Monthly Archives: September 2016
The difference between “freedom of religion” and “freedom of worship” is very distinct. The fact that our president says he believes in “freedom of worship” over “freedom of religion” is a warning to be taken seriously.
A group of Pentecostals were meeting in a home church group when the local police came and said they would drive them from the home in accordance with a new law. That new law allows “freedom of worship” but severely restricts “freedom of religion.”
Recently in Russia, a proposed law received overwhelming support from lawmakers and was approved by president Vladimir Putin. That law put restrictions on missionary work, teaching, preaching, or seeking to “recruit” people into a religious organization. The law also restricts people from sharing their faith in their home, online, or anywhere outside of a church building.
Benjamin Watson has been a professional tight end for more than a decade. Watson has played for the Patriots, Saints, and now with the Baltimore Ravens. But being an NFL player is only part of who Ben Watson is.
When you think of the NFL, you typically do not think about outspoken Christians regarding moral and social issues. And yet, that is a perfect way to describe Benjamin Watson. Watson has been an outspoken Christian throughout his career and continues to speak up for biblical truth concerning some of the most pressing issues of our day.
Recently, Watson was giving an interview with the Turning Point Pregnancy Resource Center, based in San Diego. During the interview, Watson shared some thoughts on how abortion and race relations go hand in hand. He said:
The momentum caused by a federal judge blocking the Obama Administration’s bathroom policy is having a positive impact. People are mobilizing to put a permanent end to this terrible policy. For anyone who has ever wondered “what can I do” about such a bad policy as the bathroom bill, take a look at the suggestions from a top family advocacy group and determine which of these action points you can do.
The Family Policy Alliance works to defend traditional values with its network of advocacy groups across the United States. Recently, they published an article with four ways you can get involved in the fight to defend privacy against the bathroom bill.
Someone has finally explained the funny math of the Planned Parenthood abortion business, which allows then to say abortion is only 3% of the services they offer. Wait till you see this.
For some reason the Obama Administration thought it would be a good idea to let school students to use whatever bathroom and locker room they choose. This means that boys that “identify” as girls can use the girls’ facilities and vice versa. Anyone with a little common sense can clearly see what a bad decision and policy this is.
Texas, along with 12 other states agreed that such a decision is not safe for students. So a challenge to the mandate began as greater public outcry against the mandate continued. U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor agreed with the challenge and blocked the mandate saying the Obama Administration did not follow the law in issuing the mandate. Specifically, the judge said the Obama Administration failed to give adequate notice of the impending law and allow for a comment period.
In this very short video clip, Dr. Paul Roth of the University of New Mexico Health Science Center admits that students at a summer camp dissected aborted baby brains.
The clip shows Dr. Roth admitting on camera that a faculty member obtained and used fetal brains in one of the summer workshops. Specifically, he states:
“Yes, we had a faculty member who obtained some tissue, and during one of these summer workshops, uh, dissected I think one or two fetal brains.”
A recent article on this deviant incident says that a House Select Panel has sent a letter to the New Mexico Attorney General recommending that the University of New Mexico and the supplier of the baby brains be charged with violating state and federal laws. The article states:
If you support homosexual “marriage,” you owe it to yourself to read what Matt Walsh says about a mother and son fighting for their right to “love” one another. All of the arguments used to defend and legitimize homosexual relationships and “marriage” are being used by the mother and son to defend and legitimize their incestuous relationship. And the things is: if you support the logic and reasoning used to defend homosexual “marriage” then you have no moral or legal ground to refuse to support incestuous relationships.
To prove that point, Walsh runs through the main arguments used to defend homosexual “marriage” and then applies them to incestuous relationships. Namely, he cites: