newspaper advertising and on their websites from past years.

After carefully reviewing L.L.Bean, True Value and Sam’s Club, the AFA Naughty or Nice list has downgraded them from being “For” Christmas to “Marginalized.”

Print the AFA Naughty or Nice list and use it when you do your Christmas shopping!

L.L.Bean
L.L.Bean told AFA it would increase its use of “Christmas” in advertising, but after two weeks, we haven’t seen it. Instead, it continues to reference its “Holiday Gift Shop” for those “holi-daily deals” that includes a “holiday” delivery schedule. Ironically, L.L.Bean touts a “Christmas” catalog, but you won’t find “Christmas” anywhere but on the cover. Throughout the catalog, everything is “holiday.”

True Value Hardware Stores
True Value’s website offers “holiday” coupons, “holiday” gifts, “holiday” decorating and “holiday” lights when you “Shop the Holidays.” There are very few references to “Christmas,” but the overall theme is dominantly focused on using “holiday.”

Sam’s Clubs
Sam’s Clubs website homepage reminds you to check out their “Holiday Entertaining Catalog” for those “Perfect Holiday Values.” Sam’s Club is owned by Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart is listed on our list as a top promoter of Christmas, but the Sam’s Club subsidiary is the company’s Scrooge and is hoarding the word “Christmas” from the shopping public.

Print the AFA Naughty or Nice list and use it when you do your Christmas shopping!

Written by  Daniel M. Boland, PhD

As I see it, this election of a pro-abortion/gay marriage/tax-and-spend President is (as is life itself) a potential blessing and a livable struggle, neither of which can be changed, both of which can be used for our betterment as individuals and as a nation. For those who retain some depth of religious “feeling” or, better, who possess true religious fervor and belief, this election is only a reinforcement of what we should have already comprehended: that America has drastically devolved and radically changed in the last decade.

The 2012 election results indicate that our country is now a vastly secularized, intently self-gratifying country. We are weighed down by many people dissatisfied with mindfulness, thought and introspection; many people who are gullible and easily impressed with merit-less celebrities; people too easily swayed by cultural trends and fashionable personalities, too easily captured by leaders of shallow character whose easy duplicity should alarm us all to the depth of our souls.

Most Americans live well and safely, and that is a blessing and a good. But, so many of us are also in thrall to the ease of living and to the perpetuation of comfort which surrounds us. We do not experience much that truly costs us anything, at least not too much that we are unable to compensate ourselves in a myriad of soothing ways for our inconveniences.

But, as usually happens to people gifted with the lack of want, many Americans have, I fear, lost touch with the First Principles, the virtues and fundamental moral demands of the Judeo-Christian life from which our Republic first sprang.

Even for the unbelievers amongst us, religion is crucial to our nation and to our collective understanding of the American ideal and the historic American idiom which served as the founding ethos of our nation. Our foundations as a distinct people are clear: the Judeo-Christian tradition is at the very core of our American identity.

From Judeo-Christian thought we learn that our rights are not given us by the State but by God. God truly matters in, and to, America and to the American way of life. The further we move from that principle, the greater the control we allow the State — in this case, the Obama Administration — to determine for us what we are entitled to and how we shall live our lives and worship our God. The idea that we as a Republic (and as individuals possessed of profound human freedoms) would elevate the State to the role of God is a dreadful prospect, but it is one which, as I see it, more than half of the American people are willingly undertaking.

Thus, one of the ascendant problems our country faces is the expansion of our increasingly amoral, anti-religious, often atheistic culture. It is a culture which has become so bereft of thoughtful and informed persons as to constitute a massive population of incurious, uninterested, intellectually parched, morally moribund citizens. Religion — particularly Judeo-Christian religion — is a critical factor in our national strength and identity. The decline or loss of religion in America is a clear indication of our nation’s demise, because sanity demands we acknowledge objective values which exist beyond our own limited cleverness. The health of our nation rests with the absolute necessity of respecting moral standards beyond our own urges.

Authentic faith — even the faith of patriots which once defined and sustained America — has taken a beating from many who claim to be among the secularized New Faithful. The New Faithful use the convenient patois of religious sentiment but are actually blind to the degrees of self-restraint, courage and principled consistency which, in daily practice, authentic faith demands of us. In truth, our culture spins cocoons of avoidance; we indulge ourselves in profuse activities which really serve as distractions by which we avoid the inner life of the Spirit to which all enduring faith should draw us. We substitute “doing” and a variety of outside activities for the slow and painful inner process of fidelity to our constitutional First Principles. We shun thoughtful silence and when we do speak, we abuse words and cheapen the meaning of language, so that eventually the laws we pass — and even the Commandments God has given us — have no legal urgency, no ethical impact or moral edge.

Fad and faith collide, and faith is often diminished in the confrontation.

Most of us do not read good things which enrich our souls, nor do we do our homework about the issues which determine the course of our own history. We regularly avoid the hard work of contemplation and yet we think we actually deserve the bounty and largess with which God has blessed us and our nation. We take it for granted that we (or our profoundly secularized government) are in control of our lives, our fortunes and our futures.

The philosopher Ernst Renan once wrote that “a nation is a soul, a spiritual principle.” It strikes me that my country, my America, and many of its people and its agencies have slowly devolved into a de-spirited culture of avoidance and denial and a race for instant delights, satisfied to exist in that soulless, self-deluded state of life which Renan called the “lawfulness of falsehood.”

Today our nation’s troubles rest in the fact that so many of us are so poorly informed, so vincibly ignorant about the foundations of our very lives and our identity as Americans and the array of options for good which pass daily before us. In addition, countless millions of us did not show up to vote, did not respond with the pragmatic clarity which our sagging economics demands, did not summon up the moral urgency which our utterly secularist leadership should have provoked.

So much information and data which are disseminated by schools and “liberal” church persons and the media and entertainment industries are politically one-sided and morally destructive. Public education has become a center of unionized anti-intellectualism and morally offensive curricula, shunting parental control aside, drawing attention away from the basics of traditional American schooling in the areas of math, language skills, solid reading, writing and self-expression, the hard and social sciences and history. The so-called mainstream media have become organs for unilateral political propaganda. Our culture feeds upon the most demeaning forms of “entertainment,” such as one finds on MTV or the dreadful “Two and a Half Men” which makes utterly reckless sex a jolly undertaking and praises the immorality of modern man as an enviable, laughable lifestyle for us all, including for our youth. But the sad truth is that the “stars” of this sort of tripe are perennially among the highest-paid persons in our nation.

Our culture draws us by the millions to the most brutish level of disenfranchised humanity and makes of us a morally-deficient race of ignorant, inarticulate and boorish watchers. We are become a nation in which many persons are dedicated to extraordinary shallowness; a nation in which many persons plod mindlessly through the day without a care for the future of our Republic or a desire to learn what we must do to protect ourselves from the natural consequences of our own laxity.

If we would but read history, we would see where we are headed and where our predecessors in Western Europe have already drastically arrived. But many people seem content to continue to write our nation’s epitaph even as we surf through our televisions in search of more to distract us from the glorious, yet disintegrating, reality in front of our eyes.

John Adams famously said that the fate of our Republic depends upon an informed populace. Given the agonizingly poor response of so many eligible voters to the recent challenges we still face, some defeatists say that American exceptionalism has died. Yet there are many Americans who appreciate what we still have in this glorious ongoing experiment which is our Republic. Many Americans are now even more willing and more moved to attend to the tasks at hand. But good will does not banish the hovering penumbra of history which repeatedly tells us what to expect if we — as a nation and as individuals — are not attentive to the irreplaceable gifts we possess and to the extraordinary, but all too fragile, values which make us exceptional among nations.

Let us both pray and exert sufficient efforts so that we Americans preserve, protect and defend our original God-given, constitutional values. May we abide despite these bad times which, unwelcome but upon us, cast precarious shadows over our abundant blessings and becloud the precious identity of our America.

Written by Trevin Wax, The Gospel Coalition

It’s a tricky thing to engage in political analysis before the dust has fully settled on a recent election. No doubt pollsters, pundits, and politicians from both sides of the aisle will be examining the 2012 election in the coming weeks and months.

Republican strategists will perform a post-mortem on the Romney campaign and the Senate seats that slipped away. Most will wonder about the failure of Republicans to seize the advantage during an ongoing recession and take the reins away from an unpopular president.

Despite the risks of weighing in too early, I thought it would be worth pointing out a few things the evangelical church could learn from the losses of the Republican Party this year. Let me be clear at the outset that I am not equating the two. A political party only has life as long as people find it valuable. The church is guaranteed a future because of Christ’s promise as Master Builder.

Still, there are a number of lessons that evangelicals can learn from failed strategies in the political arena. Here are a few I jotted down while watching the election returns.

1. We cannot afford to ignore changing demographics.

Much of the chatter on election night centered on the increasing racial and ethnic diversity in a number of states traditionally viewed as “safe” for Republicans. The story was similar in Colorado, Florida, and Ohio.

The days when the “male white voter” dominated elections are over, which explains why Romney was able to maintain a substantial lead among white men and still lose the election. When your target is a shrinking number of people and your strategy is to keep them on board by alienating the rising urban ethnic groups (by, let’s say, failing to come up with a sensible immigration plan), it’s no wonder you lose elections.

Surveying the crowd at Romney’s headquarters, I saw a sea of white. Obama’s gathering was a microcosm of the diverse country we live in.

How does this translate to the church? Simple. If you are seeking to be a missionary presence in your community, you can’t ignore demographics.

For example, if your church is an upper-class, predominantly white congregation in a city that is no longer upper-class or predominantly white, then you’ve got a problem. And unfortunately, this problem exists all over the country.

When the community changes colors, churches tend to go into auto-pilot mode with the silent expectation that outsiders should conform to the church’s culture. In the end, we don’t model the coming kingdom or the current community. We develop a “fortress mentality” where a way of life is maintained instead of a “missional mentality” where missionary strategies are employed, strategies that actively seek to reflect the diversity in the community by reaching the lost outside their doors.

2. We can’t ignore facts that make us uncomfortable.

It was interesting to watch how many conservative pundits and politicians were convinced up to the end that Romney would win by a landslide. The talking heads on television were divided down partisan lines, with Republicans predicting Romney would either squeak by or win big and Democrats assuring everyone that Obama would survive. The polls were analyzed, reinterpreted, and refashioned in order to give hope to both campaigns.

Churches can sometimes make the same mistake. We see incremental growth here and there, so we choose to look at the results that encourage us. We avoid the truth that may confront us and make us uncomfortable. To maintain a positive vibe in the congregation, we celebrate small victories and overestimate their importance while at the same timeignoring reality when it presses us to reevaluate our methods or ideas.

A good leader will paint a picture of reality, however disconcerting it may be. It’s only when we see where we truly are that we get motivated with a sense of urgency to complete the tasks God has given us.

3. Political campaigns remind us of the kingdom whose foundation cannot be shaken.

Wins and losses in the political realm each have their lessons. When your preferred candidate wins, it’s easy to pin great hopes on their campaign, to overlook flaws and excuse wrong behavior. When your preferred candidate loses, it’s tempting to wonder if political involvement really matters.

The Christian gets the opportunity every election season to keep things in perspective. Through wins, we temper our expectations regarding the change that any one man can affect, no matter how promising. Through losses, we continue to maintain a faithful presence in obedience to the King who is not up for reelection.

So why get involved in politics anyway? Because elections matter. Ideas have consequences. We are called to live justly and humbly for the glory of God and the good of our neighbors.

But the changing tides of political and public opinion remind us of the steadfast, unmovable kingdom we belong to. We engage, not because it’s popular or because we absolutely must win, but because we are God’s kingdom people, living on earth as citizens of heaven.

Written by Pastor Bob Moeller

Recent events have again renewed the debate among Christians as to our proper role in speaking to the moral and social issues of our time such as the definition of marriage, governmental coercion to override religious convictions, and the rights of the unborn to enjoy the same protections we do.    

On the one hand there are those who say speaking to current social and moral issues detracts from our primary mission of winning the lost to Christ. Such debates, they argue, polarize people and alienate the unbeliever.    

On the other hand there are those who believe political engagement is the mandate of every believer to stop the downward decay of society and our culture. A voter’s guide, they believe, should be inserted somewhere between the doxology and the youth group announcements in the Sunday bulletin.    

Who is right and who is wrong? To answer that question we need to revisit our heritage as Christians and look to the example of John the Baptist, about whom Jesus once said, “I tell you the truth: Among those born of women there has not risen anyone greater than John the Baptist…” (Matthew 11:11)   

John the Baptist was called to “prepare the way” for the coming Messiah, Jesus Christ. Yet, that same prophetic calling to proclaim righteousness and call sinners to repentance led him to boldly confront King Herod and denounce the monarch’s decision to take the wife of his brother Philip for his own.    

Did John the Baptist lose his head because he got foolishly diverted into palace politics? Or did he give up his life because he was called to make straight the way of the Lord and that included speaking to the glaring social and moral evils of his day?    

Our heritage as Christians should teach us that in times of moral crisis sharing the Gospel of Jesus Christ should be the root of our mission. Yet, applying this same Gospel message to the great social and moral questions of our time should be a fruit of our mission. We don’t have to choose between sharing the Gospel on the one hand and calling sin for what it is on the other.  

Another example of this truth is from 18th and 19th century America. As a history major in college I was deeply impacted by a book entitled, “Lewis Tappan and the Evangelical War on Slavery.” It told the largely untold story (and now ignored narrative) of how Bible-believing Christians in the 1830’s, 1840’s and 1850’s risked their reputations, jobs, and even their lives to publicly decry and work against the institution of slavery.    

One pastor, a faithful minister of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, had his house burned, his printing press thrown in the river, and he himself was beaten by his neighbors. Why? Because he dared to say in writing and from the pulpit that buying and selling human beings made in the image of God was contrary to the Gospel message. My wife grew up in the Wesleyan denomination that came into being nearly a century earlier primarily because of their opposition to slavery.    

Yet, to listen to the narrative of the Left and Secular Progressives these days you would think American conservative Christians are racist in origin and maliciously committed to the oppression of others. How does this narrative square with the fact that the Underground Railroad that freed countless slaves ran right through countless churches? As Ronald Reagan once observed, “Facts are stubborn things.”   

Another example of embracing the Gospel but calling out moral evil was the great Dutch Resistance member, Corrie Ten Boom.  In her autobiography, The Hiding Place, she recounts how during the Nazi occupation of Holland during World War II, she along with her unmarried sister, Betsy, and their 110 year old father (yes, I got his age right), built a concealed attic in their home they used to hide Dutch Jews who had been marked for death camps.   

Her father, Papa Ten Boom (a Gentile Christian) volunteered to publicly wear a Star of David on his coat that the Nazi occupiers forced all Jews to wear in Holland. When asked by a Jewish friend why he did this, he calmly replied, “If we all wear the Star, then the Germans won’t be able to tell who is a Jew and who is not.”   

Eventually, Corrie Ten Boom and her family were betrayed and arrested for their underground activities. But miraculously the Jews hid in their upstairs attic all escaped capture. Corrie’s father was offered amnesty by the Germans if he would stay in his home and renounce his underground activities. His answer to the German officer was, “If I stay home, I will open my door to every Jew who knocks and welcome them in.” He was promptly arrested and sent to jail where he died 10 days later.    

Again, facts are stubborn things. For all the caricatures by the Left and the Media that Christians are out of touch, mean spirited and anti-Semitic, a true telling of history reveals a story quite to the contrary.    

That brings us back to the important question American Christians must face today. Is our only choice between limiting our activities to sharing the Gospel message or risk abandoning the Great Commission to speak to the moral and social evils of our day?    

History teaches us and over that this is a false dilemma. The great heroes of the faith exercised what I call the Third Option.    

While they remained utterly committed to proclaiming the eternal Gospel of salvation by faith in Christ through grace alone, they were also committed because of this Gospel message to confronting and condemning the moral and social evils of their day.   

We should all be thankful that John the Baptist, Lewis Tappan and Corrie Ten Boom didn’t sit down, shut up, and stay in their place. The Gospel has advanced and the world is a better place because they refused to do so. Should the Lord Jesus wait to return, what will future generations of believers say about us and our actions during this great hour of crisis?   

I believe it’s time for us to stand up, say something and refuse to stay in our place.  

Bob Moeller is a pastor who cares deeply about marriages and helping couples connect their hearts for a lifetime.Bob is an in-demand conference and retreat speaker, radio personality, an author, and television host.

I often find the statements or actions of Illinois politicians embarrassing or worse. Watching U.S. Senator Dick Durbin’s interview with Bret Baier was one of those occasions. I cannot for the life of me understand why Illinoisans continue year after year to vote for men like Dick Durbin–particularly with Illinois in a state of perpetual decline.

The unflappable, congenial, and always civil Bret Baier (no Rachel Maddow or Bill O’Reilly here) tried indefatigably to get  Durbin to answer a simple question regarding the noticeable deletion of the word “God” from the 2012 Democratic platform. The phrase “God-given potential” appeared in the 2008 platform but was deleted from this year’s platform. Baier attempted multiple times to ask the obvious and reasonable question: “Why?” Durbin’s response was defensive, combative, rude, and evasive. The gentleman “doth protest too much, methinks.”

Below is a transcription of their exchange, which you can also watch here:

Baier: God was taken out of the platform, why do that?

Durbin: Well, I can just basically tell you if the narrative that is being presented on your station, and through your channel and your network is the Democrats are godless people, they ought to know better. God is not a franchise of the Republican Party

Baier: No, no, but…

Durbin: Those of us who believe in God and those of us who have dedicated our lives to helping others in the name of God don’t want to take a second seat to anyone who is suggesting that one word out of the platform means the Democrats across America are godless. Come on, Bret.

Baier: No, no, no – I don’t think that’s what’s being said. We’re reporting what’s in the platform. In 2008, God was mentioned once; in 2004, it was mentioned seven times; in 2000 it was mentioned four times. So, it’s just a question…

Durbin: So, what’s your point?

Baier: The question is, why take it out this time?

Durbin: What I’m basically saying to you is if you’re trying to draw some conclusion that the Democrats are godless, present your evidence, present your evidence.

Baier: I’m not trying to draw any conclusion. I’m just asking the question: why was the word taken out?

Durbin: I’m just telling you, you are carping on a trifle. We know that both parties are devoted to this country; both parties are God-fearing parties. Let’s get on with the agenda about creating jobs in America, about justice in this country.

Baier: And we’re going to talk about that in a second. We’re talking about the platform here, and there are two changes that we just noted, one is that God was taken out from 2008 to 2012 and two, that Jerusalem was not mentioned. I’m not drawing conclusions; I’m just asking why these changes were made.

Durbin: Bret, let me just say, I chaired the platform committee for two Democratic conventions. We produced the most unread document in the history of American politics, to suggest that this document and the insertion of two words here and one word there, now defines politics in America suggests to me that you’re not focusing on the real issues that Americans care about.

Baier: But Senator, you know…

Durbin: They want the American people to get back to work.

Baier: I understand that…

Durbin: We want to continue to create jobs.

Baier: Let’s talk about that in one second. You know that Democrats in Tampa talked about the Republican platform and what was and was not in there. So, when I’m asking you about these two changes and two words, I’m just asking why. I’m not drawing conclusions.

Durbin: I’m telling you, your conclusions are wrong, if you’re drawing them.

So, Durbin conceded that Baier may not have been drawing conclusions, but Durbin knows that if Baier had been drawing conclusions, he, Durbin, knew what they were and that they were wrong. Where is Professor Irwin Corey when we need him?

Durbin appears to have the inside scoop on the numbers of God-fearing people versus atheists in the two parties. Maybe he’s right. Maybe the number of God-fearing people in the two parties is exactly the same. If so, that makes the deletion of the one reference to God from the Democratic platform all the more perplexing.

Later Baier asked Charles Krauthammer about the deletion of the reference to God (a mere “trifle” to Durbin), which has even some moderate Democrats concerned. Krauthammer responded:

Platforms don’t really tell you what’s going to happen. But when you compare today with what people used to believe, used to say, and used to proclaim, and you see these glaring changes, you know that something has changed in the party. This is one place that Obama has led from in front and not from behind, moving the party—not just himself. And that, I think, is extremely significant.

Ditto.

Following our expose of the reason for the Southern Poverty Law Center’s (SPLC) dubious and defamatory inclusion of the Illinois Family Institute (IFI) on their “anti-gay hate groups” list, the SPLC started receiving complaints, which evidently didn’t sit too well with them. As a result of those complaints, the editor of their ironically named “Intelligence Report,” Mark Potok, started leaving troubling voice messages around the country for those who called to complain.

Here’s a transcription of one of those messages:

Yes, Hi, this is a message for . . . from Mark Potok, Southern Poverty Law Center. Very briefly, I just wanna say very briefly – we do list them (Illinois Family Institute) for a reason, which we’ve stated publicly. They (IFI) have been less, in my opinion, than honest about what we really said. They publish and promote the work of a man named Paul Cameron. Paul Cameron is a guy who is infamous for over the last 20 years for producing, for publishing fake studies that allege all kinds of terrible things about homosexuals. For instance, that gay men are, something like, 20 times more likely to molest children; that gay men have an average death age of something like 43 because they’re so sickly and, ya know, sorta do such terrible things. These things are completely false and have been proven false long ago. Our view is that the Illinois Family Institute promotes these complete falsehoods. Then that is hateful activity. We never list any group on the basis of simply disagreeing morally or otherwise with homosexuality. We told the Illinois Family Institute directly that if they remove this material from their website, in fact, that we would take them off the list. Instead, what they’ve done is essentially launched an attack on us to try to get people to call us as you did. Anyway, that’s all. I just wanted to at least briefly explain that it was not quite the way it was being portrayed.

Contrary to Mr. Potok’s claim that the SPLC had publicly stated their reason for including IFI on their “anti-gay hate groups” list, to my knowledge, prior to my phone call to them, they had never publicly stated their reason. And stating their reason in a private phone conversation doesn’t constitute a public statement. I believe it was I who stated their reason publicly. If I’m mistaken, I would like Mr. Potok to provide evidence for his claim that they had already publicly stated their reason.

After I heard his voice message in which he stated that IFI has “been less than honest,” I called and spoke to Mr. Potok, informing him that in my article, I was scrupulously honest about what Heidi Beirich had said to me. In fact, I even included a link to a follow-up email Ms. Beirich had sent to me in which she restated the reason for the SPLC’s inclusion of IFI on their hate groups list.

I told him that in my phone conversation with her, I even stopped her so that I could write down exact quotes, and I told her I was doing so. In my article I informed IFI readers that Ms. Beirich stated that the only reason we were on the anti-gay hate groups list was that we had posted one article four years ago by a writer not affiliated with IFI, and that if we took that one article down, the SPLC would remove us from the hate groups list. In my article, I explained that some of the claims that SPLC was making about this writer’s statements–if true–would be repellent to IFI, and that we were in the process of verifying the accuracy of the SPLC’s claims.

Frankly, I don’t know how I could have been more honest.

Mr. Potok stated in his voice message that we, IFI, “publish and promote the work of a man named Paul Cameron.” This grossly misrepresents the nature of our involvement with this man’s work. It suggests that we regularly or continually publish and promote his work, when, by Potok and Beirich’s own admission, we published only one brief article.

More troubling yet, this one article contained no statements remotely like those that Mr. Potok articulated in his voice message: “gay men are, something like, 20 times more likely to molest children” or that “they’re so sickly and, ya know, sorta do such terrible things.”

Mr. Potok then digs himself in even deeper when he says on tape that it is the SPLC’s view that “the Illinois Family Institute promotes these (emphasis mine) complete falsehoods.” “These” is a demonstrative pronoun referring back to the statements he just made. The problem is that he is suggesting that IFI promotes falsehoods that the SPLC’s own evidence proves we did not promote. The SPLC’s own evidence is the one four-year-old article that did not include any references to “child molestation,” or “sickly homosexuals sorta doing terrible things.” Mr. Potok was either stunningly careless with his rhetoric or deliberately manipulative.

I also explained to Mr. Potok that the one article from four years ago contained no hate rhetoric, and that it alone cannot possibly justify labeling IFI a hate group. I told him that simply quoting a source once does not mean that an organization supports or endorses everything that a source says or does.

I also explained that I would have no problem removing the article except that I want to provide evidence for our claim that the SPLC’s reason for including IFI on a hate groups list is flimsy, unethical, irresponsible, unsavory, and manipulative. IFI maintains that the SPLC has no justification for including us on a hate groups list together with actual hate groups like the KKK.

I also asked Mr. Potok if we’ve been on their hate groups list since 2005 when the challenged article was posted. He replied “No.” I then asked when we were first listed, and he said 2008. So, they added us to their list in 2008 based on one brief article posted in 2005.

Mr. Potok continues with his turbo-charged rhetoric claiming that IFI “launched an attack” on the SPLC. Once again, his facts are slightly askew. IFI did not call for people to voice their opposition to the SPLC. But more importantly, phone calls of opposition hardly constitute an “attack.”

Finally, since Mr. Potok was leaving voice messages all around the country claiming that I was being less than honest, I asked him if had even read my article. Surprise, surprise, he had not, and asked me to send it to him.

In light of the dubious and insubstantial reason the Southern Poverty Law Center has provided for including the Illinois Family Institute on their “anti-gay hate groups” list and their subsequent misleading, defamatory, and less than honest voice message, IFI is requesting that we be removed immediately from the SPLC’s hate groups list, and we are requesting a formal public apology for our inclusion on this list and for the voice message, both of which are damaging our reputation.

(Originally posted on April 7, 2009.)

Stand With Us

Your support of our work and ministry is always much needed and greatly appreciated. Your promotion of our emails on Facebook, Twitter, your own email network, and prayer for financial support is a huge part of our success in being a strong voice for the pro-life, pro-marriage and pro-family message here in the Land of Lincoln.

Please consider standing with us by giving a tax-deductible donation HERE, or by sending a gift to P.O. Box 88848, Carol Stream, IL  60188.

There is a new poll out that ought to be a call to action for every pastor and patriotic American. (That may irk some, but many of our founders would say the same thing. Consider what John Adams said about our Constitution’s need for a people of faith and a whale through a net.)

The Pew Research Center has found a dramatic shift among people under 30 in their view of God. Just five years ago only 17 percent of young people said that they doubt the existence of God. Today, that number has jumped fifteen points to 32 percent.  More young people are expressing doubts about God now than at any time since Pew started asking the question.  No other generational demographic in the survey changed more than 2 percent since 2007.

Though America is still a highly religious nation, Pew notes, “The Millennial generation is far less religious than were other preceding generations when they were the same age years ago.”

By the way, everyone believes in something, be it the God, a god or themselves. One report on the finding notes that an Atheist group called the Secular Student Alliance has gone from 81 affiliates on US college campuses in 2007 to 357 campus groups today.

As secularists crusade to remove the Bible from schools, researcher William Jeynes has discovered this effort might impede the academic achievement of African-American and Hispanic students. His three-year review of more than 1,000 studies on the achievement gap revealed that two factors predict academic success for minority students: a strong family and an active faith. It is unfortunate that, by those opposing school choice and even sometimes school choice advocates, these two critical issues often go unrecognized.

“African American and Latino children are the most disadvantaged by the absence of the Bible in public schools,” said Jeynes, a Witherspoon Institute Fellow, California State University professor, and Harvard graduate. “The meta-analysis yielded some amazing results. Not only did it indicate a powerful relationship between high levels of Bible literacy and strong scholastic results, but also of all the studies that have been undertaken on this topic not even one of them indicated a negative or neutral relationship. Every single study indicated that there existed a positive relationship. Such an overwhelming association is almost unheard of in the research world.”

Teaching the Bible as literature is gaining ground with lawmakers nationwide, and organizations like the Bible Literacy Project advance the idea that “An Educated Person is Familiar with the Bible.” Teaching the Bible as literature could practically eliminate the achievement gap among minorities. Ignoring their faith is not only intolerant, says Jeynes, but it may exacerbate the gap by discouraging students from drawing on a source of strength in their lives.

Saturday March 31, 2012 – Saturday March 31, 2012

Northfield Park District

Map and Directions | Register

Description:

Our nation was founded by ordinary citizen activists desiring a government that was accountable to the people. It’s 2012 and cities, counties, and school districts across our nation are seeing the effects of the visible lack of principled, conservative leadership as they face unbalanced budgets, uncontrolled debt, and residents who are fed-up with government intrusion into their lives and wallets.

The need for new leaders to come forward, to take a stand for free-market and limited government principles and to commit to defending Constitutional principles is as strong as ever. American Majority’s goal is to help those leaders be successful by providing the tools and resources they will need in order to run a victorious campaign.

American Majority Illinois is pleased to announce that we will be co-sponsoring an Activist Training with the North Shore Tea Party. It will be conducted on March 31 in North Shore, to provide citizens with the tools necessary to become effective activists.

The political training will take place at Northfield Park District (401 Wagner Road  Northfield, IL 60093) from9:30 am to 3:00 pm. Registration opens at 9:00 am. The pre-registration cost is $25* and space is limited. Pre-registration is strongly encouraged.  (Registration at the door is $35.00 per person)

The event will be geared toward giving activists the resources and information that will help them effectively organize in their communities to defend limited government and free market principles. Topics** to be covered during the training include:

• Community Organizers for Freedom: Finding New Leaders, Increasing Transparency, and Finding the Votes
• Instant Activism: Everything You Need to Know to Get Involved at the Local Level
• Numerous additional topics will be posted shortly

Full training materials, samples and supplements will be provided to help you apply what you learn to your organization, candidate, cause or community. Lunch will be provided.

If you have any questions or would like additional information, call Sarah Gough at 630.455.0736 or e-mail her at Sarah.G@AmericanMajority.org.

American Majority is a non-profit and non-partisan political training organization whose mission is to train and equip a national network of leaders committed to individual freedom through limited government and the free market.

Register

It is a telling commentary on our culture that we no longer comprehend that man has a penchant for bad behavior, what the Bible calls “sin.”  Discussing “sin” is like discussing the flat earth theory.  It simply isn’t.  However, we humans have the ability, under the right circumstances, to do or tolerate absolutely anything.  And I mean ANYTHING!  Consider, for example, our “tolerance” for slavery, cannibalism, human sacrifice, abortion, pornography and a laundry list of other evils mankind has practiced over the centuries.  We are now too enlightened for such, right?  Hmm.

It is reported that there are more people bound by slavery today than at any time in human history!  Do those who demand more tolerance from conservatives wish to see a return to cannibalism and human sacrifices, too? “Tolerance,” then, has very real limits.   But, some of the behaviors they are demanding we tolerate were at one time just as repugnant to most Americans as cannibalism and human sacrifice still are.  Make no mistake about it, it is not that long ago that one could find cannibalism in certain locales!

America’s cultural and political leaders a century ago understood mankind’s nature and erected barriers and boundaries in an attempt to keep the nation from devolving into an licentious morass.  Today, unbelievably, the boundaries they created are merely considered proof that those men were bigots — end of story.  However, while some of those social barriers may have been rooted in prejudice, most often they were reasonable, and were fairly effective in discouraging people from practicing bad behavior.

Today, all the wisdom evidenced by the “taboos” of the past is being scrapped in the name of “tolerance.”  It is as if those who lead the cultural charge today have no idea of the consequence of certain behaviors, or don’t care that people — often children — will be hurt badly by them.  Reading the papers and other cultural voices one would never know that there are multiplied millions of young women who suffer deep depression due to having had an abortion, for example.  If I did not do the research on my own, I would never know that post abortion stress is probably the leading cause of depression and suicide among young women!  If I read only the Chicago Tribune, I would never know about the bizarre and lewd behavior practiced by the participants in the annual Chicago “Gay Parade.”  And, if they are willing to do such things publically, I cannot even imagine the abuse they heap upon one another in private.  The fact that they are o.k. with others doing such horrific things to their bodies does not alter the fact that it is still objectively abusive! Does no one in the media care that such behavior is dangerous and even deadly, and that responsible leaders would NEVER encourage such degrading conduct, especially to the children who witness it?

The most egregious evil today is not to actually do evil, but to be “intolerant” of behaviors historically considered repugnant.  The worst label one can receive today is “Intolerant.”  But, what is it that the Left would have us tolerate?  It would be reasonable for them to be critical of conservatives if we were intolerant of beauty, generosity, or kindness.  But, no, they are angry because we are intolerant of people treating one another like animals.  Of people having tens or hundreds of sexual partners, of men who quite literally use one another as urinals, and a myriad other unspeakable horrors.

Shockingly, “license” to do whatever one wants is considered human-kind’s greatest good and trumps even one’s right even to be informed that many actions have very negative consequences. It is now considered irresponsible to warn the unaware and innocent that certain behaviors are often deadly.  It is an incontrovertible fact that involvement in random sex, drugs, homosexual conduct, alcohol abuse, pornography and other such things is dangerous or even deadly, and to ignore or gloss over these negative consequences is the height of irresponsibility.  Think “mal-practice” here.  And, to accuse those of us who point out the dangers inherent in these aberrant behaviors of harboring ill-will or even hatred is just plain wrong, malicious, or worse.  Be advised.  The Bible’s warning that “the wages of sin is death” still holds true.

We require pages upon pages of warnings for prescription drugs to insure that users are aware of possible side effects and dangers.  Toys come with warnings, cigarette packages have quite startling messages regarding the effects of smoking, etc., etc., etc.  But those of us who warn that homosexual behavior, which has from the beginning of time been considered aberrant and dangerous, is in fact demonstrably harmful, are held up as the most despicable of all people on the earth, with the complicity of the so-called “impartial” media!

These are very strange times we live in.  Strange and increasingly dangerous.

by John Piper

Of course, the courage of Bonhoeffer to defy the compromising state church of Germany in the early days of Nazism is inspiring. A church that did not stand with the Jews,  he said, was not the church of Jesus Christ. So at great risk he came out.

Wolfhart Pannenberg, 84, is the retired professor of Systematic Theology at the University of Munich where he served since 1968. He was very much the rage when I was in seminary, and I was honored to sit in some of his lectures while I was a student in Munich.

The connection I am drawing between Bonhoeffer and Pannenberg is their strong statements about what constitutes the un-churching of a church. For Bonhoeffer it was the failure to stand with the Jews. The “Aryan Paragraph” was a Nazi demand that all Jewish officers and eventually members be excluded from the German church. For Bonhoeffer, that un-churched the church.

For Pannenberg the line is crossed when a church approves of homosexual relations.

Here lies the boundary of a Christian church that knows itself to be bound by the authority of Scripture. Those who urge the church to change the norm of its teaching on this matter must know that they are promoting schism. If a church were to let itself be pushed to the point where it ceased to treat homosexual activity as a departure from the biblical norm, and recognized homosexual unions as a personal partnership of love equivalent to marriage, such a church would stand no longer on biblical ground but against the unequivocal witness of Scripture. A church that took this step would cease to be the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church. (“Should We Support Gay Marriage? No”)

While Bonhoeffer drew the line at the church-rejection of Jewish ethnicity, and Pannenberg drew the line at the church-affirmation of homosexual behavior, the principle was the same: both the rejection of Jewish ethnicity in the church and the affirmation of homosexual behavior in the church stand in opposition to the cross of Christ.

Christ died to include Jew and Gentile in one body. “He has made us both one . . . that he might . . . reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross” (Ephesians 2:14–16). Therefore to exclude Jews is to oppose Christ and his cross.

And Christ died to bring repentant sinners into the kingdom of God. But homosexual behavior excludes people from the kingdom. “Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Corinthians 6:9–10). To affirm a way of life that excludes people from the kingdom of God, is to stand opposed to the cross of Christ which aims to save people for the kingdom of God.

Should one stay in such “churches” to work against their delusions? Bonhoeffer gave his answer: “If you board the wrong train, it is no use running along the corridor in the opposite direction.”

To whom do we pledge our allegiance?

Anything American and anything Christ-centered seems to be “unconstitutional” these days. The litmus test that appears to be in use in determining if something is constitutional or not, is “if someone may become offended by another’s actions.” How flaky is that for a litmus test – when we can each vouch for our own emotions randomly ranging from high to low at any given moment.

Does the other side of this argument ever see that they are offending those who just so happen to love this country and those who believe in Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior? Honestly, do they ever consider anyone’s feelings beyond their own? Or, does what really matter to them is that their feelings are never imposed upon?

The latest actions taken by the Denair Unified School District in Denair, California, to drop their ban on the American flag would be a triumph for American freedom. However, my joy is somewhat overshadowed by just how far we’ve allowed this anti-American, anti-Christian, and progressive-thinking foolishness to go.

What would embolden a school administrator to confront a middle school-aged child to demand that he no longer display his American flag on his bike while his bike is on school property?^i,ii The reason for the administrator’s brazen behavior is simply because others had complained about the American flag. Others were offended by its presence.

So, the logic flows like this: while in America, an American child, in honor of men like his American grandfather who is a veteran, cannot ride his bike displaying an American flag, on the property of a school funded by American tax dollars, simply because SOMEONE was offended. Should we all, right here and now, abdicate our rights because of some random person’s emotional state – whether that state is rational or not? By the way, which superior person among them will decide what offense is rational or not? Can anyone say “communist-style living”? The next time you’re at the grocery store and someone should dare say your taste in style is offensive to them….well…who knows what might happen next.

This story of what’s happening on American soil is absolutely ridiculous. Though, we shouldn’t be too surprised when the leader of our own country is constantly apologizing for us being Americans.^{iii, iv, v}

I’m sure, the administrators of the Denair school district thought they were being really “smart” in their actions. I’m sure they congratulated themselves on doing a really “progressive” thing. Yet, in their pursuit of progress they regressed. A house divided, cannot stand. America is the house and we are a seriously divided country. Not like in the days of old, but our division strikes at the core of who we are: our Freedom, our Sovereignty, and the representation not domination by our elected officials.

The overturning of this silly ban highlights just how ridiculous the actions of the school district and others like them really are. If we would each commit to becoming aware of our unalienable Rights endowed by our Creator, the same rights protected by our Constitution, then when “intelligent” people like this ban attack our Rights, we will not cower down. Instead, we will stand bold and educated.

As a side note, I can’t help but wonder how these “American-hating”, “do whatever feel good” people would fair if they were planted in the middle of Afghanistan. I bet they would find a new appreciation for America – the BEST country on earth.

ⁱFox40 KTXL.TV Sacramento go, “School Makes Boy Take American Flag Off Bike: Officials Later Backtrack; Allow Boy to Fly Flag on Bike”
ⁱⁱExaminer.com Chicago, “Patriotism = prejudice?”
ⁱⁱⁱWorldNetDaily, “Obama apologizes to the world” (…here President Obama apologizes for Americans on Arab television, Al Arabiya)
^ivThe Telegraph, “Barack Obama: ‘arrogant US has been dismissive’ to allies (…here President Obama is apologizing for Americans in Europe)
^vCanada Free Press, “Obama Apologizes for Stupid Americans’ Opposition to the Ground Zero Mosque”
^viIn 1954, in response to the Communist threat of the times, President Eisenhower encouraged Congress to add the words “under God,” creating the 31-word pledge we say today.