Was George Washington a Christian?
by David Barton, Wallbuilders.com
This is a question often asked today, and it arises from the efforts of those who seek to impeach Washington’s character by portraying him as irreligious. Interestingly, Washington’s own contemporaries did not question his Christianity but were thoroughly convinced of his devout faith–a fact made evident in the first-ever compilation of the The Writings of George Washington, published in the 1830s.
That compilation of Washington’s writings was prepared and published by Jared Sparks (1789-1866), a noted writer and historian. Sparks’ herculean historical productions included not only the writings of George Washington (12 volumes) but also Benjamin Franklin (10 volumes) and Constitution signer Gouverneur Morris (3 volumes). Additionally, Sparks compiled the Library of American Biography (25 volumes), The Diplomatic Correspondence of the American Revolution (12 volumes), and the Correspondence of the American Revolution (4 volumes). In all, Sparks was responsible for some 100 historical volumes. Additionally, Sparks was America’s first professor of history–other than ecclesiastical history–to teach at the college level in the United States, and he was later chosen president of Harvard.
Jared Sparks’ decision to compile George Washington’s works is described by The Dictionary of American Biography. It details that Sparks began . . .
. . . what was destined to be his greatest life work, the publication of the writings of George Washington. [Supreme Court] Justice Bushrod Washington, [the nephew of George Washington, the executor of the Washington estate, and] the owner of the Washington manuscripts, was won over by an offer to share the profits, through the friendly mediation of Chief Justice [of the Supreme Court, John] Marshall [who from 1804-1807 had written a popular five volume biography of George Washington], who also consented to take an equal share, twenty-five per cent, with the owner. In January 1827, Sparks found himself alone at Mount Vernon with the manuscripts. An examination of them extending over three months showed that years would be required for the undertaking; and with the owner’s consent, Sparks carried off the entire collection, eight large boxes, picking up on the way to Boston a box of diplomatic correspondence from the Department of State, and the [General Horatio] Gates manuscripts from the New York Historical Society. Not content with these, he searched or caused to be searched public and private archives for material, questioned survivors of the Revolution, visited and mapped historic sites. In 1830, for instance, he followed [Benedict] Arnold’s [1775] route to Quebec. The first of the twelve volumes of The Writings of George Washington to be published (vol. II) appeared in 1834 and the last (vol. I, containing the biography) in 1837.
In Volume XII of these writings, Jared Sparks delved into the religious character of George Washington, and included numerous letters written by the friends, associates, and family of Washington which testified of his religious character. Based on that extensive evidence, Sparks concluded:
To say that he [George Washington] was not a Christian would be to impeach his sincerity and honesty. Of all men in the world, Washington was certainly the last whom any one would charge with dissimulation or indirectness [hypocrisies and evasiveness]; and if he was so scrupulous in avoiding even a shadow of these faults in every known act of his life, [regardless of] however unimportant, is it likely, is it credible, that in a matter of the highest and most serious importance [his religious faith, that] he should practice through a long series of years a deliberate deception upon his friends and the public? It is neither credible nor possible.
One of the letters Sparks used to arrive at his conclusion was from Nelly Custis-Lewis. While Nelly technically was the granddaughter of the Washingtons, in reality she was much more.
When Martha [Custis] married George, she was a widow and brought two young children (John and Martha–also called Patsy) from her first marriage into her marriage with George. The two were carefully raised by George and Martha, later married, and each had children of their own. Unfortunately, tragedy struck, and both John and Patsy died early (by 1781). John left behind his widow and four young children ranging in age from infancy to six years old.
At the time, Washington was still deeply involved in guiding the American Revolution and tried unsuccessfully to convince Martha’s brother to raise the children. The young widow of John was unable to raise all four, so George and Martha adopted the two younger children: Nelly Parke Custis and George Washington Parke Custis, both of whom already were living at Mount Vernon.
Nelly lived with the Washingtons for twenty years, from the time of her birth in 1779 until 1799, the year of her marriage and of George Washington’s untimely death. She called George and Martha her “beloved parents whom I loved with so much devotion, to whose unceasing tenderness I was indebted for every good I possessed.”
Nelly was ten years old when Washington was called to the Presidency, and she grew to maturity during his two terms. During that time, she traveled with Washington and walked amidst the great foreign and domestic names of the day. On Washington’s retirement, she returned with the family to Mount Vernon. Nelly was energetic, spry, and lively, and was the joy of George Washington’s life. She served as a gracious hostess and entertained the frequent guests to Mount Vernon who visited the former President.
On Washington’s birthday in 1799, Nelly married Washington’s private secretary, Lawrence Lewis. They spent several months on an extended honeymoon, visiting friends and family across the country. On their return to Mount Vernon, she was pregnant and late that year gave birth to a daughter. A short few weeks later, on December 14, General Washington was taken seriously ill and died.
Clearly, Nelly was someone who knew the private and public life of her “father” very well. Therefore, Jared Sparks, in searching for information on Washington’s religious habits, dispatched a letter to Nelly, asking if she knew for sure whether George Washington indeed was a Christian. Within a week, she had replied to Sparks, and Sparks included her letter in Volume XII of Washington’s writings in the lengthy section on Washington’s religious habits. Of that specific letter, Jared Sparks explained:
I shall here insert a letter on this subject, written to me by a lady who lived twenty years in Washington’s family and who was his adopted daughter, and the granddaughter of Mrs. Washington. The testimony it affords, and the hints it contains respecting the domestic habits of Washington, are interesting and valuable.”
Woodlawn, 26 February, 1833.
Sir,
I received your favor of the 20th instant last evening, and hasten to give you the information, which you desire.
Truro [Episcopal] Parish is the one in which Mount Vernon, Pohick Church [the church where George Washington served as a vestryman], and Woodlawn [the home of Nelly and Lawrence Lewis] are situated. Fairfax Parish is now Alexandria. Before the Federal District was ceded to Congress, Alexandria was in Fairfax County. General Washington had a pew in Pohick Church, and one in Christ Church at Alexandria. He was very instrumental in establishing Pohick Church, and I believe subscribed [supported and contributed to] largely. His pew was near the pulpit. I have a perfect recollection of being there, before his election to the presidency, with him and my grandmother. It was a beautiful church, and had a large, respectable, and wealthy congregation, who were regular attendants.
He attended the church at Alexandria when the weather and roads permitted a ride of ten miles [a one-way journey of 2-3 hours by horse or carriage]. In New York and Philadelphia he never omitted attendance at church in the morning, unless detained by indisposition [sickness]. The afternoon was spent in his own room at home; the evening with his family, and without company. Sometimes an old and intimate friend called to see us for an hour or two; but visiting and visitors were prohibited for that day [Sunday]. No one in church attended to the services with more reverential respect. My grandmother, who was eminently pious, never deviated from her early habits. She always knelt. The General, as was then the custom, stood during the devotional parts of the service. On communion Sundays, he left the church with me, after the blessing, and returned home, and we sent the carriage back for my grandmother.
It was his custom to retire to his library at nine or ten o’clock where he remained an hour before he went to his chamber. He always rose before the sun and remained in his library until called to breakfast. I never witnessed his private devotions. I never inquired about them. I should have thought it the greatest heresy to doubt his firm belief in Christianity. His life, his writings, prove that he was a Christian. He was not one of those who act or pray, “that they may be seen of men” [Matthew 6:5]. He communed with his God in secret [Matthew 6:6].
My mother [Eleanor Calvert-Lewis] resided two years at Mount Vernon after her marriage [in 1774] with John Parke Custis, the only son of Mrs. Washington. I have heard her say that General Washington always received the sacrament with my grandmother before the revolution. When my aunt, Miss Custis [Martha’s daughter] died suddenly at Mount Vernon, before they could realize the event [before they understood she was dead], he [General Washington] knelt by her and prayed most fervently, most affectingly, for her recovery. Of this I was assured by Judge [Bushrod] Washington’s mother and other witnesses.
He was a silent, thoughtful man. He spoke little generally; never of himself. I never heard him relate a single act of his life during the war. I have often seen him perfectly abstracted, his lips moving, but no sound was perceptible. I have sometimes made him laugh most heartily from sympathy with my joyous and extravagant spirits. I was, probably, one of the last persons on earth to whom he would have addressed serious conversation, particularly when he knew that I had the most perfect model of female excellence [Martha Washington] ever with me as my monitress, who acted the part of a tender and devoted parent, loving me as only a mother can love, and never extenuating [tolerating] or approving in me what she disapproved of others. She never omitted her private devotions, or her public duties; and she and her husband were so perfectly united and happy that he must have been a Christian. She had no doubts, no fears for him. After forty years of devoted affection and uninterrupted happiness, she resigned him without a murmur into the arms of his Savior and his God, with the assured hope of his eternal felicity [happiness in Heaven]. Is it necessary that any one should certify, “General Washington avowed himself to me a believer in Christianity?” As well may we question his patriotism, his heroic, disinterested devotion to his country. His mottos were, “Deeds, not Words”; and, “For God and my Country.”
With sentiments of esteem,
I am, Nelly Custis-Lewis
George Washington’s adopted daughter, having spent twenty years of her life in his presence, declared that one might as well question Washington’s patriotism as question his Christianity. Certainly, no one questions his patriotism; so is it not rather ridiculous to question his Christianity? George Washington was a devout Episcopalian; and although as an Episcopalian he would not be classified as an outspoken and extrovert “evangelical” Founder as were Founding Fathers like Benjamin Rush, Roger Sherman, and Thomas McKean, nevertheless, being an Episcopalian makes George Washington no less of a Christian. Yet for the current revisionists who have made it their goal to assert that America was founded as a secular nation by secular individuals and that the only hope for America’s longevity rests in her continued secularism, George Washington’s faith must be sacrificed on the altar of their secularist agenda.
For much more on George Washington and the evidences of his strong faith, examine the following sources:
⦁ George Washington, The Writings of George Washington, Jared Sparks, editor (Boston: Ferdinand Andrews, Publisher, 1838), Vol. XII, pp. 399-411.
⦁ George Washington, The Religious Opinions of Washington, E. C. M’Guire, editor (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1836).
⦁ William Johnson, George Washington The Christian (1917).
⦁ William Jackson Johnstone, How Washington Prayed (New York: The Abingdon Press, 1932).
⦁ The Messages and Papers of the Presidents, James D. Richardson, editor (Published by the Authority of Congress, 1899), Vol. I, pp. 51-57 (1789), 64 (1789), 213-224 (1796), etc.
⦁ George Washington, Address of George Washington, President of the United States, Late Commander in Chief of the American Army, to the People of the United States, Preparatory to his Declination (Baltimore: George & Henry S. Keatinge, 1796), pp. 22-23.
⦁ George Washington, The Maxims of Washington (New York: D. Appleton and Co., 1855).
Acknowledgements and thanks for permission to reprint this article go to Wallbuilders: http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=127
Obama – America’s Most Biblically-Hostile U. S. President
(Note: This is the fourth in a series of articles on Obama vs. the Bible, demonstrating his preference for the tenets of political correctness and secular moral relativism over traditional Godly and Biblical values.)
America’s Most Biblically-Hostile U. S. President
David Barton – 02/29/2012
When one observes President Obama’s unwillingness to accommodate America’s four-century long religious conscience protection through his attempts to require Catholics to go against their own doctrines and beliefs, one is tempted to say that he is anti-Catholic. But that characterization would not be correct. Although he has recently singled out Catholics, he has equally targeted traditional Protestant beliefs over the past four years. So since he has attacked Catholics and Protestants, one is tempted to say that he is anti-Christian. But that, too, would be inaccurate. He has been equally disrespectful in his appalling treatment of religious Jews in general and Israel in particular. So perhaps the most accurate description of his antipathy toward Catholics, Protestants, religious Jews, and the Jewish nation would be to characterize him as anti-Biblical. And then when his hostility toward Biblical people of faith is contrasted with his preferential treatment of Muslims and Muslim nations, it further strengthens the accuracy of the anti-Biblical descriptor. In fact, there have been numerous clearly documented times when his pro-Islam positions have been the cause of his anti-Biblical actions.
Listed below in chronological order are (1) numerous records of his attacks on Biblical persons or organizations; (2) examples of the hostility toward Biblical faith that have become evident in the past three years in the Obama-led military; (3) a listing of his open attacks on Biblical values; and finally (4) a listing of numerous incidents of his preferential deference for Islam’s activities and positions, including letting his Islamic advisors guide and influence his hostility toward people of Biblical faith.
1. Acts of hostility toward people of Biblical faith:
April 2008 – Obama speaks disrespectfully of Christians, saying they “cling to guns or religion” and have an “antipathy to people who aren’t like them.” 1
February 2009 – Obama announces plans to revoke conscience protection for health workers who refuse to participate in medical activities that go against their beliefs, and fully implements the plan in February 2011. 2
April 2009 – When speaking at Georgetown University, Obama orders that a monogram symbolizing Jesus’ name be covered when he is making his speech. 3
May 2009 – Obama declines to host services for the National Prayer Day (a day established by federal law) at the White House. 4
April 2009 – In a deliberate act of disrespect, Obama nominated three pro-abortion ambassadors to the Vatican; of course, the pro-life Vatican rejected all three. 5
October 19, 2010 – Obama begins deliberately omitting the phrase about “the Creator” when quoting the Declaration of Independence – an omission he has made on no less than seven occasions. 6
November 2010 – Obama misquotes the National Motto, saying it is “E pluribus unum” rather than “In God We Trust” as established by federal law. 7
January 2011 – After a federal law was passed to transfer a WWI Memorial in the Mojave Desert to private ownership, the U. S. Supreme Court ruled that the cross in the memorial could continue to stand, but the Obama administration refused to allow the land to be transferred as required by law, and refused to allow the cross to be re-erected as ordered by the Court. 8
February 2011 – Although he filled posts in the State Department, for more than two years Obama did not fill the post of religious freedom ambassador, an official that works against religious persecution across the world; he filled it only after heavy pressure from the public and from Congress. 9
April 2011 – For the first time in American history, Obama urges passage of a non-discrimination law that does not contain hiring protections for religious groups, forcing religious organizations to hire according to federal mandates without regard to the dictates of their own faith, thus eliminating conscience protection in hiring. 10
August 2011 – The Obama administration releases its new health care rules that override religious conscience protections for medical workers in the areas of abortion and contraception. 11
November 2011 – Obama opposes inclusion of President Franklin Roosevelt’s famous D-Day Prayer in the WWII Memorial. 12
November 2011 – Unlike previous presidents, Obama studiously avoids any religious references in his Thanksgiving speech. 13
December 2011 – The Obama administration denigrates other countries’ religious beliefs as an obstacle to radical homosexual rights. 14
January 2012 – The Obama administration argues that the First Amendment provides no protection for churches and synagogues in hiring their pastors and rabbis. 15
February 2012 – The Obama administration forgives student loans in exchange for public service, but announces it will no longer forgive student loans if the public service is related to religion. 16
2. Acts of hostility from the Obama-led military toward people of Biblical faith:
June 2011 – The Department of Veterans Affairs forbids references to God and Jesus during burial ceremonies at Houston National Cemetery. 17
August 2011 – The Air Force stops teaching the Just War theory to officers in California because the course is taught by chaplains and is based on a philosophy introduced by St. Augustine in the third century AD – a theory long taught by civilized nations across the world (except America). 18
September 2011 – Air Force Chief of Staff prohibits commanders from notifying airmen of programs and services available to them from chaplains. 19
September 2011 – The Army issues guidelines for Walter Reed Medical Center stipulating that “No religious items (i.e. Bibles, reading materials and/or facts) are allowed to be given away or used during a visit.” 20
November 2011 – The Air Force Academy rescinds support for Operation Christmas Child, a program to send holiday gifts to impoverished children across the world, because the program is run by a Christian charity. 21
November 2011 – The Air Force Academy pays $80,000 to add a Stonehenge-like worship center for pagans, druids, witches and Wiccans. 22
February 2012 – The U. S. Military Academy at West Point disinvites three star Army general and decorated war hero Lieutenant General William G. (“Jerry”) Boykin (retired) from speaking at an event because he is an outspoken Christian. 23
February 2012 – The Air Force removes “God” from the patch of Rapid Capabilities Office (the word on the patch was in Latin: Dei). 24
February 2012 – The Army orders Catholic chaplains not to read a letter to parishioners that their archbishop asked them to read. 25
3. Acts of hostility toward Biblical values:
January 2009 – Obama lifts restrictions on U.S. government funding for groups that provide abortion services or counseling abroad, forcing taxpayers to fund pro-abortion groups that either promote or perform abortions in other nations. 26
January 2009 – President Obama’s nominee for deputy secretary of state asserts that American taxpayers are required to pay for abortions and that limits on abortion funding are unconstitutional. 27
March 2009 – The Obama administration shut out pro-life groups from attending a White House-sponsored health care summit. 28
March 2009 – Obama orders taxpayer funding of embryonic stem cell research. 29
March 2009 – Obama gave $50 million for the UNFPA, the UN population agency that promotes abortion and works closely with Chinese population control officials who use forced abortions and involuntary sterilizations. 30
May 2009 – The White House budget eliminates all funding for abstinence-only education and replaces it with “comprehensive” sexual education, repeatedly proven to increase teen pregnancies and abortions. 31 He continues the deletion in subsequent budgets. 32
May 2009 – Obama officials assemble a terrorism dictionary calling pro-life advocates violent and charging that they use racism in their “criminal” activities. 33
July 2009 – The Obama administration illegally extends federal benefits to same-sex partners of Foreign Service and Executive Branch employees, in direction violation of the federal Defense of Marriage Act. 34
September 16, 2009 – The Obama administration appoints as EEOC Commissioner Chai Feldblum, who asserts that society should “not tolerate” any “private beliefs,” including religious beliefs, if they may negatively affect homosexual “equality.” 35
July 2010 – The Obama administration uses federal funds in violation of federal law to get Kenya to change its constitution to include abortion. 36
August 2010 – The Obama administration Cuts funding for 176 abstinence education programs. 37
September 2010 – The Obama administration tells researchers to ignore a judge’s decision striking down federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. 38
February 2011 – Obama directs the Justice Department to stop defending the federal Defense of Marriage Act. 39
March 2011 – The Obama administration refuses to investigate videos showing Planned Parenthood helping alleged sex traffickers get abortions for victimized underage girls. 40
July 2011 – Obama allows homosexuals to serve openly in the military, reversing a policy originally instituted by George Washington in March 1778. 41
September 2011 – The Pentagon directs that military chaplains may perform same-sex marriages at military facilities in violation of the federal Defense of Marriage Act. 42
October 2011 – The Obama administration eliminates federal grants to the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops for their extensive programs that aid victims of human trafficking because the Catholic Church is anti-abortion. 43
4. Acts of preferentialism for Islam:
May 2009 – While Obama does not host any National Day of Prayer event at the White House, he does host White House Iftar dinners in honor of Ramadan. 44
April 2010 – Christian leader Franklin Graham is disinvited from the Pentagon’s National Day of Prayer Event because of complaints from the Muslim community. 45
April 2010 – The Obama administration requires rewriting of government documents and a change in administration vocabulary to remove terms that are deemed offensive to Muslims, including jihad, jihadists, terrorists, radical Islamic, etc. 46
August 2010 – Obama speaks with great praise of Islam and condescendingly of Christianity. 47
August 2010 – Obama went to great lengths to speak out on multiple occasions on behalf of building an Islamic mosque at Ground Zero, while at the same time he was silent about a Christian church being denied permission to rebuild at that location. 48
2010 – While every White House traditionally issues hundreds of official proclamations and statements on numerous occasions, this White House avoids traditional Biblical holidays and events but regularly recognizes major Muslim holidays, as evidenced by its 2010 statements on Ramadan, Eid-ul-Fitr, Hajj, and Eid-ul-Adha. 49
October 2011 – Obama’s Muslim advisers block Middle Eastern Christians’ access to the White House. 50
February 2012 – The Obama administration makes effulgent apologies for Korans being burned by the U. S. military, 51 but when Bibles were burned by the military, numerous reasons were offered why it was the right thing to do. 52
Many of these actions are literally unprecedented – this is the first time they have happened in four centuries of American history. The hostility of President Obama toward Biblical faith and values is without equal from any previous American president.
Endnotes
1. Sarah Pulliam Baily, “Obama: ‘They cling to guns or religion’,” Christianity Today, April 13, 2008.
2. Aliza Marcus, “Obama to Lift ‘Conscience’ Rule for Health Workers,” Bloomberg, February 27, 2009; Sarah Pulliam Baily, “Obama Admin. Changes Bush ‘Conscience’ Rule for Health Workers,” Christianity Today, February 18, 2011.
3. Jim Lovino, “Jesus Missing From Obama’s Georgetown Speech,” NBC Washington, April 17, 2009.
4. Johanna Neuman, “Obama end Bush-era National Prayer Day Service at White House,” Los Angeles Times, May 7, 2009.
5. Chris McGreal, “Vatican vetoes Barack Obama’s nominees for U.S. Ambassador,” The Guardian, April 14, 2009.
6. Meredith Jessup, “Obama Continues to Omit ‘Creator’ From Declaration of Independence,” The Blaze, October 19, 2010.
7. “Remarks by the President at the University of Indonesia in Jakarta, Indonesia,” The White House, November 10, 2010.
8. LadyImpactOhio, ” Feds sued by Veterans to allow stolen Mojave Desert Cross to be rebuilt,” Red State, January 14, 2011.
9. Marrianne Medlin, “Amid criticism, President Obama moves to fill vacant religious ambassador post,” Catholic News Agency, February 9, 2011; Thomas F. Farr, “Undefender of the Faith,” Foreign Policy, April 5, 2012.
10. Chris Johnson, “ENDA passage effort renewed with Senate introduction,” Washington Blade, April 15, 2011.
11. Chuck Donovan, “HHS’s New Health Guidelines Trample on Conscience,” Heritage Foundation, August 2, 2011.
12. Todd Starns, “Obama Administration Opposes FDR Prayer at WWII Memorial,” Fox News, November 4, 2011.
13. Joel Siegel, “Obama Omits God From Thanksgiving Speech, Riles Critics,” ABC News, November 25, 2011.
14. Hillary Rodham Clinton, “Remarks in Recognition of International Human Rights Day,” U.S. Department of State, December 6, 2011.
15. Ted Olson, “Church Wins Firing Case at Supreme Court,” Christianity Today, January 11, 2012.
16. Audrey Hudson, “Obama administration religious service for student loan forgiveness,” Human Events, February 15, 2012.
17. “Houston Veterans Claim Censorship of Prayers, Including Ban of ‘God’ and ‘Jesus’,” Fox News, June 29, 2011.
18. Jason Ukman, “Air Force suspends ethics course that used Bible passages that train missle launch officers,” Washington Post, August 2, 2011.
19. “Maintaining Government Neutrality Regarding Religion,” Department of the Air Force, September 1, 2011.
20. “Wounded, Ill, and Injured Partners in Care Guidelines,” Department of the Navy (accessed on February 29, 2012).
21. “Air Force Academy Backs Away from Christmas Charity,” Fox News Radio, November 4, 2011.
22. Jenny Dean, “Air Force Academy adapts to pagans, druids, witches and Wiccans,” Los Angeles Times, November 26, 2011.
23. Ken Blackwell, “Gen. Boykin Blocked At West Point,” cnsnews.com, February 1, 2012.
24. Geoff Herbert, ” Air Force unit removes ‘God’ from logo; lawmakers warn of ‘dangerous precedent’,” syracuse.com, February 9, 2012.
25. Todd Starnes, “Army Silences Catholic Chaplains,” Fox News Radio, February 6, 2012.
26. Jeff Mason and Deborah Charles, “Obama lifts restrictions on abortion funding,” Reuters, January 23, 2009.
27. “Obama pick: Taxpayers must fund abortions,” World Net Daily, January 27, 2009.
28. Steven Ertelt, “Pro-Life Groups Left Off Obama’s Health Care Summit List, Abortion Advocates OK,” LifeNews, March 5, 2009.
29. ” Obama Signs Order Lifting Restrictions on Stem Cell Research Funding,” Fox News, March 9, 2009.
30. Steven Ertelt, “ Obama Administration Announces $50 Million for Pro-Forced Abortion UNFPA,” LifeNews, March 26, 2009; Steven Ertelt, “President Barack Obama’s Pro-Abortion Record: A Pro-Life Compilation,” LifeNews, February 11, 2012.
31. Steven Ertelt, “Barack Obama’s Federal Budget Eliminates Funding for Abstinence-Only Education,” LifeNews, May 8, 2009.
32. Steven Ertelt, “Obama Budget Funds Sex Ed Over Abstinence on 16-1 Margin,” LifeNews, February 14, 2011.
33. Steven Ertelt, “Obama Admin Terrorism Dictionary Calls Pro-Life Advocates Violent, Racist,” LifeNews, May 5, 2009.
34. “Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies,” The White House, June 17, 2009.
35. Matt Cover, “Obama’s EEOC Nominee: Society Should ‘Not Tolerate Private Beliefs’ That ‘Adversely Affect’ Homosexuals,” cnsnews.com, January 18, 2010.
36. Tess Civantos, “White House Spent $23M of Taxpayer Money to Back Kenyan Constitution That Legalizes Abortion, GOP Reps Say,” Fox News, July 22, 2010.
37. Steven Ertelt, “Obama, Congress Cut Funding for 176 Abstinence Programs Despite New Study,” LifeNews, August 26, 2010.
38. Steven Ertelt, “President Barack Obama’s Pro-Abortion Record: A Pro-Life Compilation,” LifeNews, February 11, 2012.
39. Brian Montopoli, “Obama administration will no longer defend DOMA,” CBSNews, February 23, 2011.
40. Steven Ertelt, “Obama Admin Ignores Planned Parenthood Sex Trafficking Videos,” LifeNews, March 2, 2011.
41. Elisabeth Bumiller, “Obama Ends ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ Policy,” New York Times, July 22, 2011; George Washington, The Writings of George Washington, John C. Fitzpatrick, editor (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1934), Vol. XI, pp. 83-84, from General Orders at Valley Forge on March 14, 1778.
42. Luis Martinez, “Will Same Sex Marriages Pose a Dilemma for Military Chaplains?,” ABC News, October 12, 2011.
43. Jerry Markon, “Health, abortion issues split Obama administration and Catholic groups,” Washington Post, October 31, 2011.
44. Barack Obama, “ Remarks by the President at Iftar Dinner,” The White House, September 1, 2009; Kristi Keck, “ Obama tones down National Day of Prayer observance,” CNN, May 6, 2009; Dan Gilgoff, “ The White House on National Day of Prayer: A Proclamation, but No Formal Ceremony,” U.S. News, May 1, 2009.
45. “Franklin Graham Regrets Army’s Decision to Rescind Invite to Pentagon Prayer Service,” Fox News, April 22, 2010.
46. “Obama Bans Islam, Jihad From National Security Strategy Document,” Fox News, April 7, 2010; “Counterterror Adviser Defends Jihad as ‘Legitimate Tenet of Islam’,” Fox News, May 27, 2010; “‘Islamic Radicalism’ Nixed From Obama Document,” CBSNews, April 7, 2010.
47. Chuck Norris, “ President Obama: Muslim Missionary? (Part 2),” Townhall.com, August 24, 2010; Chuck Norris, “President Obama: Muslim Missionary?,” Townhall.com, August 17, 2010.
48. Barack Obama, “Remarks by the President at Iftar Dinner,” The White House, August 13, 2010; “Obama Comes Out in Favor of Allowing Mosque Near Ground Zero,” Fox News, August 13, 2010; Pamela Geller, “Islamic Supremacism Trumps Christianity at Ground Zero,” American Thinker, July 21, 2011.
49. “WH Fails to Release Easter Proclamation,” Fox Nation, April 25, 2011; “President Obama ignores most holy Christian holiday; AFA calls act intentional,” American Family Association (accessed on February 29, 2012).
50. “Report: Obama’s Muslim Advisers Block Middle Eastern Christians’ Access to the White House,” Big Peace (accessed on February 29, 2012).
51. Masoud Popalzai and Nick Paton Walsh, “ Obama apologizes to Afghanistan for Quran burning,” CNN, February 23, 2012; “USA/Afghanistan-Islamophobia: Pentagon official apologizes for Quran burning,” International Islamic News Agency (accessed on February 29, 2012).
52. “Military burns unsolicited Bibles sent to Afghanistan,” CNN, May 22, 2009.
(Reprinted with permission from Wallbuilders.com)
And let’s add one more very important one:
Obama Calls for the Repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act
Other Obama vs. the Bible articles:
Obama vs. the Bible – Abortion
Obama vs. the Bible – Redistribution of Wealth
Obama vs. the Bible – The Defense of Marriage Act and Gay Marriage
-The Righter Report
Our Battle for the Soul of America
Rabbi Spero is a radio talk show host, and president of Caucus for America. He can be reached at http://www.caucusforamerica.com.
People of faith look around our country at forms of behavior now accepted and wonder how is it possible that during their own lifetime things have so dramatically deteriorated. I refer not simply to the decadent sexual realities that have become so de rigueur but to the political positions and mouthings spewing from politicians who appear to care more about our enemies than the plight of our soldiers, and profess a worldview more internationalist than American.
The elitists in media, academia, Hollywood, government – especially the Courts – have united to reconstitute the Founding Fathers’ vision of a nation conceived in G-d We Trust, One Nation Under G-d, into a secular, hedonistic version of France and Sweden. They seem to be succeeding. Why?
It is because people of faith, along with patriotic Americans, have responded tepidly and not mightily, as is required in such a battle. Many remain silent and complacent because our goodwill and naiveté have stood in the way of our apprehending how those forces have had as their mission – for decades – the erasing of Judeo-Christian influence in American civic life and the diminution of real patriotism that is its twin.
What motivates these elitists is anti-Christianism and anti-historic Americanism. But to destroy America one must first destroy serious Protestantism, for the Judeo-Christian ethic is America’s founding rock. And to destroy America’s unique brand of Christianity, one must first destroy the specific American ethos that spawned it. Secularists have been successful for, apparently, they are more zealous in their crusade than we have been in our beliefs. Their religion is left/liberalism, fanatic liberalism: today’s neo-paganism. Animated by the fervor of paganism, they have managed, through intimidation, to disparage and squelch true public religiosity while spreading – missionary-like – their creed of secularism, hedonism.
Simply answering with love is no match for those using the stick of intimidation, weapons of mass cultural destruction (WMCDs). We, believing and patriotic Americans, were caught off guard since we assumed that the face arrayed against Christianity and love of country would be an ugly face. But that is not so, for throughout history pagans have most often been charming neighbors. No doubt those false prophets who followed the wicked King Ahab and Jezebel dined in ancient Judea’s finest restaurants, attended the theater, dressed well, were fashionable, and comported themselves with ingratiating, amiable manners. Look at the French!
Were not the ancient pagans who extolled beauty and grace charming? The elites of their day? The face of paganism in ancient high society as well as today’s is often a pleasant one and, therefore, dangerously disarming. Rarely is it the face of Genghis Kahn. Pagan secularists did not want to kill their neighbors, rather invite them into their multi-cultural, pantheistic circles. Retain your God, they proclaimed, so long as your God assumes his pitiful position among the many gods and cultures. Continue your Americanism and Christianity here in America, the multiculturalists assert, so long as it is not dominant, simply a limp ingredient in the overriding multi-cultural edifice.
It would be silly in a modern society to frame an argument in language speaking of multi-gods, pantheism. The appeal is made, therefore, in terms of multiculturalism, a code-phrase, an undertaking for diminishing the Old-Line Protestant Christianity that produced America’s historic culture. Diversity in different segments of society is enriching. The intent, however, of professional multiculturalists is to weaken America’s civic culture by relegating its fount, Old Testament Christianity, to a low rung; by ordering Christians of Faith to the back of the bus.
As in any culture war, it is won by those who define and, therefore, command, the moral language. American liberals did this by employing terminology they knew good-willed people – us – would readily accept: compassion, sensitivity, inclusion, tolerance. Especially tolerance, for who wishes to be called intolerant, the deadliest of the neo-pagan seven sins. Limitless tolerance – a fanatic tolerance – is the very essence of paganism. It accepts everything, including decadence. Out of a desire for appearing good – and we have allowed liberals to decide who in this society is considered “good” — we’ve been intimidated into accepting that which our forbearers, even non-religious, would never have accepted.
Every person needs a doctrine or set of guiding principles from which to order his life. Historically, ours derived from the Old and New Testament. Rejecting the constraints demanded by the Bible, liberals created their own deities, mirroring, almost to a tee, the virtues assigned to respective pagan gods. They worship these deities with an absolutism surpassing, often, our own to our G-d. While we’ve allowed ourselves to be intimidated or embarrassed into silence, fanatic liberals have never flinched from relentless public chanting of their deities: “separation of church and state,” “racism,” “non-judgmentalism” – except when judging Christians of Faith. Sin and virtue in our society have been re-categorized to reflect a hierarchy of liberal values instead of the ones enunciated in the Bible and displayed by America’s past everyday citizens.
Liberals have instituted a new type of Replacement Theology, even corrupting mainline Protestant and Catholic denominations. What one hears from the pulpits today in many Jewish temples is akin to what was heard at the Temple of Zeus. It is delivered by clergymen who are modern-day versions of the ancient False Prophets. America’s liberals have co-opted the moral language. We are to tolerate all lifestyles, except that of the traditional family. Tolerate every “religion,” except Evangelical Christianity. Tolerate every culture, except that of the unique American civilization. We are to have compassion for America’s enemies but be “ho-hum” about our soldiers and those beheaded by our enemies. We must show compassion to criminals while caring not how victims and society live in fear. We must be sensitive to the needs of those following Haitian witchcraft, Ramadan and Kwanzaa, but do our best to prohibit nativity scenes and crosses. Sensitivity to every group, not however to white, Christian evangelicals – and their wives. We must never be racist, but bigotry is welcome when denigrating Southerners.
Equality should mean no double standards, yet certain segments of society are exused for behavior that are not tolerated when done by the mainstream. In the name of anti-racism, we are asked to accept reverse racism. For example, affirmative action is forced on a society that clearly wishes to reward merit and character rather than color of skin. We must be inclusive, except when it comes to excluding principled practicing Christians of Faith who go before the Senate Judiciary Committee as nominees for Federal judgeships. The A.C.L.U., the legal arm of pagan America, has convinced us all that George Washington fought at Valley Forge to found a nation predicated on “separation of church and state.” Unfortunately, they have succeeded.
The truth is the A.C.L.U. never believed in separation of church and state as much as using it as a hammer to dampen Christianity, its symbols, its values. The proof? In the last two years it has taken up the cause of defending Islamic “religious rights” – from wearing full-length burkas at community swimming pools to public school recitings from the Koran representing Islamic figures, to its silence on the issue of five-times-a-day-call- to-prayer loudspeaker announcements from mosques on public streets. The A.C.L.U. says, “those are cultural expressions, not religious.” Yet, Santa Claus, carols, nativity scenes, and crosses in military cemeteries…
The secular Left is purposely elevating Islam as a means to neutralize Christianity. It does so for it knows that the only way to destroy the American we’ve known is by destroying the Christianity, the Judeo-Christian ethic, which created it and made it great. It realizes that what stands in its way of molding America into a libertine European country, and a socialist “utopia” with them at the controlling helm, is Evangelical Christianity.
Liberals are today rewriting our religious heritage by now referring to “our” Judeo-Christian-Islamic heritage, as if George Washington and John Adams spoke Arabic. When one observes the sheer absurdity of how these terms are today – through political correctness – employed and enforced, the phrase that comes to mind is absolutism, extremism. That liberals don’t question their reckless application of those terms is a sign of their blind faith. They are the religious Left.
When one beholds the mean-spiritedness behind each of these “virtues” created to exclude Christians and true-blue Americanism, the intent is obviously to destroy. What began as the goal of marginalizing Christianity has evolved into a desire to vanquish, from within, John Adams’s America. For the two are symbiotic. For the neo-Communists to control all power, they know they must first topple the twin pillars. The Jews and Christians of antiquity knew paganism for what it was and fought it. We, however, have been blindsided, and suckered.
We have compartmentalized our lives by retreating into the private all the while allowing the purveyors of secularism to reign over the public. We now find that the public domain controls our private realms. In the process, we have almost forfeited America, the America extant from the Pilgrims’ arrival until 1963. In our defense, we had assumed that paganism would attack the church frontally. It did not. Instead, it cleverly came through the door of government, courts, schools, our institutions. The media and press facilitated it, collaborated. We expected paganism to ride at us in blatant anti-religious garb. Instead, it arrived on a Trojan horse, a benighted political horse: liberalism.
We had thought that those living within the geographic boundaries called America were brothers, sometimes with slight differing views. We’ve learned, however, that country is more than geography but a set of core beliefs and values. Had what is being done to America today from those within its borders been enacted by people outside its shores, we would have recognized it as an invasion with intent to destroy our way of life, and liberties. We would have raised our swords. It is time we recognize that there are battalions living in America who, as if foreigners, share nothing of our American core beliefs and values. They are not brothers. To them, we are an enemy.
Even some who hail from American blue-blood families have tossed aside their heritage for internationalism, preferring to be citizens of the world. We’ve seen this phenomenon before. During ancient Israel’s Second Commonwealth, there arose (circa 185 B.C. – 10 B.C.) an elitist, pagan class called Hellenists. Though some were from Judea’s ancient families, they chose internationalism over the security and indigenous culture of their people, Israel. They abandoned the G-d of Israel for the culture and gods of the world. Internationalism has always been the enemy of David’s God.
No wonder a recent poll showed that Evangelicals are by far this nation’s most patriotic. The Hebrew term for paganism, idol worship, false gods, is avodah zarah. The ancients who engaged in avodah zarah, especially the Canaanites, never worshipped the objects per se but the ideal each object represented: excessive passion, self-indulgence, lust, nature, environment, gluttony, pantheism. These idols, especially in pre-Mosaic Canaan, represented the base in man, not the Divine. The pull and power of idol worship was enormous, as is neo-paganism today. One of the most popular and seductive gods was Baal, the Molech god. Molech, a fire god, demanded the sacrifice of a mother’s child. It was a fashion of the time, just as is today the sacrifice of one’s fetus to Mother feminism: abortion at any time, for any reason, even partial birth abortion. It is the sacrament. It has become the sophisticated mantra of our day that “a woman’s right to her own body” constitutes enlightenment.
Are we any less guilty of fashion-obsession than were the ancient fashion-conscious idol worshippers? How many in America are, like Elijah of old, willing to endure the out-casting “high society” confers on those standing up to today’s False Prophets of Liberalism? In Islamic society, “suicide bombing” is the sacrifice more and more mothers are proud to offer to the god Allah. Imams have elevated the purposeful death of a woman’s child for the sake of Allah as a surefire step to social standing and prominence. This, too, is Baal worship, paganism. (This itself affirms how all “holy books” are not equal, and that the true G-d we worship is defined not simply by being One but by His teachings. Their god is not our G-d.)
The fact that many on the Left, in Europe and America, have begun establishing “Endowment/Charity Funds to subsidize these “martyr” mothers is indicative of the symbiosis developing between the Left and Islam. You may ask, what unites these western sophisticates with Middle East barbarians? Anti-Christianity, anti-Americanism, paganism: the devotion to avodah zarah.
Unfortunately, we, too, have become seduced by a form of Molechism. It is the sacrifice of our children to an absurd, neo-morality. In the name of neo-morality we ask our soldiers not to fire until Islamic terrorists first fire on them. We ask our soldiers to go house-to-house in search of terrorists instead of bombing from above. The reason being: to “spare the innocents.” Look how Israel unnecessarily forfeited 23 soldiers in Jenin by sending them house-to-house in search of Arab terrorists so that “innocents” – who all wished them dead – could be spared from helicopter bombing from above. Many Leftist Israelis, as liberals here in America, felt a “spiritual” joy that their own were sacrificed in behalf of the new “higher” morality.
While historically the U.S. tried to protect non-combatants, when did it become the goal of war to let our own truly innocent die so as to spare the enemy’s “innocents?” The morality the Bible demands for war is quite simple and direct: Do not plunder, rape and ransack for the satisfaction of lust; rather, limit war’s purpose to the defense and security of country. Protecting one’s soldiers was considered paramount. Sacrificing them on the altar of “look how nice we are” was and is never Biblical, instead a form of self-worship. In fact, a secular newspaper editorialized how wonderful this neo-morality is for without it, the editor asks, “What gives meaning to us in this land?” Well, religious Christians and Jews already have meaning in their lives, thank you. Only a secularist is forced to fashion a neo-morality to supply personal meaning. Only someone who doesn’t believe in his own country’s way of life and ethos would require ersatz meanings to life.
Michael Lerner, one of this country’s most vocal and influential Leftists, Hillary Clinton’s former guru, announced that the United States must create a “Politics of Meaning.” I’m certain that Rev. Pat Robertson and Rev. Jerry Falwell and Brit Hume have no such need! The ubiquitous “compassion” phrase has been invoked in numerous editorials to justify the unnecessary deaths of our own military men and women so as to spare Moslem “innocents.” Only a twisted pagan view of what constitutes true compassion could make such an assertion. But even good men, religious men, have fallen sway to the new morality and definition of compassion being shoved down our throats.
The political correctness police have begun their indoctrination. It is hard to defy this brainwashing even while the heart murmurs “It is not so.” To me, none of this is genuine compassion, rather a disregard for the sanctity of our young soldiers’ lives. It places a higher value on others than our own. It is perverse internationalism, a disease infecting many in high places.
There is a 2,500-year-old Midrash (Jewish Bible commentary) that reflects on the civic nature of Biblical Sodom. It states: “In Sodom good was called bad; evil was labeled worthy. Cruelty was forced on those deserving compassion, while compassion was extended to the cruel. The pleas from victims of crime went unheeded because of the ‘rights’ granted perpetrators.” Sodom, as the Bible tells us, was a garden-like city and prosperous. Nonetheless, it was pagan. While paganism boasts of “loving life and all its pleasures,” at its heart it is suicidal, dark, full of self-hate and death-wish. It is cynical, bored. Psychologists might call this “compensation.”
Today’s extreme liberalism exhibits that nihilism, imbuing within its adherents a subconscious emotion longing for the death of its own American civilization. Rarely do societies have a chance to relive the actual Biblical experience. We do! In the form of extreme liberalism, high-society paganism in America and Europe is marching to conquer Biblical values.
If we wish to transmit to our children and grandchildren the religious heritage we cherish as well as the Americanism we inherited from our forefathers, we must fight now – in the public domain. We cannot afford to lose. We cannot turn the other check, for our Battle is for the Soul of America. As Elijah said: “Who is for G-d stand up: Come.” Now, before it is too late!
(Reprinted with permission from Rabbi Aryeh Spero)
– The Righter Report
Obama vs. the Bible – Abortion
This is the third in a series of articles on Obama vs. the Bible, demonstrating his preference for the tenets of political correctness and secular moral relativism over traditional Godly and Biblical values.
First up, a brief recap of Obama’s voting record on abortion.
Obama on Abortion: In 1997, Obama voted in the Illinois Senate against SB 230, a bill designed to prevent partial-birth abortions. In the US Senate, Obama has consistently voted to expand embryonic stem cell research. He has voted against requiring minors who get out-of-state abortions to notify their parents. The National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) gives Obama a 100% score on his pro-choice voting record in the Senate for 2005, 2006, and 2007. On March 30, 2001, Obama was the only Illinois senator who rose to speak against a bill that would have protected babies who survived late term labor-induced abortion. Obama rose to object that if the bill passed, and a nine-month-old fetus survived a late-term labor-induced abortion was deemed to be a person who had a right to live, then the law would “forbid abortions to take place.” (Source: Obama Nation, by Jerome Corsi, p.238-239 Aug 1, 2008)
When asked if he believed if life begins at conception, Obama replied:
“This is something that I have not come to a firm resolution on. I think it’s very hard to know what that means, when life begins. Is it when a cell separates? Is it when the soul stirs? So I don’t presume to know the answer to that question.” (Source: 2008 Democratic Compassion Forum at Messiah College Apr 13, 2008)
And in a classic display of Biblical ignorance, Obama said the following during an interview with Pastor Rick Warren at the Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, California:
“…whether you’re looking at it from a theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that question with specificity, you know, is above my pay grade.”
Have you never read Psalm 139:13 or Jeremiah 1:5, Mr. President?
In another egregious exhibition of contempt for the sanctity of life, President Obama remarked:
“Look, I got two daughters — 9 years old and 6 years old,” he said. “I am going to teach them first about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby. I don’t want them punished with an STD at age 16, so it doesn’t make sense to not give them information.” – Barack Obama
So, not only does Obama consider a precious, unborn baby in the womb as “punishment” for its mother, but he callously places the baby in the same general category as an STD – both “punishments.” The gist of his remarks makes it quite obvious that it’s better in Obama’s mind to exterminate the innocent baby instead.
It’s been said before and I’ll say it again: You don’t kill an innocent unborn baby for the sins or personal convenience of its parents. If they don’t want the baby give it up for adoption.
It’s no secret that Barack Obama claims to be a Christian. “I’m a Christian by choice,” the president said. “I think my public service is part of that effort to express my Christian faith.” Notice that President Obama’s public service actions are based on his Christian beliefs. Or so he claims. The evidence, though, is to the contrary.
Since Roe vs. Wade in 1973, and for the last four decades, the lives of some 50 million unborn American citizens, teachers, scientists, health care professionals, and taxpayers – enough souls to actually fund, in full, the Pelosi, Reid, and Obama Health Care bill, have been snuffed out on the altar of personal convenience and political correctness. And while many Republicans and Independents have likewise abrogated their moral responsibilities to the unborn, their moral turpitude pales in comparison to the dedicated left wing pro-infanticide crowd, and Barack Obama in particular.
What does the Bible say about when life begins?
“And if men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she has a miscarriage, yet there is no further injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman’s husband may demand of him; and he shall pay as the judges decide. But if there is further injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life.” (Exodus 21:22-23)
Straight from the Jewish Torah, God immediately affirms the value of human life in a mother’s womb.
God knows your name before you are born: “Before I was born the LORD called me; from my mother’s womb he has spoken my name.” – Isaiah 49:1
Next, a divinely appointed prophet from the womb:
Jeremiah 1:5 – ‘Before I formed you in the womb I knew you,
before you were born I set you apart;
I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.”
Other prophets and Biblical personalities ordained from their mother’s wombs:
Samson: Then the woman came and told her husband, saying, “A man of God came to me and his appearance was like the appearance of the angel of God, very awesome. And I did not ask him where he came from, nor did he tell me his name. “But he said to me, `Behold, you shall conceive and give birth to a son, and now you shall not drink wine or strong drink nor eat any unclean thing, for the boy shall be a Nazirite to God from the womb to the day of his death.'” (Judges 13:6-7, see also Judges 16:17)
John the Baptist: “For he will be great in the sight of the Lord, and he will drink no wine or liquor; and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit, while yet in his mother’s womb.” (Luke 1:15)
Jesus, the Son of God: Then the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bring forth a Son, and shall call His name JESUS. He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. And He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of His kingdom there will be no end.” – Luke chapter 1
The Apostle Paul: “But when He who had set me apart, even from my mother’s womb, and called me through His grace, was pleased…” (Galatians 1:15)
It is clear in scripture that in some way, God creates life in a mother’s womb.
Psalm 139:13 – ‘For you created my inmost being;
you knit me together in my mother’s womb.’
Of course, the question for Barack and Michelle Obama and the pro-abortion crowd, is: What divine insight does the pro-abortion crowd think they have to where they can destroy in a mother’s womb that which God is somehow instrumental in creating? Mr. President? Michelle Obama? Anyone?
Those were future prophets to the nations and the Savior of mankind in the womb. But the pro-abortion crowd wants to pretend that instead of babies with divine plans, they were nothing more than unviable tissue masses. Well, God is not fooled, and neither are those who read and respect God’s word.
President Obama says that abortion needs to be more rare. Which begs the question – if there’s nothing wrong with abortion, then why does it need to be more rare? Mr. President? And if there is something wrong with the practice of abortion, then why isn’t the President pro-life? Can anyone answer that?
Some might ask, “But what if the cause of the pregnancy was from rape or incest?” Examiner.com notes,
“There are numerous responses that could be given to that question, but one thing that needs to be acknowledged is that rape and incest account for less than one percent of all reported abortions. Those that use that argument would like you to believe that it is the most common reason for a woman having an abortion. Actually, the most common reason given for having an abortion is because the child is “unwanted” or “inconvenient.” That reasoning accounts for ninety-three percent of all reported abortions. In other words, ninety-three percent of abortions stem from the rejection of personal responsibility.”
It is the avoidance of personal responsibility that is one of the chief hallmarks of liberalism.
Infanticide down through the Ages
When Moses the Lawgiver was conceived, they killed the babies (Exodus chapter 1). When Jesus was born, they killed the babies (Matthew chapter 2). And now that the Lord’s return is imminent, they’re killing the babies again, only this time by the tens of millions.
The fact is that God has a plan for everyone, no matter how insignificant they may appear to be. The Bible is full of personal accounts of people who trusted in God, and who then went on to achieve great things. God respects life. America should also.
Mother Teresa on abortion:
“America needs no words from me to see how your decision in Roe v. Wade has deformed a great nation. The so-called right to abortion has pitted mothers against their children and women against men. It has sown violence and discord at the heart of the most intimate human relationships. It has aggravated the derogation of the father’s role in an increasingly fatherless society. It has portrayed the greatest of gifts – a child – as a competitor, an intrusion, and an inconvenience. It has nominally accorded mothers unfettered dominion over the independent lives of their physically dependent sons and daughters”
“But I feel that the greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a war against the child – a direct killing of the innocent child – murder by the mother herself. And if we accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another?”
Now, a question for pro-Obama Christians and Jews: Why do you vote for and support a man who condones, defends, and enables the horrendous act of infanticide against the innocent unborn? Is that not one of the most grievous practices in the whole universe – to rip the innocent unborn from a mother’s womb? A place where a baby is supposed to be nurtured and protected? But where instead the mother turns the helpless infant over for execution? And you support that man? The Word of God doesn’t mean anything to you?
“The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president.” – author unknown
And so today, the slaughter of the innocents continues.
America needs to reverse course and protect and respect the innocent unborn. There’s no other way around it. For the God who established America can darn well take our country from us and bring divine Judgment to our shores. Don’t think he won’t. Thomas Jefferson once noted:
“Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; and that His justice cannot sleep forever.” (Notes on the State of Virginia, 1781)
We are treading on very thin ice and there surely will be a personal and national price to pay for our continued, callous disregard of innocent life.
In November of 2012, protect life and vote Barack Obama and the pro-abortion congressmen and women of Capitol Hill out of office.
May God have mercy on our country.
Reference: Barack Obama on Abortion
Graphic images of aborted babies
Other Obama vs. the Bible articles:
Obama – America’s Most Biblically-Hostile U.S. President
Obama vs. the Bible – Redistribution of Wealth
Obama vs. the Bible – The Defense of Marriage Act and Gay Marriage
-The Righter Report
Obama vs. the Bible – The Defense of Marriage Act and Gay Marriage
This commentary starts a new series of articles on Obama vs. the Bible that will continue on until Election Day 2012.
It’s no secret that Barack Obama claims to be a Christian. “I’m a Christian by choice,” the president said. “I think my public service is part of that effort to express my Christian faith.” Notice that President Obama’s public service actions are based on his Christian beliefs. Or so he claims.
But what does Barack Obama really believe, and does it coincide with what we find in the Bible? A close examination reveals that what Barack Obama believes and practices are quite often contrary to what Scripture teaches. Traditional, Biblically-based marriage is one such example.
For example, the Bible teaches that marriage is a covenant instituted by God (Malachi 2:14), and is a union between one man and one woman (Genesis 2). When God created a “helpmate” for Adam, it was a woman (Genesis 2:18-24) whom God created. Thereafter, Adam and Eve became one flesh. The Scriptures are clear that a Biblical Marriage is strictly between one man and one woman. For additional information on traditional, Biblical marriage visit here. Notice in the link that one of the purposes of a Biblical marriage is to create Godly offspring.
Concerning traditional marriage, on July 19, 2011 President Barack Obama publicly acknowledged his opposition to the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) – whereby the federal government defines marriage as a legal union between one man and one woman. The law was passed by an overwhelming majority in both houses of Congress and was signed into Law by President Bill Clinton on September 21, 1996.
Evidently, based on his own ideas of political correctness, Barack Obama has turned his back on Christian values and the approved will of the people of the United States and arbitrarily declared The Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional. Amazing. It’s amazing since this was a personal declaration of Barack Obama and not an approved judgment or ruling handing down by the Supreme Court of the United States. What’s more, Obama’s sworn U.S. Attorney General, Eric Holder, is refusing to defend DOMA in legal challenges. That’s correct, President Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder, who swore to uphold the laws of the United States of America, are now arbitrarily violating the law and violating the trust of the American people. Why? According to the New York Times, “Now President Obama says his views on same-sex marriage are ‘evolving,’ and as he runs for re-election he is seeking support from gay donors who want to know where he stands.” Obama is already on record as approving of gay civil unions.
In a new development, The Huffington Post reported the following on April 9, 2012:
President Barack Obama’s Minnesota campaign announced Monday that Obama opposes a state ballot initiative that would define marriage as between one man and one woman.
Vice President Joseph Biden is equally Biblically-challenged:
“I am absolutely comfortable with the fact that men marrying men, women marrying women, and heterosexual men and women marrying another are entitled to the same exact rights, all the civil rights, all the civil liberties,” he told NBC’s David Gregory on Meet The Press
Update from Fox News, May 9, 2012: President Obama on Wednesday endorsed same-sex marriages, becoming the first sitting U.S. president to take that position following days of speculation about his “evolving” stance on the issue. The president used a hastily called TV interview to make his position clear.
“At a certain point, I’ve just concluded that for me personally, it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same-sex couples should be able to get married,” Obama told ABC News.
He sure didn’t make that decision based on the Bible.
What’s more, now Obama is working to undermine traditional marriage and DOMA. On Friday, February 21, 2013 the Obama administration asked the Supreme Court to strike down the federal law defining marriage as a union between only a man and a woman.
Obama Calls for the Repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act
What an absolute abomination.
Do we need to remind Obama, Biden, and their politically correct, liberal contemporaries that sexual unions between two men or two women are sinful and not ordained by God? Are there any Biblically-based leaders left in the Democratic Party?
Let’s review the Scriptures on homosexual sin and see what the Bible says on the subject:
Leviticus 18:22 – “Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.”
Leviticus 20:13 – “If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.”
Romans 1:26-27 – “Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.”
1 Corinthians 6:9-10 – “Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.”
1 Timothy 1:8-10 – “But we know that the law is good if one uses it lawfully, knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine…”
Jude 7 – “In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire.”
There’s no gay marriage approved in the Old Testament; no gay marriage approved in the New Testament; no gay sexual relations approved anywhere in the Bible. Just the opposite – gay sexual relations are condemned in both testaments. God is consistent on that. And no gay marriage covenant is seen anywhere in Scripture.
Some may say Jesus never spoke out against homosexuality. That’s not really true. Jesus is God. As God, Jesus is the one who gave Moses the Levitical law against gay sexual relations to begin with; and he’s the one who inspires all Scripture (2 Timothy 3:16), including prohibitions against gay sexual relations in Romans 1:26-27 and I Corinthians 6:9-10, etc.
It’s also worth noting that Jesus didn’t mention wife beating or other sins such as pedophilia either, and there are not many folks who would argue he approved of those behaviors. So Jesus was under no obligation to reiterate the moral laws against homosexual sin that already existed, unless there were clarifications to be made.
Now, does Obama not realize that there are negative consequences of sin that can effect an entire nation? Did he forget that the sin of one man – Achan (note Joshua 7) – resulted in the deaths of 36 fighting men? And that the sin of King David resulted in a plague that killed 70,000 Israelites (2 Samuel 24:15)? Has Obama never read Deuteronomy chapter 28 – the Blessings of Obedience to the Lord and the Consequences of Disobedience? Please remember too that when nations other than Israel got out of line with the Lord, they came under judgment also. So God’s laws and judgments are not just for Israel, or just for America either. That’s why Obama’s unbiblical decisions are a threat to America.
In conclusion, President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, Attorney General Eric Holder, and the Democratic leadership have turned their collective backs on Godly principles and the lawful will of the American people in order to oppose the traditional Defense of Marriage Act. Biblically-based Christians (and Jews and others who base their beliefs on the Bible) need to strongly take this into account in the next Presidential Election, and vote President Obama, Vice President Biden, and Attorney General Holder and Company out of office. And if their Pastors had any moral convictions based on Biblical principles, they ought to throw these apostates out of their respective churches as well.
Other Obama vs. the Bible articles:
Obama – America’s Most Biblically-Hostile U.S. President
Obama vs. the Bible – Abortion
Obama vs. the Bible – Redistribution of Wealth
– The Righter Report
-
Archives
- March 2022 (2)
- December 2021 (1)
- June 2021 (1)
- April 2021 (1)
- March 2021 (1)
- December 2020 (1)
- June 2020 (2)
- May 2020 (1)
- April 2020 (1)
- January 2018 (1)
- July 2017 (1)
- March 2017 (1)
-
Categories
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
The Righter Report 