Saturday’s Newslinks brought to you by At Ease Tees

http://www.christianpost.com/article/20080706/nat-l-a-m-e-meeting-caps-obama-s-faith-filled-week.htm

Nat’l A.M.E. Meeting Caps Obama’s Faith-Filled Week

Barack Obama spoke to a room of churchgoers and celebrated “active faith”. He also said that “active faith” is an obligation of religious Americans and a chief agent of societal change. Obama also urged the national meeting of the African Methodist Episcopal Church to help fix national and local ills. He encouraged parents to help with homework and to turn off the TV. He called on them to pass on a healthy self-image to their daughters and to teach their boys to boys to respect women. He also said that boys need to be taught, “responsibility does not end at conception”. The main focus of his speech was the government’s duty to address “moral” problems and that they should use religious institutions to do this. He said that we should do everything in our “individual and collective power” to solve these problems and that until we do everything our “the conscience of our nation cannot rest”.

It seems that Obama’s focus is to try and gain Christian voters. Many of the things that he is speaking of now seem to contradict the things that he says he stands for. He is one of the most pro-abortion people in America today. Oddly, he encouraged people to teach their sons that responsibility doesn’t end at conception. If a man’s responsibility as a father doesn’t end at conception, then doesn’t that mean that life would have to begin at conception? If that’s the case, then how can Obama support abortion? If Obama is really a Christian, then that’s contradictory. The “moral” problems that Obama says should be fixed are actually social issues. Things like war, poverty, joblessness, homelessness, violent streets and crumbling schools are things that Christians should be concerned about. They are things that we should be making every effort to battle. It seems to confuse biblically moral issues (like adultery, homosexuality, etc) from things that are not moral issues. There is a much greater reason that the conscience of our nation should not be able to rest. This reason is called sin. The sin of our nation should be our number one concern. The battle against sin will be the one that changes all of the other “ills” that we are facing.

___________________________________________

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Education/Default.aspx?id=168956

German home schoolers flee to Canada

A German family that fled their country because of pressure by their government to put their kids in public school has moved to Canada in hopes that they will be able to homeschool their children. The family fled the country when the German government threatened the parents with jail and took their children into custody. The children were returned and the family fled the country and went to Austria. The German government still tried to chase the family and that caused them to flee to Canada. According to Mike Donnelly, a lawyer with the Homeschool Defense League (HDSL), says that this is an increasingly common occurrence in German. He even cited a case where a family fled from Germany to Iran in order to homeschool their kids. The Plett family is appealing to the European Court of Human Rights because of their situation while the HSDL is trying to get the US to show Germany that homeschooling is an asset.

It’s sad that homeschooling is not seen for the wonderful thing that it is. As our public schools continue to crumble and the education system seems to be unable to actually teach our kids what they need to know, homeschooling continues to grow. As our schools introduce anti-Christian ideas like homosexuality and evolution, homeschooling offers our children the truth of the scriptures to build their lives on. Is it any wonder that people are willing to flee to a place where they can do this (even Iran)? I look for the Plett family to be free to raise their kids the way that they desire.

___________________________________________

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Legal/Default.aspx?id=165572

ACLU given ‘veto power’ over free-speech rights

U.S. District Judge Catherine Perry has decided that the Gideons will not be allowed to pass out bibles to South Iron school children. The Missouri school district allows outside organizations to pass out literature to the children before and after school as well as during non-school breaks like lunchtime. The ACLU sued the Gideons, saying that because the nature of the material is religious, it should not be allowed. The judge not only agreed with that but also said that the ACLU “must have the say-so over whether religious materials can be distributed”. Matt Staver, founder of Liberty Counsel, disagrees recognizing that if the ACLU has the say-so, there will be no religious literature handed out. Staver says that the First Amendment says that no “heckler” has the right to prohibit free speech and that the Constitution requires equal treatment, even if the ACLU doesn’t like it.

It would be nice if revisionists would actually look at the Constitution. There is nothing in the writing that says anything about “separation of church and state”. If I remember right, this was a phrase used by Thomas Jefferson in a letter to the Danbury Baptists. The idea of giving an organization that is obviously anti-Christian the “say-so” to determine whether or not religious literature can be handed out is ridiculous and should be an indication of the fact that many judges are not as concerned about judging rightly as they are judging according to their own agendas…

___________________________________________

http://www.christianpost.com/article/20080707/fmr-science-director-sues-over-neutral-policy-on-intelligent-design.htm

Fmr. Science Director Sues Over ‘Neutral’ Policy on Intelligent Design

Christina Comer is suing the Texas Education Administration (TEA) saying that she was forced to resign last year after sending an email promoting a speaker who is opposed to intelligent design. The forced resignation was due to a policy that requires TEA employees to remain neutral on the idea of creationism. The suit asks that the policy be determined unconstitutional and that she be reinstated to her old job. The court papers say that the idea of requiring employees to remain neutral on creationism validates it as a scientific theory and endorses religion. The email is cited as one of the many reasons why Comer was going to be terminated, but she handed in her resignation before that could happen.

If she felt forced into resignation, then why didn’t she say something? Why did she resign and then sue? What is she looking for from this? She is obviously not neutral, which was what the policy required. As an employee, it should have been followed. If she had an issue with the policy and thought that it was unconstitutional, then why didn’t she speak up about it and try to see it changed? There’s more to this I’ll wager and, if I had to guess, I would say that the majority of it has to do with anti-Christian, anti-creationist stuff…