Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘freedom’ Category

Tommorow is the Fourth of July which for Americans is our Independence Day.  It comes once a year but there is also another freedom in the spiritual realm, freedom from sin and what Christ has done for our freedom is celebrated not once a year but once a week.

Here’s a verse from Galatians 5:1=

freedom bible verse

Read Full Post »

Liberty Defined Ron Paul

Ron Paul. Liberty Defined: 50 Essential Issues That Affect Our Freedom by Ron Paul.  New York, NY: Grand Central Publishing, April 19th, 2011.325 pp.

            In light of this being an election year I think this book is quite relevant to read even though neither Ron Paul nor his son is in the election.  What I appreciate about Ron Paul is his conscious effort in being principled in his approach towards politics and this book truly reflect what’s important for him: Liberty.  He makes the point that the term liberty can be quite misconstrued today so it is important to talk about what liberty is and the importance of safeguarding it.

(more…)

Read Full Post »

Gay Wedding Cake At Muslim Bakeries

This is too good not to post in light of all the discussion about the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

I wonder if the Left will try to go force Muslim bakers and cake makers to bake Gay Wedding Cakes?  Or worst, do what they did to an Indiana Family Pizza Shop, threaten them.  I don’t condone that at all by the way, just noting the double standard.

Louder With Crowder went and asked some Muslim Bakers if they would make a Gay Wedding Cake.  The answer is what you expected.

See the video below:

 

Read Full Post »

Islam, Deception, Sharia and Intolerance….in the USA…

This is wrong.  From what I understand, the Christians who have been wronged by the guards are going to take it to court.

Let others know, share this video.

http://www.answeringmuslims.com/2009/07/special-report-sharia-comes-to-dearborn.html

Read Full Post »

It seems as if freedom of speech is okay for every perspective except for Prolifers for the City of Oakland

They are trying to pass an ordinance to hinder Freedom of Speech and they built their case with fabricated lies.

City officials alleged there was a rising tide of complaints of “harassment” of clinic patients and staff and state and federal laws don’t offer enough protections. They want to impose penalties of up to a year in jail and fines of up to $2,000 for violators of their new speech regulation. A final vote is set for Dec. 4.

But city officials are wrong on both counts, Johnson insisted, pointing out there were no records of complaints, no injunctions, no records of lawsuits, no record of police action and no record of any kind submitted to support the allegation that such situations are a problem.

Click here for the newstory

Read Full Post »

I thought I share an interesting Associated Press article that I found from Yahoo.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071025/ap_on_re_mi_ea/bin_laden_tape_1&printer=1;_ylt=Ak4vNLxdJih5tiT7fmBlBM8UewgF

Below is the excerpt with my side comments:

Al-Qaida anger at Jazeera on Laden tape

By MAGGIE MICHAEL, Associated Press WriterThu Oct 25, 4:22 PM ET

Al-Qaida sympathizers have unleashed a torrent of anger against Al-Jazeera television, accusing it of misrepresenting Osama bin Laden’s latest audiotape by airing excerpts in which he criticizes mistakes by insurgents in Iraq.

Users of a leading Islamic militant Web forum posted thousands of insults against the pan-Arab station for focusing on excerpts in which bin Laden criticizes insurgents, including his followers.

Analysts said the reaction highlighted militants’ surprise at bin Laden’s words, and their dismay at the deep divisions among al-Qaida and other Iraqi militants that he appeared to be trying to heal.

“It’s not about Al-Jazeera, it’s about their shock from bin Laden,” said Diaa Rashwan, an Egyptian expert on Islamic militant groups. “For the first time, bin Laden, who used to be the spiritual leader who gives guidance, became a critic of al-Qaida and is confessing mistakes. This is unusual.”

MY COMMENT:

Do those in Iraq or anywhere else in the world really want to live in a place where there can be no discussion or publicizing the weakness of Radical Islam?

Imagine thousands of threats not for talking bad about radical Islam, but for broadcasting Osama’s encouragement to insurgents to unite together in one cause as somehow a threat!

“God fight Al-Jazeera,” railed one militant Web poster, calling the station a “collaborator with the Crusaders” for suggesting the tape showed weakness in al-Qaida and featuring discussions of how the tape reflected weaknesses and divisions among insurgents in Iraq.

The recording aired Monday contained unusually strong criticism of insurgents in Iraq from bin Laden, who urges them to admit mistakes and unify. Bin Laden even aknowledges that he advises himself not to be “fanatical” in his stances.

MY RESPONSE:

Ironically, its Osama’s criticism that is being aired and not Al Jazeera going about with their pundits criticizing Al Qaida

(Do Al Jazeera ever level criticism towards Al Qaida? My Arabic is weak at the moment)

Were these new recording by Osama meant to be heard only for insurgents?

Yet, if Osama releases these recordings through the same jihad medium and forums that have been used for the purpose of letting the World hear it, why would Al Qaida and their sympathizers getting angry or be suprised at the fact that this is being publicized for the World to hear with what Osama did say???

….

But the Al-Fajr Media Center, which usually posts al-Qaida video and audio tapes on the Web, accused Al-Jazeera of “counterfeiting the facts” by making the speech appear as exclusively critical of insurgents.

“Al-Jazeera directors have shamefully chosen to back the Crusaders’ side, and the defenders of hypocrites and the thugs and traitors of Iraq,” Al-Fajr said in a statement posted on several Islamic Web sites.

Another Web contributor even rattled off a five-stanza poem of rhymed couplets, comparing the station to a “miserable fly in the garbage” and concluding, “Your day will come, vile one. As long as we live, you won’t be safe, Jazeera.”

Few of the thousands of messages posted by contributors on the Web sites — who are only identified by usernames — called for direct violence against Al-Jazeera. Most instead urged that the full bin Laden tape be distributed as widely as possible on the Web to show its true message.

MY COMMENT:

If there is one thing the world needs to remember, it is the fact that this war waged by Al Qaida is heavily dependent on an information and propaganda war of words and ideology

The importance of ‘image’ and protraying a world of appearances is just as important as the actual violence

Ironically, bad PR can be a more larger strategic loss than their own combat losses on the ground

Bin Laden’s message came at a time of deepening splits in the Sunni Arab insurgency in Iraq. Some insurgent groups have formed a coalition rivaling one set up by al-Qaida in Iraq. Other factions have broken away and joined U.S. troops in fighting al-Qaida. A group of Sunni Arab tribes in the western province of Anbar also have campaigned against al-Qaida.

MY COMMENT:

The real problem for Al Qaida’s vision of a Pan-Islamic Empire?

Disunity in Iraq with the various insurgents group

Read Full Post »

James White.

An Open Letter to Dr. Lee Carter

Dr. Carter Responds

A Second Open Letter to Dr. Lee Carter

Read Full Post »

WARNING: EMOTIONAL CONTENT.

Memorial Day morning…

Lest we forget, with our church retreats, picnics, the beach or sleeping in,

Take a time this morning or evening to remember those who have fallen in during times of war…

Out of all the pictures I’ve seen, I think this has got to be the most riveting for me of all the pictures concerning Iraq…

The picture of a Marine’s casket (a 2nd. Lt. Cathey, who left behind his pregnant wife) as contrast to the plane and the people looking out of the window…the contrast is beautifully captured and is almost surreal.

02.jpg

Enough with my words. THis picture was part of a series that won the pulizter prize…reading the 19 pages, you would know why.  Have tissues nearby, it is very emotional.

SOURCE:(Beware, its 10MB PDF FILE) 

The picture in its context:

The American Airlines 757 couldn’t have landed much farther from the war.  The plane arrived in Reno on a Friday evening, the beginning of the 2005 “Hot August Nights” festival — one of the city’s biggest—filled with flashing lights, fireworks,care free music and plenty of gambling.  When a young Marine in dress uniform had boarded the plane to Reno, the passengers smiled and nodded politely. None knew he had just come from the plane’s cargo hold, after watching his best friend’s casket loaded on board.

At 24 years old, Sgt. Gavin Conley was only seven days younger than the man in the coffin.The two had met as 17-year-olds on another plane — the one to boot camp in California. They had slept in adjoining top bunks,the two youngest recruitsin the barracks.

All Marines call each other brother. Conley and Jim Cathey could have been.They finished each other’s

sentences, had matching infantry tattoo setched on their shoulders, and cracked on each other as if they had grown up together— which, in some ways, they had.

When the airline crew found out about Conley’s mission, they bumped him to first-class.  He had never flown there before.  Neither had Jim Cathey.  On the flight, the woman sitting next to him nodded toward his uniform and asked if he was coming or going. To the war,she meant.

He fell back on the words the military had told him to say: “I’m escorting a fallen Marine home to his family from the situationin Iraq.”

The woman quietly said she was sorry, Conley said.  Then she began to cry.

When the plane landed in Nevada, the pilot asked the passengers to remain seated while Conley disembarked alone.

Then the pilot told them why.

The passengers pressed their faces against the windows.

Outside, a procession walked toward the plane. Passengers in window seats leaned back to give others a better view. One held a child up to watch.

From their seats in the plane, they saw a hearse and a Marine extending a white-gloved hand into a limousine,helping a pregnant woman out of the car.

On the tarmac, Katherine Cathey wrapped her arm around the major’s, steadying herself. Then her eyes locked on the cargohold and the flag-draped casket.

Inside the plane, they couldn’t hear the screams.

marsacrifice.jpg

Read Full Post »

A word from REpent America Press Release….

REPENT AMERICA CALLS FOR NATIONAL
“HATE CRIMES” PETITION DAY 

PHILADELPHIA – On Tuesday, May 15, 2007, Repent America (RA) is calling Christians to participate in a national effort to flood Capitol Hill with telephone calls, e-mails, and faxes, urging members of the U.S. Senate to vote against any so-called “hate crimes” legislation, particularly S. 1105, which is expected to be voted on by the end of next week.

Earlier this month, the U.S. House of Representatives passed federal “hate crimes” bill H.R. 1592 by a vote of 237 to 180, which is now being considered along with the U.S. Senate version S. 1105. Rep. John Conyers, D.-Mich., is the House sponsor, and Sen. Edward Kennedy, D.-Mass., is the sponsor in the Senate.

“Those who hate God are working to criminalize those who love Him, and they are making great strides to see that it happens. We must not remain silent as our liberty to freely speak the Word of God and the Gospel of Jesus Christ is being threatened by those who are framing mischief by a law,” stated Repent America director Michael Marcavage.

In October of 2004, eleven Christians with RA were arrested while attempting to evangelize during a taxpayer-funded celebration of homosexuality in Philadelphia. After spending 21 hours in jail, the eleven were charged under Pennsylvania’s hate crimes law, along with a host of other felony and misdemeanor charges. These charges were later dismissed, but if convicted, they would have faced up to 47 years in prison and $90,000 in fines each.

“On Tuesday, May 15, we are calling Christians all across America to come together in a unified effort to speak up and be heard on Capitol Hill,” Marcavage continued. “Together, as one loud voice, we must urge our lawmakers to vote against the legislation that seeks to silence us,” Marcavage said.

“Who will rise up for me against the evildoers? or who will stand up for me against the workers of iniquity? … Shall the throne of iniquity have fellowship with thee, which frameth mischief by a law?” (Psalm 94:16, 20)

###

5-STEP CALL TO ACTION FOR TUESDAY, MAY 15, 2007:

1. Pray for this extremely important petition effort. See, 2 Thessalonians 3:1
2. Telephone, e-mail, and fax as many members of the Senate as possible, asking
them to vote NO on S. 1105 or any other so-called “hate crimes” legislation. Calls
can be made toll-free by dialing the Capitol Hill switchboard at 1-877-851-6437,
or click here for other contact information.
3. Call the White House at 202-456-1111 and ask the President to commit to veto-
ing S. 1105, as well as any other so-called “hate crimes” bill that reaches his desk
for approval.
4. Immediately forward this information to as many people as possible.
5. Educate your family, friends, church members, and pastor on the dangers of so-
called “hate crimes” laws and call them to action as well.

Read Full Post »

I’ve sat on this and thought about it, and revised it before I posted this here…

I’ve had various inquiry in private messages, comments and also people asking me about whether the rights to bear arm make sense in light of Virginia Tech shooting. This is what this entry is about.

capt-2.jpg

1.) Protecting your life–Who’s responsibility is it?

That’s something that needs to be taken into consideration: Is it ultimately your responsibility or someone else’s?

Is your life worth protecting? If so, whose responsibility is it to protect it? If you believe that it is the police’s, not only are you wrong — since the courts universally rule that they have no legal obligation to do so — but you face some difficult moral quandaries. How can you rightfully ask another human being to risk his life to protect yours, when you will assume no responsibility yourself? Because that is his job and we pay him to do it? Because your life is of incalculable value, but his is only worth the $30,000 salary we pay him? If you believe it reprehensible to possess the means and will to use lethal force to repel a criminal assault, how can you call upon another to do so for you?

Do you believe that you are forbidden to protect yourself because the police are better qualified to protect you, because they know what they are doing but you’re a rank amateur? Put aside that this is equivalent to believing that only concert pianists may play the piano and only professional athletes may play sports. What exactly are these special qualities possessed only by the police and beyond the rest of us mere mortals?

(SOURCE: http://golubski.blogspot.com/2007/04/bleating-for-security.html)

What about the police? Where do they fit in?

070416shooting_cnn.jpg

most people readily believe that the existence of the police relieves them of the responsibility to take full measures to protect themselves. The police, however, are not personal bodyguards. Rather, they act as a general deterrent to crime, both by their presence and by apprehending criminals after the fact. As numerous courts have held, they have no legal obligation to protect anyone in particular. You cannot sue them for failing to prevent you from being the victim of a crime.

If its your ultimate responsibility, and not that of the police to protect your own life, what tools and means then do you have, to protect yourself and especially of someone who want to take your life?

2.) Does Gun Control necessarily save lives?

England has one of the most toughest gun laws, yet:

“While Britain has some of the toughest firearms laws in the world, the recent spate of gun murders in London has highlighted a disturbing growth in armed crime.”

Despite the anti-gun laws, we find disturbing empirical data during 2001:

Between April and November 2001, the number of murders in the Metropolitan Police area committed with a firearm soared by almost 90% over the same period a year earlier

(SOURCE: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1741336.stm)

And also as well in 2002 of gun crimes and over all crimes:

RECORDED CRIME RISES

  • Overall crime: 9.3%
  • Gun crime: 35%
  • Robbery: 14.5%
  • Domestic burglary: 7.9%
  • Drug offences: 12.3%
  • Sexual offences: 18.2% Source: Home Office
  • (SOURCE: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/uk_news/politics/2640817.stm)

    In 2003, despite being into the fifth year of English total gun ban, gun control still did not produce its desired effect but rather:

    there are more and more guns being used by more and more criminals in more and more crimes.

    So much crime increase that,

    According to a UN survey from last month, England and Wales now have the highest crime rate of the world’s 20 leading nations.

    So what does England do? Pass more laws:

    Now, in the wake of Birmingham’s New Year bloodbath, there are calls for the total ban to be made even more total: if the gangs refuse to obey the existing laws, we’ll just pass more laws for them not to obey.

    (SOURCE: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2003/01/05/do0502.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2003/01/05/ixopinion.html)

    If they won’t obey the laws already, what makes them obey a total gun ban by passing another total gun ban?

    3.) Gun Control: Who benefits and who loses?

    We have already seen who are the victims of gun control, especially a total weapons ban above.  There are more victims with the rise of gun control.

    Virginia2520Tech2520shootings.jpg

    Should citizens try to help other citizens and defend yourself when there are criminal activies that victimizes people with the use of gun?

    When you disarm the citizenry, when you prosecute them for being so foolish as to believe they have a right to self-defence, when you issue warnings that they should “walk on by” if they happen to see a burglary or rape in progress, the main beneficiaries will obviously be the criminals.

    (SOURCE: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2003/01/05/do0502.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2003/01/05/ixopinion.html)

    Taking away a law abiding citizen’s deterrent, it makes law abiding citizens easier to target, because law abiding citizens will abide with the gun control laws while the criminal will not.

    Having disarm the population, those who are armed (the totalitarian state, criminals, etc) will benefit.

    4.) Does responsible Gun ownership protect lives and property?

    Did you know that yesterday, on April 20th, there was an:

    armed robbery of a convenience store in Hoopa that ended when the suspected robber was shot.

    (SOURCE: http://www.eurekareporter.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?ArticleID=23108)

    And on the same day somewhere else, it saved the life of a victim of an armed burglary that ended with the criminals shooting and wounding the home owner?

    One of the robbers shot at him, hitting him in the neck. He ran into the street. The robbers followed him outside.

    The homeowner told police he fired at the robbers. As the robbers returned fire, two retreated into the house. The third, Price, continued to exchange gunfire with the homeowner.

    (SOURCE: http://www.kansascity.com/115/story/77569.html)

    Or, in the hands of a citizen working as a security guard, it ended a robbery?

    A suspected robber was shot and wounded by security guards after he and another man allegedly robbed a business in Hyde Park on Monday, Gauteng police said.

    (SOURCE: http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=15&art_id=nw20070416164408862C252156 )

    Imagine being a mom eight months pregnant with a two year old child, and someone is physically being aggressive towards you and is now heading towards your two year old:

    The store surveillance tape shows the suspect aggressively confronting Susana while her 2-year-old daughter sits nearby.

    “She walked to just right to her quick … and went to attack her right away,” said Joe. “My wife has a big stomach like this, she’s eight months pregnant.”

    The two women struggled briefly at the counter…

    When the suspect appeared to move toward their daughter, Susana shot the suspect in the shoulder blade, near the collarbone.

    (SOURCE: http://wcco.com/topstories/local_story_098095821.html)

    Imagine a place where every body has guns.  Some people believe that with more guns, we:

    would soon become a place where routine disagreements between neighbors would be settled in shootouts.

    But is this necessarily true?

    In March 1982, 25 years ago, the small town of Kennesaw – responding to a handgun ban in Morton Grove, Ill. – unanimously passed an ordinance requiring each head of household to own and maintain a gun. Since then, despite dire predictions of “Wild West” showdowns and increased violence and accidents, not a single resident has been involved in a fatal shooting – as a victim, attacker or defender.

    The crime rate initially plummeted for several years after the passage of the ordinance, with the 2005 per capita crime rate actually significantly lower than it was in 1981, the year before passage of the law.

    Prior to enactment of the law, Kennesaw had a population of just 5,242 but a crime rate significantly higher (4,332 per 100,000) than the national average (3,899 per 100,000). The latest statistics available – for the year 2005 – show the rate at 2,027 per 100,000. Meanwhile, the population has skyrocketed to 28,189.

    (SOURCE: http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55288)

    In summarizing the above, this town mandated everyone to own a gun and this have a dramatic turnaround in crime reduction.

    Contrast to its sister city of Morton Grove, which was the first city with a law to ban guns for those who are not officers:

    More significantly, perhaps, the city’s crime rate increased by 15.7 percent immediately after the gun ban, even though the overall crime rate in Cook County rose only 3 percent.

    (SOURCE: http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55288)

    Does the good outweigh the bad, in having guns?

    firearms are used defensively an estimated 2.5 million times every year, four times more than criminal uses. This represents some 2,575 lives protected and saved for every life lost to a gun. According to the national Safety Council, the loss of life to accidental firearm death is at its lowest point since records were begun nearly a hundred years ago.

    (SOURCE: http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/daily/opinion/48570.php)

    gun

    I just hope that those who are swept by the emotions of anti-gun rhethorics in light of the tragic incident in Virginia Tech might take the time to take into consideration the four factors I’ve stated.

    Will having more weapon mean that violence will never happen? I don’t think so, and I don’t know anyone that does argue that.  Its because of the sinfulness of man’s nature that violence are born.  But taking everything into consideration, more gun control is not the solution.

    THE END.

    Read Full Post »

    Nothing like reading during Spring break!

    SlaveryAndChrist.jpg

    A book I finished reading like last night…

    This is why I recommend this super-short booklet.

    BOOK RECOMMENDATION: SLAVERY AND CHRISTIANITY, BY JOHN ROBBINS

    In the history of the United States, there is no war that is bloodier for America, than the American Civil War from 1861-1865.  One of many issues and controversy surrounding this conflict was the issue of Slavery.  Today, the issue of Christianity and slavery is still bought up, and usually done in light of slavery that existed in the South. From both sides, arguments were given that attempted to justify their position by appealing to the Bible.  For anyone interested in the subject, host of books can be recommended.  Indispensable to this, is John Robbin’s latest work, “Slavery and Christianity”.

    chians.jpg

    (CAPTION: REFERENCE TO PHILEMON?)

    “Slavery and Christianity” is actually a commentary on the Book of Philemon, in the New Testament.  One of Paul’s shortest epistles, this book in the Bible has always been referenced as having a dramatic impact for the abolition movement.  John Robbins pointed out early in his commentary of how people often misjudge something that is short as being insignificant.  Interestingly enough, “Slavery and Christianity” is also short, coming in at 49 pages, yet it is powerful.  Having read several commentaries on Philemon, in my estimation “Slavery and Christianity” was the best one among them.  Many people are cautious with the works of John Robbins in controversy today, but the quality of “Slavery and Christianity” is what you would expect from a Reformed and Presuppositional teacher of the Word of God: logically sharp, fascinating insight from the Biblical text, lay-man friendly and more importantly, spiritually edifying.

    slavery.jpg

                “Slavery and Christianity” commentary on Philemon draws out the social and political ramification of God’s Word, specifically as it touches on the institution on slavery.  There is no doubt, that this new book would cause a stir among some pro-Southern Slavery theologians existing even today.  For those who have always heard that Philemon advances the abolition’s cause but would like to see exactly how the argument from Biblical references goes, “Slavery and Christianity” is highly recommended.

    Purchase: Amazon

    **POSTSCRIPT: As I read this and was writing this, I know there are those out there from a theonomic perspective, that supports and defend the Southern conception of Slavery who read this xanga from time to time, feel free to respond, but I want to let you know that I think its a hard position to defend. Also, I”m going to try to find Dabney’s book articulating your perspective.  I don’t think that by being Theonomic you have to buy into Southern Slavery by the way.  Southern Slavery undermind free-market economics as well, a defining plank in Christian Reconstructionism***

    Read Full Post »