1 - 10 Next
In response to:

More Trouble Than He Knows

JakeSchlangemann Wrote: Nov 10, 2013 10:39 AM
"The President needs to listen... needs to reach beyond... needs to... needs to..." The President NEEDS TO QUIT AND GO HOME! I know the objection: "But Biden, the drooling idiot, would inflict too much damage on America!" Obama has been elevated by the left as a quasi-deity. I'll grant them their fantasy, and insist that, accordingly, Obama is not making mistakes, he does everything on purpose according to a deliberate plan that is ruining our Nation and dispossessing us of our liberty. Therefore, I say, give me Biden any day of the week. I'd rather spend the next two decades fixing damage inflicted by the mistakes of a border-line retard, than spend the next two generations, or more, fixing damage inflicted by calculated sabotage.
#4 A small, armed US force in Tripoli was told it did not have the authority to deploy to Benghazi in the midst of the attack. Twice. #6 Amb. Stevens was stationed at the vulnerable Benghazi compound on a dangerous symbolic date at the behest of Sec. Clinton... #8 A mortally wounded Amb. Stevens was taken to a hospital controlled by the Islamist extremist group (Ansar Al-Sharia) primarily responsible for the assault. #9 ...Help was not on the way. It was never sent. ------- Q1: What did Amb. Stevens know, or do, that Clinton and Obama were evidently so eager to set him up to be killed? Or did they intend that he only be captured and tortured by these Muslims, in order that he would reveal to them, under their "questioning," what he knew? Q2: Was Amb. Stevens the only thing at the Benghazi "Diplomatic Mission" that Obama and Clinton intended for these Muslims to retrieve? What else might have been there? A stash of advanced military hardware? Maybe a dirty-bomb cookbook? Maybe access codes of some sort? When dealing with suspected enemies of the State in positions of High Trust, we have to think the worst -- especially when they are caught lying.
The only way to protect parents' rights is to recognize and enumerate those rights in an amendment to the US Constitution. Otherwise, any such rights, even if they are eventually recognized by the majority, will always be "open to interpretation" and to arbitrary limitations. As it is, parents are only recognized as *surrogates* for the government/community. When the Village thinks it can do better than mom and dad, the Village will take over. ParentalRights.org (http://parentalrights.org/) Visit their site, watch their video, "OVERRULED: Government Invasion of your Parental Rights," sign their petition, and encourage your legislators to protect your God-given rights and responsibilities to see to the education of your own children.
ParentalRights.org (http://parentalrights.org/) Visit their site, watch their video, "OVERRULED: Government Invasion of your Parental Rights," sign their petition, and encourage your legislators to protect your God-given rights and responsibilities to see to the education of your own children
Religious conviction is definitely the WRONG way to defend Home Education. The ONLY sure solution is a Constitutional Amendment which guarantees the rights of parents. Why? No one gives a rip about religion anymore. Your right to religion is nothing more than your right to your opinion. And all opinions are equal. That Christianity has been reduced to such a sad state is purely the result of a sharp intellectual decline among Christians, especially among experiential rock 'n roll Christianity.
Are these individuals so "uniquely correct" in their convictions that no one else agrees with them in any systematic way? If so, then in the eyes of the law, they lose. If not, then they need to show that their beliefs are normative, by showing that there is a systematic theology supporting these claims and that this system of theology has a genuine following. Short of these, we would force the Law to recognize opinion as religion -- in which case, ANYTHING GOES.
How many other Christian denominations in America hold the teaching that *parents,* not the State and not the Church, are responsible for the education of their children (there are a few, BTW, and I belong to one such denomination). If they are not one of these Christian denominations, and if these denominations will not formally support them, then the State is NOT bound to regard as genuine any claim of so-called "religious conviction" of any individual.
These poor Germans are fleeing Germany because their religious convictions compel them to home school. Fine. What religion is that, exactly? Something they just made up? If not, then they need to prove it. What direct positive statements from Scripture compel them to specifically home school? Is this the teaching of their Church body, or are they renegade Christians without a Church body that supports their convictions?
This isn't an indictment of Home Education, per se (which I whole-heartedly agree with), nor of support for parental rights in the choice of education based on religious conviction. Rather, *it is an indictment of what passes for "religion" in America these days.* A claim of religious conviction is a virtually impotent claim in America these days.
..There is NO formal agreement in doctrine among them, and certainly no legal viability of any claim from them that their religious convictions are grounds for some fundamental right to educate in the home, or to protect the legal standing of ANY so-called religious practice, except, perhaps, for Sunday worship. But even claims that would protect the sanctity of Sunday as a general day of worship are becoming more and more dubious, largely because the nonchalance of Evangelical practice, and employers are capitalizing on this fact.
1 - 10 Next