Ragbag Headliners

Republicans Threaten Contraception Access World Wide

The Republicans may be launching an all out assault on contraception here in the United States, but as Michelle Goldberg reports, it’s a war that has devastating global consequences.

In Liberia teen pregnancy rates are high even by West African standards, birth control is largely paid for by USAID programs that are at risk of evaporating should Republicans win in 2012. With every Republican candidate speaking out against contraception and with all of them pledging to eliminate Title X, the federal family-planning program launched by conservative Richard Nixon, public health officials are legitimately worried about a coming spike in unintended pregnancies and deaths should access to contraception be taken away.

As Goldberg notes, to put the severity of attack in some context, consider Mike Pence. Pence is one of Congress’s leading crusaders against Planned Parenthood, but even he thinks the right has gone too far. “I’ve never advocated reducing funding for Title X,” he told an Indiana radio station last year. “Title X clinics do important work in our inner cities. They provide health services for women and children that might not otherwise have access to them.”

Just how at risk are international women’s health programs? Should Mitt Romney, the most moderate of the Republicans win the presidency then he’ll impose the global gag rule, preventing any American money from going to organizations that perform or even counsel about abortions. He will also likely withhold money from the United Nations Population Fund, or UNFPA, an agency that promotes reproductive health worldwide on the “demonstrably false” grounds that it supports coerced abortion in China.

Romney has also made it clear he would slash funding for HIV/AIDS relief efforts, pulling harder to the right on international public health initiatives than even former President Bush.

And a loss of funding will literally mean a loss of lives. In Africa approximately 95% of abortions performed are considered unsafe, meaning they happen outside of clinics and/or by people other than trained health care practitioners. In West African countries like Liberia where abortion is illegal women have been resorting to a method called a Rocket Propelled Grenade which is a mix of herbs and broken glass that is inserted into the vagina. Make reproductive health services even more difficult to access, or eliminate then all together, and these methods of desperation will only increase.

In countries like Liberia where civic peace is a tenuous prospect, destabilizing women’s health will increase pressure on governments and NGO’s and threaten to undo the small bits of progress that has been made in these desperately poor regions of the world. Like it or not the Republicans have declared war on the poor women of the world and it’s time they get called out on it. –Care2

<><><>*<><><>

St. Petersburg Advances Fines for ‘Promotion’ Of Homosexuality

St. Petersburg’s legislature approved Wednesday a bill imposing fines for the so-called ‘promotion’ of homosexuality. This is the legislation’s second reading. It must now be approved a third time before it becomes law.

The legislation virtually abolishes the right of freedom of assembly in terms of gay pride parades and also seems to preclude in broad terms any affirmation of LGBT identity.

Via RIA Novosti:

It also allows authorities to impose fines [...] for “public activities promoting homosexuality (sodomy and lesbianism), bisexualism and transgender identity” as well as pedophilia among minors.

The fines are 10 times higher than when the bill was first brought before the city’s legislature in November.

The authorities insist the ban is necessary to safeguard “minor’s moral and spiritual development,” but rights groups earlier warned of the slide towards legitimizing fascism.

As mentioned above the fines the bill mandates have been substantially increased from November’s first reading.  More on that from The Moscow Times:

Following November’s first reading of the bill, lawmakers raised the maximum fines for promoting nontraditional sexual relationships.

The fine for individuals was raised from 3,000 rubles to 5,000 rubles ($170), and for officials the amount went from 5,000 rubles to 50,000 rubles ($1,725).

The fine for legal entities also increased tenfold, from 50,000 rubles to 500,000 rubles ($17,250), Interfax reported.

Sadly, this is not the first time such legislation has been approved in Russia, with bans in the southern Arkhangelsk, which passed last September, and Ryazan, which has had a similar ban since 2006.

St. Petersburg human rights groups have said that the bill is clearly homophobic and that this attack on gay rights is simply an attempt to divert attention from other, more pressing issues.

St. Petersburg police reportedly detained five gay-rights activists who were arrested protesting the bill this week. This follows wider protests in January that also saw a number of arrests. –Care2

An Unexpected and Unusual Ordination of a Priest

This is a true story about Rich Dyer, a Virginia man who never expected to become a priest, but became one sooner than he expected. Dyer, 48, left behind a successful career in business after hearing a calling to the priesthood.
 
Some of you don't believe in miracles, and others are certain they exist. But, this is a story for the multitudes who still wonder.  C.S. Lewis, in Surprised by Joy, his autobiography of his journey from atheism to faith said, "You may take any number of wrong turnings; but keep your eyes open and you will not be allowed to go very far before the warning signs appear."
 
Naturally, it would be easy if bushes regularly burned and spoke, erasing all doubt. But revelations so cheap and easy, dispense with human freewill. How difficult would moral choices be when faith has no role? If the answers were so obvious, goodness and grace would not be human choices, but rather servile obedience to a revealed omnipotent.
 
Instead of miracles, many have experienced a weighty and unmistakable synchronicity, where seemingly impossible events occur. Answered prayers fall into this category. But so do smaller revelations, joyous moments when blessings reveal themselves in hindsight, blessings that once seemed ordinary, or even dreadful. Those who have experienced this weighty synchronicity know there is no such thing as a coincidence.
 
C.S. Lewis described moments of revelations as being "surprised by joy." Sometimes they are as gentle as an unseen sparrow's song that reminds you spring has arrived. Other times, they are as bold and unforgettable as a grand pastel sunset.
 
Last December, the unusual ordination of Father Rich Dyer took place in Virginia.
 
For those unfamiliar with the Catholic priesthood, a brief aside. Holy orders, when a priest is ordained, is one of the seven Catholic sacraments. Seminarians study for years before being ordained. Beyond study, seminarians seek to discern whether they are truly called to the priesthood. After they complete their studies, conclude that they are committed to the vocation, and are called to orders by their local bishop, priests are ordained by the bishop of the diocese. In the Diocese of Arlington (Virginia), this occurs in June of each year in a celebratory mass. Canon law vests the bishop with authority to alter the date of the ordination, but use of this power is not common.
 
In the summer of 2011, Rich Dyer learned that his father was sick with cancer. His fellow seminarians asked him if he considered asking Bishop Paul Loverde for special permission to be ordained early.
 
The week before his December finals at Mt. St. Mary's Seminary in Maryland, Dyer had his regular meeting with a representative of Bishop Loverde. He wondered if anyone had ever been ordained ahead of schedule. He wrote to Bishop Loverde: "I seek God’s will. I do not know what His will is regarding the date of my priestly ordination, but I know and trust that He speaks through you. I am not asking that you accelerate my ordination date, only that you prayerfully discern God’s will regarding it and then communicate this will to me."
 
It appeared to Dyer, and anybody else, that a December ordination was impossible, and January was unlikely because the bishop would be in Rome. An early ordination, if it were to occur, could only be in February.
 
Then on Tuesday, December 20, Dyer received a telephone call. The bishop had read and considered the letter. Dyer was given the choice to be ordained as regularly scheduled on June 9, 2012, or, if Dyer wished to be ordained earlier, the Bishop was available ... the following Tuesday, December 27.
 
Being the feast of St. John the Apostle, December 27, was a special day to Dyer. For years, his computer's screen saver had a quote from St. John - "Perfect love drives out fear" (1 John 4:18).Dyer did not come to the priesthood the traditional way. He obtained a degree in electrical engineering from Notre Dame, and joined the Air Force on graduation. After the Air Force, he returned to Notre Dame and received a masters degree in business. He went on to a successful career as an executive with an independent power producer in Virginia before hearing a calling to become a priest. "I had a great life, but I knew I was called to the priesthood, even if sometimes I didn't want to do it," Dyer told me by telephone.
 
Bishop Loverde ordained Dyer as a priest in a ceremony at St. Andrew the Apostle Church in Clifton, Virginia on December 27. His father Richard Dyer was at the ordination.
 
The next day, December 28, Dyer celebrated his first mass at St. Andrews, a mass which began at 11:00 a.m. His father, meanwhile, was with two family friends miles away. As Father Dyer said mass, the two friends taking care of his father noticed the elder Dyer's breathing became heavy and labored. They adjusted him in the bed and "he became alert," Father Dyer told me.
 
The family friends reported Richard Dyer "seemed to be looking at things all around the room, his eyes moving all around," looking at things that nobody else could see. While the friends then prayed aloud around Richard Dyer, and his son continued celebrating mass miles away, the elder Dyer hushed their prayers. "I'm trying to listen to it," he told them.
 
The friends continued their prayers in silence before one of them came to the elder Dyer’s bedside, held his hand, and prayed that the Holy Spirit come and take the elder Dyer home. The friend’s eyelids began to flutter uncontrollably, his body began to shake, and he became very warm as he felt something like an energy pass through him to the elder Dyer. The elder Dyer’s face became very peaceful as he looked to the ceiling and asked for his wife before saying, "I have to go now," Richard Dyer said, and then died. The elder Dyer died at 12:05 pm just as his eldest son finished celebrating his first Mass.
 
Not far away, the son of the friends watching the elder Dyer was playing outside. This now-healthy child had been cured of a rare form of cancer. Richard Dyer had prayed for just such a cure for the boy. Looking up at a break in the clouds, at the rays of the sun, the boy said aloud to his companions, "I think Mr. Dyer just went to the Lord."
 
It is beyond our capability to say with certainty what these events mean. But one thing is certain, these events occurred. They occurred not on the pages of a dusty storybook, or in a fable passed through generations. They occurred in Virginia, just a few weeks ago.
 
Some will reflexively suggest worldly explanations. They will afford no possibility other than the laws of science, and random chance when those laws prove inadequate. Others, like the "mouse chasing the cat," have experienced the awe of stumbling into a new understanding, of unintentionally running into the cat.
 
Next June, the Bishop of Arlington will assign Father Dyer to a parish somewhere in Northern Virginia. Father Dyer didn't expect to find himself where he is now, or will be next June. "I'm rather shy," he told me. For people who wonder, who question whether something guides our course, perhaps there is something in the contemporary story of one shy, already successful, 48 year old man becoming a priest, and how it happened.

J Christian Adams–Family Security Matters

Foot Note: FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor J. Christian Adams is an election attorney who served in the Voting Rights Section at the U.S. Department of Justice. He is author of the bestselling book Injustice: Exposing the Racial Agenda of the Obama Justice Department (Regnery) His website is www.electionlawcenter.com.

Jackie Evancho Video - The Lord's Prayer HD

John Mearsheimer And Richard Falk Endorse A Blatantly Anti-Semitic Book

As the discourse about Israel on university campuses continues to degenerate, there is growing concern that some of Israel’s most vocal detractors are crossing a red line between acceptable criticism of Israel and legitimizing anti-Semitism. The recent endorsements by several internationally prominent academics—including John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago and Richard Falk of Princeton—of an overtly anti-Semitic book written by a notorious Jew-hater illustrate this dangerous trend.

The book in question is entitled The Wandering Who? and was written by Gilad Atzmon, a British jazz musician. Lest there be any doubt about Atzmon’s anti-Semitic credentials, listen to his self-description in the book itself. He boasts about “drawing many of my insights from a man who … was an anti-Semite as well as a radical misogynist” and a hater of “almost everything that fails to be Aryan masculinity” (89-90). He declares himself a “proud, self-hating Jew” (54), writes with “contempt” of “the Jew in me” (94), and describes himself as “a strong opponent of … Jewish-ness” (186). His writings, both online and in his new book, brim with classic anti-Semitic motifs that are borrowed from Nazi publications:

Throughout his writings, Atzmon argues that Jews seek to control the world:

> “[W]e must begin to take the accusation that the Jewish people are trying to control the world very seriously.”

> “American Jewry makes any debate on whether the ‘Protocols of the elder of Zion’ [sic] are an authentic document or rather a forgery irrelevant. American Jews do try to control the world, by proxy.”

Atzmon expands on this theme in The Wandering Who?, repeatedly conflating “the Jews” and “the Zionist”:

> He calls the recent credit crunch “the Zio-punch” (22) and says it was not “a Jewish conspiracy” because “it was all in the open” (30).

> Paul Wolfowitz, Rahm Emmanuel, and other members of “the Jewish elite” remain abroad instead of moving to “Zion” because they “have proved far more effective for the Zionist cause by staying where they are” (19).

> The American media “failed to warn the American people of the enemy within” because of money (27).

Atzmon has written that Jews are evil and a menace to humanity:

> “With Fagin and Shylock in mind Israeli barbarism and organ trafficking seem to be just other events in an endless hellish continuum.”

> “The Homo Zionicus quickly became a mass murderer, detached from any recognised form of ethical thinking and engaged in a colossal crime against humanity.”

Atzmon rehearses many of these ideas in The Wandering Who?:

> “[T]o be a Jew is a deep commitment that goes far beyond any legal or moral order” (20) and this commitment > > “pulls more and more Jews into an obscure, dangerous and unethical fellowship” (21).

> If Iran and Israel fight a nuclear war that kills tens of millions of people, “some may be bold enough to argue that ‘Hitler might have been right after all’” (179).

Atzmon regularly urges his readers to doubt the Holocaust and to reject Jewish history:

> “It took me years to accept that the Holocaust narrative, in its current form, doesn’t make any historical sense. … If, for instance, the Nazis wanted the Jews out of their Reich (Judenrein—free of Jews), or even dead, as the Zionist narrative insists, how come they marched hundreds of thousands of them back into the Reich at the end of the war?”

> “[E]ven if we accept the Holocaust as the new Anglo-American liberal-democratic religion, we must allow people to be atheists.”

Atzmon reprises some of this language in The Wandering Who?:

> Children should be allowed to question, as he did, “how the teacher could know that these accusations of Jews making Matza out of young Goyim’s blood were indeed empty or groundless” (185).

> “The Holocaust religion is probably as old as the Jews themselves” (153).

> The history of Jewish persecution is a myth, and if there was any persecution the Jews brought it on themselves (175, 182).

Atzmon argues that Jews are corrupt and responsible for “why” they are “hated”:

> “[I]n order to promote Zionist interests, Israel must generate significant anti-Jewish sentiment. Cruelty against Palestinian civilians is a favourite Israeli means of achieving this aim.”

> “Jews may have managed to drop their God, but they have maintained goy-hating and racist ideologies at the heart of their newly emerging secular political identity. This explains why some Talmudic goy-hating elements have been transformed within the Zionist discourse into genocidal practices.”

Atzmon returns to this theme repeatedly in The Wandering Who?:

> The “Judaic God” described in Deuteronomy 6:10-12 “is an evil deity, who leads his people to plunder, robbery and theft” (120). Atzmon explains that “Israel and Zionism … have instituted the plunder promised by the Hebrew God in the Judaic holy scriptures” (121).

> The moral of the Book of Esther is that Jews “had better infiltrate the corridors of power” if they wish to survive (158).

Finally, Atzmon repeatedly declares that Israel is worse than the Nazis and has actually “apologized” to the Nazis for having earlier compared them to Israel:

> “Many of us including me tend to equate Israel to Nazi Germany. Rather often I myself join others and argue that Israelis are the Nazis of our time. I want to take this opportunity to amend my statement. Israelis are not the Nazis of our time and the Nazis were not the Israelis of their time. Israel, is in fact far worse than Nazi Germany and the above equation is simply meaningless and misleading.”

In light of this Der Stürmer-like bigotry against Jews, it should come as no surprise that even some of the most hard-core anti-Israel activists have shunned Atzmon out of fear that his anti-Semitism will discredit their cause. Tony Greenstein, a self-styled “anti-Zionist” who recently participated in the Palestine Solidarity Campaign’s unprecedented disruption of an Israel Philharmonic Orchestra concert in London (which Greenstein compared to protesting the Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra in the 1930s), denounced The Wandering Who? as “a poisonous anti-Semitic tome.” Sue Blackwell, who co-wrote the Association of University Teachers’ motion to boycott Israeli universities in 2005, removed all links to Atzmon from her website and placed Atzmon on her list of “nasties” along with David Irving and Israel Shamir. Socialist Worker, a website that frequently refers to Israeli “apartheid” and publishes articles with titles such as “Israel’s murderous violence,” removed an interview with Atzmon and called the evidence of Atzmon’s anti-Semitism “damning.” At least ten authors associated with the Leftist publisher that published The Wandering Who? have called on the publisher to distance itself from Atzmon’s views, explaining that the “thrust of Atzmon’s work is to normalise and legitimise anti-Semitism.”

Hard-core neo-Nazis, racists, anti-Semites and Holocaust deniers, on the other hand, have happily counted Atzmon as one of their own. David Duke, America’s premier white supremacist, has posted more than a dozen of Atzmon’s articles on his website over the past five years and recently praised Atzmon for “writ[ing] such fine articles exposing the evil of Zionism and Jewish supremacism.” Kevin MacDonald, a professor at Cal State Long Beach whose colleagues formally disassociated themselves from his “anti-Semitic and white ethnocentric views,” called Atzmon’s book “an invaluable account by someone who clearly understands the main symptoms of Jewish pathology.” Israel Shamir, a Holocaust denier (“We must deny the concept of Holocaust without doubt and hesitation”) who argues that Jews ritually murdered Christian children for their blood and that “The rule of the Elders of Zion is already upon us,” refers to Atzmon as a “good friend” and calls Atzmon one of “the shining stars of the battle” against “the Jewish alliance.”

But neither Atzmon’s well-established reputation for anti-Semitism nor the copious anti-Semitic filth that fills The Wandering Who? has deterred Professors John Mearsheimer and Richard Falk from actively endorsing Atzmon’s work. Mearsheimer, the Harrison Distinguished Service Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago and a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, calls The Wandering Who? a “fascinating” book that “should be read widely by Jews and non-Jews alike.” Falk, Milibank Professor of International Law Emeritus at Princeton University and United Nations Special Rapporteur on “human rights in the Palestinian territories,” calls The Wandering Who? an “absorbing and moving” book that everyone who “care[s] about real peace” should “not only read, but reflect upon and discuss widely.” Falk’s endorsement appears prominently on the cover of Atzmon’s book. Mearsheimer’s endorsement is featured on its first page. These professors are not merely defending Atzmon’s right to publish such a book; they are endorsing its content and urging their colleagues, students, and others to read and “reflect upon” the views expressed by Atzmon. One wonders which portions of this bigoted screed Professors Mearsheimer and Falk believe their students and others “should” read and “discuss widely.”

Mearsheimer has defended his endorsement (on Stephen Walt’s blog) by questioning whether his critics have even read Atzmon’s book. Well, I’ve read every word of it, as well as many of Atzmon’s blogs. No one who has read this material could escape the conclusion—which Atzmon freely admits—that many of his “insights” are borrowed directly from classic anti-Semitic writings. Mearsheimer claims, however, that he has endorsed only Atzmon’s book and not his other writings. But the book itself is filled with crass neo-Nazi rants against the “Jew,” “World Jewry,” and “Jewish bankers.” He claims that “robbery and hatred is imbued in Jewish modern political ideology on both the left and the right” (123). And like other anti-Semites, Atzmon is obsessed in the book with Jewish names. It was Jews, such as Wolfowitz and Libby, who pushed the United States into war against Iraq in the “interests” of “their beloved Jewish state” (26). “How is it that America failed to restrain its Wolfowitzes?” Atzmon asks (27).

Likewise, according to Atzmon’s book, it was “Jewish bankers,” financiers, economists, writers, and politicians such as Greenspan, Levy, Aaronovitch, Saban, Friedman, Schiff, and Rothschild who have caused the economic and political problems of the world, ranging from the Bolshevik revolution to the wars of the 20th century to the current economic troubles (27,194). And like other classic anti-Semites, Atzmon doesn’t simply fault the individual Jews he names; he concocts a worldwide Jewish conspiracy motivated by a “ruthless Zio-driven” (27) “Jewish ideology” (69) that finds its source in “the lethal spirit” (122) of the Hebrew Bible. This sort of conspiratorial drivel is borrowed almost word for word from the Protocols of the Elders of Zion—the Czarist forgery that became a staple of Nazi propaganda.

A number of other prominent academics have defended Atzmon and his endorsers. Brian Leiter, the Llewellyn Professor of Jurisprudence at the University of Chicago Law School, dismissed the reaction to the book and to Mearsheimer’s “straightforward” endorsement as “hysterical” and not “advanc[ing] honest intellectual discourse,” though he acknowledges not having read Atzmon’s book. On the basis of having perused one brief interview with Atzmon, Leiter is nonetheless prepared to defend him against charges that he is an anti-Semite or a Holocaust denier: “His positions [do not mark him] as an anti-Semite [but rather as] cosmopolitan. … He does not deny the Holocaust or the gas chambers… .” Leiter should read the book, especially pages 175-176, before leaping to Atzmon’s defense. There Atzmon reflects “that 65 years after the liberation of Auschwitz, we must be entitled to start asking questions. We should ask for historical evidence and arguments rather than follow a religious narrative that is sustained by political pressure and laws.”

James Petras, Bartle Professor of Sociology Emeritus at Binghamton University, called The Wandering Who? “a series of brilliant illuminations” and praised Atzmon’s “courage.” The list of academics who have endorsed Atzmon also includes William A. Cook, a professor of English at the University of La Verne in southern California; Makram Khoury-Machool, a lecturer at the University of Cambridge; and Oren Ben-Dor of the University of Southampton School of Law.

These endorsements represent a dangerous step toward legitimizing anti-Semitic rhetoric on university campuses. If respected professors endorse the views contained in Atzmon’s book as “brilliant,” “fascinating,” “absorbing,” and “moving,” these views—which include Jewish domination of the world, doubting the Holocaust, blaming “the Jews” for being so hated, and attributing the current economic troubles to a “Zio-punch”—risk becoming acceptable among their students. These endorsements of Atzmon’s book are the best evidence yet that academic discourse is beginning to cross a red line, and that the crossing of this line must be exposed, rebutted, and rejected in the marketplace of ideas and in the academy. (Another evidence of this academic trend in Europe appeared recently on Atzmon’s website, where he brags that he has been invited to “give a talk on ethics at the Trondheim University” in Norway. This is the same university whose faculty refused to invite me to speak about the Arab-Israel conflict.)

Accordingly, I hereby challenge Professors Mearsheimer and Falk to a public debate about why they have endorsed and said such positive things about so hateful and anti-Semitic a book by so bigoted and dishonest a writer.

By Alan M. Dershowitz-Front Page Mag

Believe it or not,
I have finally become very rich!

I now have. . .
silver in my hair,
gold in my teeth,
crystal in my kidneys,
sugar in my blood,
calcium deposits in my joints,
lead in my feet,
iron in my arteries,
And
an inexhaustible supply of
natural gas in my guts and
abundantly blowing out of my ass!

Never in my life have I ever dreamed
that I'd accumulate such wealth!

~ Author Unknown ~

A Spirit of Gentleness

"What do you want? Shall I come to you with a rod, or in love and a spirit of gentleness?" -1 Corinthians 4:21

While exiting a parking garage only a few days ago, I was confronted by a rather large sign: The arrow was black and the circle with the slash was red. Bright red. The sign couldn't be missed - it was nearly SCREAMING at me. That was the idea...they didn't want me turning right into oncoming, one-way traffic. I get it.

It's somewhat crazy, but, the very first thing that went through my mind when I saw the sign was, "Wouldn't a sign like this be just as effective if worded in a nicer way?" ...something like: "Left Turn Only, Please".

I assume (probably correctly) that there have been numerous, lengthy studies yielding information that solidly concludes exactly what style and configuration of road and traffic signs are most effective under every circumstance. There is a vast amount of visual stimuli for the driver's eye to see, so an effective sign is certainly necessary, especially in potential life and death or serious injury situations.

Nonetheless, something inside of me longs for gentler, kinder ways between people. I suppose I'm somewhat of an idealistic romantic, but I maintain that people don't need to be SCREAMED at to stimulate a positive response.

Christ's demeanor always conveys that of a loving, gentle, kind spirit. Yes, He raised His voice on occasion - for good reasons. You and I may raise our voices, too, but for good reasons? Maybe. Christ's teaching was conversational - communicating the joy, the truth, and the love of God.

I'm convinced that results and reactions that are more positive bear fruit from seeds sown in a spirit of love and gentleness than with "the rod." In fact, a rose bush full of buds looses all or many of them if I hit the bush repeatedly with a stick or a rod. Only "love" expressed through the careful application of water and nutrients combined with a gentle cultivation of proper soil yields the colorful, blossoming, fragrant beauty of God's budding creation.

* * *

PRAYER:

Lord, help me to reevaluate my character and voice today. Show me, open my eyes to ways that I can speak more like You. Amen.

* * *

How do you speak to people? Do you think you come across as demanding? Sometimes? Always? Or, are your words mostly kind and gently honest?

By Jim Coleman-Hour of Power

Biblical Literacy And Spiritual Growth

As research shows the correlation between spiritual maturity and reading the Bible, one organization is addressing the significant lack of biblical literacy within the Christian community, as few Christians take time to make Bible study a daily practice.

Ed Stetzer, president of LifeWay Research, says his group's findings indicate that church members may be aware of general themes about Christianity, but they lack the biblical literacy necessary to better understand the full story of what God is doing in the world.

"We did a study at LifeWay Research and found the number-one correlated factor to spiritual growth and maturity was consistency in the Bible," he reports. "We know how essential this is to spiritual maturity, so literacy is not just something that kind of floats out there by itself; it is a tool. Biblical literacy is a tool that God uses to grow people spiritually as well."

Stetzer also contends that part of the problem is that many believers consider it the job of their pastor to digest and regurgitate the spiritual gleanings found in scripture.

"And in doing so, their spiritual diet suffers -- and it's obvious by the anemic state of many Christians," he notes. "So I think ultimately, God's given us his Word not so pastors alone can walk through it, but at the end of the day, it's so that they might engage the scriptures themselves and grow from them."

In a column for Baptist Press, Stetzer says he makes it a habit to read through the Bible once a year because if he only reads the parts he thinks he needs, he knows he will "miss a big part of God's design" for his growth.

Results From Our Related Poll

What do you think is the dominant cause of biblical illiteracy?

Modern Culture Discourages Reading … 23.25%
Christian Books Have Replaced The Bible … 17.48%
Focus On Religion Rather Instead Of Relationship With God … 59.27%

4955 Responses

Daily reading essential, encouraged

Three-hundred ministry powerhouses are joining forces to encourage people to engage in reading their Bibles on a daily basis. The American Bible Society (ABS) recently conducted a survey that reveals that even though Americans are pro-Bible, they do not always utilize the Word.

"We buy the Bible in increasing volume, we revere the Bible, we give the Bible as gifts, but we Americans do everything with the Bible except read it," says Lamar Vest, president and CEO of ABS.

But the coalition contends that it is vital that people get in touch with the Bible, both personally and corporately, especially considering the fact that Bible literacy has fallen in the last three years.

"It's not just about Bible literacy; it's about learning what the Bible is all about and learning about the living, active Word of God," Vest adds. "And we find that only about 20 percent of Americans are actually engaged with scripture on a regular basis."

The ministry and church coalition has launched a project called "Uncover the Word," and in the initial stages, more than 250,000 people have already made a commitment to participate. Vest and his colleagues hope that millions of Americans will go on to join the pledge to read the Bible on a regular, if not daily, basis. –One News Now

There's Something Terribly Wrong With This Picture!

Santorum: Gay Partnerships Don’t Benefit Society

Presidential hopeful Rick Santorum, continuing his already well established anti-gay rhetoric, told a gay man at a campaign stop in Fulton, Missouri, on Friday that marriage is a “privilege” that only heterosexuals get because it is only the “intrinsic good” of their unions that benefit society.

When asked by a gay audience member why gay couples don’t deserve equal rights when it comes to marriage, Santorum said that gay people are not entitled to “special” treatment under the law and went on to say:

[Marriage is] not a right, it’s something that has existed since the beginning of human history as an institution where men and women come together for the purposes of forming a natural relationship as God made it to be. And for the purposes of having children and continuing that civilization. It is an intrinsic good…And as a result of that, we extend a privilege. We extend certain privileges to people who do that because we want to encourage that behavior. [...]

Two people who may like each other or may love each other who are same-sex, is that a special relationship? Yes it is, but it is not the same relationship that benefits society like a marriage between a man and a woman.

Sadly, and ignoring the inaccuracies Santorum offered about the history of marriage and the circular logic he uses to back up each and every anti-gay argument, candidate Santorum’s assertions regarding same-sex marriage not benefiting society are demonstrably false.

Firstly, marriage is classed as a civil right. It may not have explicit constitutional reference but the freedom to marry has consistently been upheld by courts across America. Thus, there does exist a state sanctioned right to marry that is quite apart from the issue of how various religions choose to recognize and sanction marriage.

Secondly, married same-sex couples pay, on average, higher levels of tax and are forced to claim fewer benefits than their heterosexual counterparts thanks to the federal ban on gay marriage (DOMA), and this is further compounded for gay and lesbian couples in long-term relationships living in states where they cannot marry at all. If anything, in economic terms married gay couples are forced to contribute more to society.

Further, many same-sex couples are today raising children who have been shown in studies to do at least as well as their peers and, according to some studies, have demonstrated slightly elevated levels of social adjustment. This even in the face of their parents being thoroughly disadvantaged by prejudicial laws. Clearly, if having children and continuing the human race is the “intrinsic good” then gay couples have it in plentiful supply and Santorum’s argument falls down under a most basic test. Another quick consideration is that of heterosexual couples who cannot or do not want to have children. They are, if one follows the  logic, also substandard in Santorum’s view.

This isn’t the first time Santorum has attacked gay couples of course. The former senator surprised many during a question and answer session in New Hampshire last month when he declared that research shows children do better in families where a father is incarcerated and has abandoned his child than those in a same-sex parent household. No such research is thought to exist.

Santorum, who believes he’s been pretty restrained on gay rights issues, also recently said that he would “invalidate” all same-sex marriages, seemingly abandoning his small government ideals when it benefits his agenda. –Care2

Ragbag Headlines

Pro-'gay' Mayors To Be Confronted

One family leader says citizens who value family should bear in mind that many mayors throughout the nation are pushing homosexual "marriage" in their cities.

Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa has joined a group of 80 mayors in announcing support for "gay marriage" and for the "Mayors for the Freedom to Marry" initiative. He will co-chair the coalition that will spearhead an effort to broaden rights for homosexuals. The mayors have pledged to pressure their cities to pass laws that would permit same-sex marriage, and they are pressing for the repeal of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

Villaraigosa claims that "denying gays and lesbians the freedom to marry weakens society" and hurts communities, neighbors, and families. But Ron Prentice of the California Family Council (CFC) disagrees.

"These mayors and many others are intentionally disregarding the reams of social research that speak strongly to the best environment to raise children by their committed biological moms and dads," he notes.

Mayors Michael R. Bloomberg of New York City, Jerry Sanders of San Diego, and Annise Parker of Houston, among others, have all joined the national Freedom to Marry project. Parker is the first openly homosexual mayor of a major U.S. city.

"Mayor Villaraigosa may indeed attempt to establish some policies specific to same-sex marriage in L.A., but he will be confronted immediately by lawsuits," Prentice asserts.

And the CFC spokesman adds that the Los Angeles leader has voiced his support for same-sex marriage and has fought against Proposition 8, the law passed by California voters in 2008 that defined marriage solely as between one man and one woman. –One News Now

<><><>*<><><>

Federal Court: ‘Tolerance Is A Two Way Street’

The Sixth Circuit has ruled in favor of Christian graduate student Julea Ward, who almost three years ago was expelled from a university counseling program for her religious beliefs.

In a strongly worded opinion earlier today, the Sixth U.S. Circuit of Appeals reversed a district court decision in favor of Eastern Michigan University, sending it back for trial along with this message: “A reasonable jury could conclude that Ward’s professors ejected her from the counseling program because of hostility toward her speech and faith ….”

As part of her counseling practicum course in early 2009, Ward had been assigned a potential client who was homosexual and was seeking affirmation of that sexual orientation. Because she was unwilling to violate her own religious beliefs in the context of the counseling relationship, Ward was permitted to refer the client to another counselor — but was told to remain in the counseling program she would have to undergo a “remediation” program that would help her “see the error of her ways.”

When Ward refused, a faculty committee dismissed her from the program. In her subsequent lawsuit, a district federal court ruled in favor of EMU — a ruling that has now been reversed. –Vision To America

<><><>*<><><>

Time To Start 'Monitoring' Mosques

The head of a Messianic Jewish ministry is defending the producers of a documentary on Islamic Jihad that has created substantial controversy in New York City.

"We believe Islam will dominate" -- those are the opening words of the trailer. "It's an entire movement, and the idea of it is hatred for our way of life," former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani goes on to comment. He is just one of the terrorism experts featured in the full-length documentary, The Third Jihad: Radical Islam's Vision for America, produced by the Clarion Fund.

The New York Times reports that nearly 1,500 officers in the New York City Police Department had viewed the video since early 2010 as part of their counter-terrorism training. But the NYPD stopped showing the film after a few officers, as well as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), complained about it. On Friday, New York's police commissioner said the "inflammatory" film was shown by mistake -- and described the department's relationship with the city's Muslim community as "excellent."

The Clarion Fund has stood by its project, saying it is not a film about Islam, but a film about the threat of radical Islam.

Jan Markell, founder and director of Olive Tree Ministries in Minnesota, was present when the film was introduced, and she is glad that New York City police officers had a chance to see the documentary.

"I think this is very, very appropriate, and I think they can learn a lot," she contends. "And what's good about it is they're learning about it from a balanced Muslim, Dr. Zuhdi Jasser. He's a faithful, loyal practitioner of Islam, but he is showing its dark side. So I say Hallelujah! I'm glad this happened."

And Markell has no problem with the idea of the NYPD "spying" on activities in the mosques.

"I think it's time we start monitoring our mosques," she suggests. "I'm sure that it gets over into the area of political correctness and it looks like persecution, but I would maintain the source of a lot of our problems within our borders [is] mosques in America."

And the Olive Tree Ministries founder does not think peaceful Muslims who love America should have a problem with mosques being searched. –One News Now

How To Fight The Man

A few weeks ago, a 22-year-old man named Jefferson Bethke produced a video called “Why I Hate Religion, but Love Jesus.” The video shows Bethke standing in a courtyard rhyming about the purity of the teachings of Jesus and the hypocrisy of the church. Jesus preaches healing, surrender and love, he argues, but religion is rigid, phony and stale. “Jesus came to abolish religion,” Bethke insists. “Religion puts you in bondage, but Jesus sets you free.”

The video went viral. As of Thursday, it had acquired more than 18 million hits on YouTube. It speaks for many young believers who feel close to God but not to the church. It represents the passionate voice of those who think their institutions lack integrity — not just the religious ones, but the political and corporate ones, too.

Right away, many older theologians began critiquing Bethke’s statements. A blogger named Kevin DeYoung pointed out, for example, that it is biblically inaccurate to say that Jesus hated religion. In fact, Jesus preached a religious doctrine, prescribed rituals and worshiped in a temple.

Bethke responded in a way that was humble, earnest and gracious, and that generally spoke well of his character. He also basically folded.

“I wanted to say I really appreciate your article man,” Bethke wrote to DeYoung in an online exchange. “It hit me hard. I’ll even be honest and say I agree 100 percent.”

Bethke watched a panel discussion in which some theologians lamented young people’s disdain of organized religion. “Right when I heard that,” he told The Christian Post, “it just convicted me, and God used it as one of those Spirit moments where it’s just, ‘Man, he’s right.’ I realized a lot of my views and treatments of the church were not Scripture-based; they were very experience based.”

Bethke’s passionate polemic and subsequent retreat are symptomatic of a lot of the protest cries we hear these days. This seems to be a moment when many people — in religion, economics and politics — are disgusted by current institutions, but then they are vague about what sorts of institutions should replace them.

This seems to be a moment of fervent protest movements that are ultimately vague and ineffectual.

We can all theorize why the intense desire for change has so far produced relatively few coherent recipes for change. Maybe people today are simply too deferential. Raised to get college recommendations, maybe they lack the oppositional mentality necessary for revolt. Maybe people are too distracted.

My own theory revolves around a single bad idea. For generations people have been told: Think for yourself; come up with your own independent worldview. Unless your name is Nietzsche, that’s probably a bad idea. Very few people have the genius or time to come up with a comprehensive and rigorous worldview.

If you go out there armed only with your own observations and sentiments, you will surely find yourself on very weak ground. You’ll lack the arguments, convictions and the coherent view of reality that you’ll need when challenged by a self-confident opposition. This is more or less what happened to Jefferson Bethke.

The paradox of reform movements is that, if you want to defy authority, you probably shouldn’t think entirely for yourself. You should attach yourself to a counter-tradition and school of thought that has been developed over the centuries and that seems true.

The old leftists had dialectical materialism and the Marxist view of history. Libertarians have Hayek and von Mises. Various spiritual movements have drawn from Transcendentalism, Stoicism, Gnosticism, Thomism, Augustine, Tolstoy, or the Catholic social teaching that inspired Dorothy Day.

These belief systems helped people envision alternate realities. They helped people explain why the things society values are not the things that should be valued. They gave movements a set of organizing principles. Joining a tradition doesn’t mean suppressing your individuality. Applying an ancient tradition to a new situation is a creative, stimulating and empowering act. Without a tradition, everything is impermanence and flux.

Most professors would like their students to be more rebellious and argumentative. But rebellion without a rigorous alternative vision is just a feeble spasm.

If I could offer advice to a young rebel, it would be to rummage the past for a body of thought that helps you understand and address the shortcomings you see. Give yourself a label. If your college hasn’t provided you with a good knowledge of countercultural viewpoints — ranging from Thoreau to Maritain — then your college has failed you and you should try to remedy that ignorance.

Effective rebellion isn’t just expressing your personal feelings. It means replacing one set of authorities and institutions with a better set of authorities and institutions. Authorities and institutions don’t repress the passions of the heart, the way some young people now suppose. They give them focus and a means to turn passion into change. –New York Times

Hoezo Parkeren

An Amish Christmas

The simplicity of an Amish Christmas epitomize the warmth, peace, altruism, and beauty we associate with the true meaning of the religious holiday.

Without the flashing, colored lights and brightly colored packages, the emphasis of the Amish Christmas shifts to the purity of the holiday, as pristine as the whiteness of the snow coating the Amish farmland; to the love shining in the eyes of friends and family as they gather together; to the simple joys of horse-drawn sleighs on snowy roads and the laughter of children as they frolic in the snow and skate on ice-covered ponds.

The peace and joy the outside world works so hard to find are emanated by the Amish community this time of year. Candles flickering in windows, carolers joining together in songs of the season, and the scent of homemade baked goods filling the air are some of the simple, joyful, ways that the Amish celebrate the birth of Christ.

The lack of commercialism is one of the most distinct differences between the Amish and other Christians who observe Christmas. The Amish do not do much Christmas shopping. Instead, most of their gifts to friends and family are handmade. Amish children are not exposed to television; therefore, they don’t beg for the latest, greatest video game system or the newest, most expensive piece of consumer technology. Instead, they give and receive special, albeit mostly practical, household items, clothing accessories, and toys. Simple, faceless dolls dressed in traditional Amish garb are often received by little girls on Christmas Day. Amish boys might receive handmade trains or cars. Both boys and girls enjoy presents of board games that can be played by the fireplace on long winter evenings.

Because the Amish do not promote belief in Santa Claus, the children, like their parents, focus on the real meaning of Christmas: the birth of Jesus Christ. Nativity scenes are frequently displayed both inside and outside Amish homes. Children sometimes help construct Nativity figures as part of learning about the Biblical meaning of the holiday.

On Christmas Eve, most Amish communities gather for a Christmas program performed in a one-room schoolhouse, where students from grades one through eight are educated. The students recite poems, perform skits, or read stories for their parents and other family members. Afterward, they enjoy refreshments, such as cookies, candies, and other sweets made by those in attendance. If the ground is snow-covered, the students and their families  ride home in horse-drawn sleighs, where they can truly appreciate the stillness and peace of a silent night, with stars blinking against a velvet sky.

The Amish spend Christmas Day with immediate families quietly observing the religious holiday. The families eat a large meal, usually consisting of roasted chicken, mashed potatoes, noodles, vegetable dishes, salads, and myriad desserts. The remainder of the day is spent reading scriptures, meditating on the true meaning of Christmas, and exchanging simple presents with family members. The homes are not lavishly decorated, but do often have swags of greenery and handmade stars or angels to add a touch of festivity.  Sometimes Christmas cards, mostly received from “English friends” (those who do not belong to the Amish community) are strung across the kitchen or living room. The Amish homes do not have Christmas trees.

The Amish reserve the day after Christmas, or “the Second Christmas,” for visiting friends and extended family. This day is when the Amish talk, laugh, and play games, either indoors or outdoors. Amish children often go sled riding, ice skating, or play other games in the snow as part of the fun of “Second Christmas.” Some friends and extended family members exchange simple gifts on this day as well. The Amish’s “Second Christmas” is focused on the joyful, celebratory aspects of the holiday.

Known for their plain attire, the Amish often express their appreciation for color and design in creating intricate quilts. These elaborate, colorful quilts are often exchanged as Christmas gifts between friends and family. Other handmade gifts include wood crafts, stationary with personalized stenciling, crocheted or knitted items. Books are sometimes given as gifts as well. In spite of their limited formal education, many of the Amish enjoy reading books and Amish newspapers.

In many ways, the Amish lifestyle is reminiscent of the way that most Americans lived during the late 1800s. Because many modern conveniences are shunned by the Amish, homes are lit by kerosene lanterns or gas-operated lamps, and heated by gas or coal furnaces or wood stoves. Furnishings are usually relatively simple, although some homes contain well-crafted, Amish-made furniture. Floors are usually covered with tile or linoleum; a touch of color and comfort are added by handmade rugs. Clocks and calendars are usually the only items adorning the walls.

On a visit to Lancaster County, Pa., earlier this fall, I visited a New Order Amish home. I was impressed with the home’s coziness and subtle pretty touches. The kitchen, with its handmade cabinets, was especially attractive. The appliances appeared new and modern, but were gas-operated, rather than electric.

Most impressive were the Amish people themselves, who exuded warmth and hospitality. They welcomed us into their home, shared a meal, and included us in conversation. The family we visited did not convey a judgmental attitude toward outsiders, which made us feel welcome and comfortable in their home. It was an experience that my mother, grandmother, and I will long hold in our hearts.

Most of the information in this column about the Amish Christmas season was obtained during that visit, as well as through various books written by authors of popular Amish fiction, such as Beverly Lewis and Wanda Brunstetter. These writers have thoroughly researched the Amish, as well as spent time in their homes, making their books a wonderful, authentic glimpse into the Amish traditions and faith. –The Washington Times

Dear God,

my prayer for 2012 is for a fat bank account

and a slim body.
Please don't reverse them like you did last year.

AMEN!
 

Author Unknown

A Taste of Islam: An Interview With Bill Warner

In the years after the 9/11 attacks, more non-Muslims than ever before have studied Islam to understand the religious motives of those who had declared war on us. And yet non-believers who are alarmed at what they have found in the foundational texts of Islam are always told by apologists that we don’t understand the true Koran, that we labor under misconceptions about the Religion of Peace, that we don’t understand the complexities of sharia, that our objections and criticisms stem from racism (even though Islam is not a race) and an irrational fear of Islam and its adherents. The problem always seems to lie with us. What is the truth and how can we get to it behind the contradictions and the mystification?

Bill Warner has the answer. The founder and director of the Center for the Study of Political Islam (CSPI), he holds a PhD in physics and math. He has been a university professor, a businessman, and an applied physicist. But Dr. Warner has also had a lifelong interest in religion and its impact on history, and so the day after 9/11 he decided to make the source texts of Islam available for the average person who wants to know more.

As part of that effort, Mr. Warner has produced a dozen books, including a Koran, a biography of Mohammed and a summary of the political traditions of Mohammed. He writes articles and produces news bulletins that record the suffering of the victims of political Islam. And he has spoken nationally and internationally about Islamic political doctrine.

This Tuesday in Los Angeles, Mr. Warner will present “A Taste of Islam.” See here for information about attending.

Mark Tapson: Mr. Warner, your background is in physics and mathematics. How did you come to devote yourself to the study of religion and to feel compelled to share your insights on political Islam? How did the field of statistics shape your perspective on Islam?

Bill Warner: I was raised in a very religious family and read the Bible a great deal. I studied physics and math, but my interest in religion expanded to the effects of religion on history. After graduate school I was attracted to mysticism and Eastern religions. So, forty years ago, I looked into Sufism, mystical Islam. I went to Sufi dances, learned zikr (a Sufi devotional practice), met Sufi masters and read Sufi literature. But, there was always this jarring background noise of the history of Islam. So, I left my study of Sufism.

Twenty years later as a professor I had Muslims in my classes and they sparked my interest in the Koran. It was a tough read, but I read it cover to cover. The text was literally a puzzle, but I set it aside until 9/11.

On 9/11 as soon as the second plane hit the second tower, I knew it was an act of jihad. I stood up, turned off the TV and I haven’t watched it since. In that moment it came to me that the rest of my life would be spent explaining the meaning of Islamic texts.

I sat down and reread the Koran, read the Sira (Ishaq and Al Tabari), read the Hadith (Bukhari and Muslim). These are the absolute foundational texts of Islam, the source code, the DNA. I was following Sun Tzu’s advice; know your enemy and attack your enemy’s strategy.

My attack was to reveal the Koran, Sira and Hadith in a rational form that was easy to read. This became the Trilogy Project. I assembled a team of volunteers and paid writers and editors. From the beginning, I knew that it was the political aspect of Islam that offered the only chance of success. The religious aspect has too much misunderstood protection of the First Amendment.

MT: What is the Trilogy Project?

BW: The approach to the Trilogy was new and unorthodox, and its only chance of success lay in a scientific approach to the texts. Every paragraph can be verified by going back to the source texts. These books are not opinion, but give us the facts of the sources. For this reason, nearly every paragraph has an index number that allows it to be verified.

The greatest fun was solving the Koran puzzle. The Koran must be the most famous book that is not read or understood. The first step, which is not unique to me, is to lay out the Koran in the correct time sequence. The bookstore Koran is arranged by chapter length, and is not in the right time order. It was created by Uthman, the third caliph. The bookstore Koran is Uthman’s Koran.

If you take the life of Mohammed, the Sira, and lay it out alongside the Koran in the right time order, it is like matching a key to a lock. What is happening to Mohammed is reflected directly in the Koran. So if you integrate the life of Mohammed into the same text as the Koran and use separate fonts, so there is no confusion, you get a recreation of the Koran of Mohammed, the historical Koran. The Koran becomes an epic story that begins with a hymn to god and ends with the triumph over the world—the annihilation of all other civilization.

In 2006, I published the complete foundational doctrine of political Islam in three volumes. The Trilogy Project was finished. Now anyone can read and understand the Koran, Sira and Hadith. You can know Allah and Mohammed from the source texts.

This system of knowledge integrates the entire body of Islam into one view. If it is in the Trilogy, it is Islam. If it is Islam, it must be in the Trilogy.

Once the Trilogy was assembled, there was a bonus prize. Part of making the texts readable included sorting and reordering of the ideas. Once the work was all correlated, concepts leapt off the page. The ideas of Islamic ideology stood out. The simple statistical method of counting the words devoted to ideas clearly showed the themes of the doctrine.

The biggest statistical surprise was the dualistic nature of Islamic doctrine. Islam holds contradictory ideas that are simultaneously true. Now this confounds all Western logic, but this gives Islam its great strength. Islam is peace. Islam is jihad. Islam is a brother to Christianity and Judaism. Islam annihilates Christianity and Judaism.

I find it revealing that 64% of the Koran deals with Kafirs (non-Muslims), not Muslims. The Trilogy has a greater textual devotion to Jew hatred, 9%, than Mein Kampf. We are led to believe that there are a few verses about jihad in the Koran, but 24% of the Koran written in Medina is about jihad.

My work is from the view point of the Kafir, the non-Muslim. The Kafir is the victim in nearly every verse by Allah and most actions by Mohammed. The grandest lie of Islam is that Muslims have the correct view of Islam. But dualism demands that there are two correct views that contradict each other and cannot be logically aligned. Hence, there is the Kafir-centric view of Islam that is equally valid as the Muslim-centric view. Islam, the universities, and the apologists all insist that only the Muslim view is the true view. This is an error that is not supported by facts.

We can now hold fact-based discussions about Islam. There is no longer any need for “experts”, since we have the supreme experts in our hand — Mohammed and Allah.

MT: You’re speaking in Los Angeles on “A Taste of Islam.” Why is it necessary to appreciate “the full menu” of Islam in order to understand it?

BW: It is impossible to understand Islam based on just the Koran, but it is simple to understand when you look at the entire picture, both of Allah and Mohammed.

Muslims and their apologists want us to look at Islam one verse at a time. But this is like trying to understand a jigsaw puzzle by looking at it one piece at a time. If we put all the pieces together, as a system, the picture is obvious.

MT: Pointing out the theological motivation of Islamic fundamentalists always brings the politically correct objection that they constitute a “tiny minority of extremists” who have “hijacked” a religion of peace and interfaith tolerance. How are we to answer that objection?

BW: The use of the term “extreme” implies that something is being measured, and it is off the chart. There is one and only one measure of Islam and that is its doctrine as found in the Trilogy. For example, Mohammed preached the religion of Islam for thirteen years and made only 150 converts. But when he turned to jihad, ten years later he died, he was the ruler of Arabia and every Arab was a Muslim. Conclusion: jihad is normal, not extreme. But notice that since Islam is dualistic, Muslims can claim that it is peaceful.

As to the claim that the jihadists are few in number, look at war statistics. During WW II only 10% of our population was in the military. Did that mean we were not at war? No. In war only a few are doing the actual work, the rest of the country backs them with labor, money and morale.

The biggest statistical surprise was the dualistic nature of Islamic doctrine. Islam holds contradictory ideas that are simultaneously true. Now this confounds all Western logic, but this gives Islam its great strength. Islam is peace. Islam is jihad. Islam is a brother to Christianity and Judaism. Islam annihilates Christianity and Judaism.

I find it revealing that 64% of the Koran deals with Kafirs (non-Muslims), not Muslims. The Trilogy has a greater textual devotion to Jew hatred, 9%, than Mein Kampf. We are led to believe that there are a few verses about jihad in the Koran, but 24% of the Koran written in Medina is about jihad.

My work is from the view point of the Kafir, the non-Muslim. The Kafir is the victim in nearly every verse by Allah and most actions by Mohammed. The grandest lie of Islam is that Muslims have the correct view of Islam. But dualism demands that there are two correct views that contradict each other and cannot be logically aligned. Hence, there is the Kafir-centric view of Islam that is equally valid as the Muslim-centric view. Islam, the universities, and the apologists all insist that only the Muslim view is the true view. This is an error that is not supported by facts.

We can now hold fact-based discussions about Islam. There is no longer any need for “experts”, since we have the supreme experts in our hand — Mohammed and Allah.

MT: You’re speaking in Los Angeles on “A Taste of Islam.” Why is it necessary to appreciate “the full menu” of Islam in order to understand it?

BW: It is impossible to understand Islam based on just the Koran, but it is simple to understand when you look at the entire picture, both of Allah and Mohammed.

Muslims and their apologists want us to look at Islam one verse at a time. But this is like trying to understand a jigsaw puzzle by looking at it one piece at a time. If we put all the pieces together, as a system, the picture is obvious.

MT: Pointing out the theological motivation of Islamic fundamentalists always brings the politically correct objection that they constitute a “tiny minority of extremists” who have “hijacked” a religion of peace and interfaith tolerance. How are we to answer that objection?

BW: The use of the term “extreme” implies that something is being measured, and it is off the chart. There is one and only one measure of Islam and that is its doctrine as found in the Trilogy. For example, Mohammed preached the religion of Islam for thirteen years and made only 150 converts. But when he turned to jihad, ten years later he died, he was the ruler of Arabia and every Arab was a Muslim. Conclusion: jihad is normal, not extreme. But notice that since Islam is dualistic, Muslims can claim that it is peaceful.

As to the claim that the jihadists are few in number, look at war statistics. During WW II only 10% of our population was in the military. Did that mean we were not at war? No. In war only a few are doing the actual work, the rest of the country backs them with labor, money and morale.

There are four ways to be a jihadist – sword, pen, speech and money. Jihad is incumbent on ALL Muslims; therefore, it is the sixth pillar of Islam.

MT: Especially in the wake of the Arab Spring, the Obama administration wants us to draw a distinction between the terrorists and the “moderate” Islamists we can work with. How do you respond to that?

BW: First, a terrorist is a jihadist, modeled after Mohammed, the supreme jihadist. A moderate Muslim can be one who is not observant or it can be a Muslim who is following the Koran of Mecca, the religious Koran.

The apologists always want to talk about people, Muslims, not doctrine. Remember: when a Muslim is talking to a Kafir, there are twelve verses of the Koran that state that a Muslim is not the friend of a Kafir. Also, Mohammed repeatedly told Muslims to deceive the Kafir if it would advance Islam. There is one Muslim who will tell us the complete truth about Islam and that man is Mohammed.

The iron rule of Islamic doctrine is: if someone is talking about Islam and does not mention Mohammed or Allah (Koran) they are only building castles in the air.

An Islamist wants Sharia. Sharia destroys human rights and Kafir civilization. Why would we want to cooperate with someone who wants Sharia?

We don’t need politicians, religious leaders or academics to explain about Islam, we now have Mohammed and Allah. Forget the opinions of experts. For the first time in history, the common man can read the facts of the Trilogy and find out all of the answers without the “experts.”

By Mark Tapson-Front Page Mag

Foot Note: Mark Tapson, a Hollywood-based writer and screenwriter, is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center. He focuses on the politics of popular culture.

God Is Always Right: A Modern Parable

A certain king who did not believe in God, had a slave who, in all circumstances always said: “My king, do not be discouraged because everything God does is perfect. He makes no mistakes!”

One day they went hunting when suddenly a wild animal jumped out of the bushes and attacked the king. His slave managed to kill the animal, but his majesty lost a finger from the attack.

Furiously and without considering that his life had been saved, the king exclaimed, "God is no good! If He was good, I would not have been attacked by that wild animal, and I would not have lost my finger."

The slave replied: "My king, despite all these things, I can only tell you that God is good, and He knows why these things happened. What God does is perfect. He is never wrong!"

Outraged by the slave's response, the king ordered that the slave be thrown in jail.

Later, the King went on another hunt -- this time alone. He was captured by savages, who practiced human sacrifice.

As the king was about to be slain and offered as a sacrifice to the gods, the savages discovered that one of his fingers was missing. The king without his finger was deemed abominable and an unfit sacrifice to the gods. So they released him.

Upon his return to the palace, the king had a sudden change of heart, and he ordered that his slave be released. And since then, he treated the slave affectionately.

He told his slave, "Now I know that God was really good to me! I was almost killed by the wild men, but because of my missing finger, I was let go. My question now is: if God is so good, why did he allow me to put you in jail?"

The slave answered, "My King, had I gone with you on the hunt, I would have been sacrificed instead because I have all my finger. Remember everything God does is perfect. He is never wrong. He made you throw me in jail to protect me."

MORAL OF THE STORY: Often we complain about life and seeming misfortunes. We often forget that everything has a purpose.

God is never wrong!

Author Unknown