American Evangelical Christians Are Being Labeled As “Extremists” And “Hate Grou

[Mark]

Hillary Clinton: Right to Abortions More Important Than Religious Liberty

Recently, Hillary Clinton's comments on abortion rights have stirred controversy from both the pro-life crowd and, in a more far-reaching aspect, virtually everyone who takes their religious beliefs seriously, from Christians to Muslims to Jews and beyond.

While speaking to a Women of the World summit in late April, she offered this nugget of wisdom:

"Far too many women are denied access to reproductive health care and safe childbirth, and laws don't count for much if they're not enforced. Rights have to exist in practice—not just on paper. Laws have to be backed up with resources and political will. And deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed." [emphasis added]

While many have railed against her comments suggesting that religious beliefs should be subservient to policymakers desirous of easier paths to abortion, Answers in Genesis founder Ken Ham recently threw his hat in the ring.

 "Hillary Clinton's comments garnered a lot of attention from Christians across the nation who were understandably and rightly upset that Clinton would even suggest such a thing," he said in his blog. But according to one writer he cites, her words might not be too far off from what's already happening in the Christian community.

"Religious freedom has never been under more scrutiny, nor has it ever been more acceptable to personally attack Christians and their livelihoods for their beliefs," he quotes the writer, A.D.P. Efferson, as saying. "There is no longer any institutional refuge for the religious. It is not at all surprising, then, that significant numbers of Christians have learned to adapt as a result."

In the cited article, originally appearing in The Federalist, Efferson argues that abortion becoming widely accepted by Christians is not at all absurd. Pointing to the considerable increase in young evangelicals' support for same-sex marriage in recent years, she argues that mounting societal and political pressure, coupled with the reduction of the usual religious freedom protections this country has afforded believers for centuries, could very well see a similar acquiescence on the issue of abortion.

"As the church continues to reject God's clear words in Genesis (e.g., teaching of the sanctity of human life, as we are image bearers of God) we are seeing more and more Christians reject other parts of the Bible," Ham argues. "If we can just reinterpret what God's Word says in Genesis, why not reinterpret what marriage means? After all, the definition of marriage comes from Genesis! And why not reinterpret when life begins and what murder is? After all, the value of life is grounded in our being created in God's image, which comes directly out of Genesis!"

He also points to the Reproductive Heath Non-Discrimination Amendment Act (RHNDA), which just became law in the nation's capital, noting the curious timing of the two events.

"Reportedly, his law could now effectively force religious—even pro-life—organizations to hire someone who agreed with abortion and force them to provide insurance coverage for their employees to get an abortion!" Ham states. "This is a direct infringement and attack on the freedom of conscience of pro-life people, and it infringes on the guaranteed First Amendment rights of freedom of speech, freedom of religion and freedom of association."

Warning against the continued degradation of religious truth in the modern church, Ham writes, "Unless the church repents and renews its commitment to God's Word and its authority in all areas, we will only continue to see Christians accept sinful man's ideas and accommodate God's Word to fit them."

Efferson's closing words are equally cautionary.

"My hope is that profoundly religious people will recognize what candidate Clinton's suggestion portends," she writes. "My fear is that the profoundly religious will acquiesce, because they have done so before."

http://www.charismanews.com/politics/49650-hillary-clinton-right-to-abortions-more-important-than-religious-liberty

[Mark]

Is Prison the Fate for Christians Deemed Intolerant? Religious Freedom Champion Frank Wolf Asks Harvard Audience

Religious freedom champion and former Congressman Frank Wolf warned a Harvard audience that freedom of conscience is endangered in the United States and conservative Christians may have to engage in civil disobedience because their views are considered intolerant.

"When tolerance is demanded, when orthodox Christianity is deemed intolerant and when government and even society fails to extend tolerance to people of faith, we are headed down a perilous path," he said.

Wolf, who retired last year after serving 34 years in Congress, delivered the May 7 address, "After Hobby Lobby: What is Caesar's and What is God's?" as part of an event hosted by the Petrie-Flom Center and the Ambassador John L. Loeb Jr. Initiative on Religious Freedom and Its Implications at Harvard's Center for American Political Studies.

His main point was that freedom of conscience has long been understood as important for religious freedom, but recently there has been a trend of violating the conscience protections of conservative Christians, particularly over the issues of abortion and marriage.

Citing a resolution passed by the Continental Congress to protect the conscience rights of pacifists, Wolf argued, "our conscience is not ultimately allegiant to the state, but to something, and for many people, Someone, higher." And this is important "because if our conscience belongs to the state, the state can choose to violate it or compromise it at will."

Recently, however, there has been a "subtle but insidious trend" in which the government is expanding into areas that are more likely to infringe upon conscience rights. This trend was "at the heart" of the recent Supreme Court case involving Hobby Lobby, a Christian-owned craft supply chain, and the Obama administration's birth control mandate. While the owners of Hobby Lobby, the Green family, are pro-life, the Obama administration sought to require them to pay for health insurance coverage for contraceptive pills that could cause an abortion.

Citing a Yuval Levin article, Wolf argued "we are witnessing the imposition of a new state religion" called "progressive liberalism."

Wolf also pointed to opposition to Religious Freedom Restoration Acts as part of the trend.

In particular, he pointed out the inconsistency of corporation leaders, such as Apple CEO Tim Cook, who opposed RFRA, a law to protect conscience rights, while exercising their own conscience rights. Apple removed from its products an app by the pro-life and pro-marriage group The Manhattan Declaration. Plus, Cook opposed Indiana's RFRA over supposed "fairness" toward gays while doing business with Arab countries where homosexuality is illegal, and China, a nation that "has one of the worst overall human rights records."

"Freedom of conscience is good for all," he said. "If Apple and other companies want to protect their own rights, they ought also to protect those of others. If they wish to run their companies according to their conviction, they ought not deny other companies the same right."

Wolf's third example of religious conscience infringement was the trend of Christian groups on college campuses being forced to choose between leaving or remaining faithful to their beliefs.

"These legal realities and emerging policy norms, coupled with fears of compromised livelihoods and tarnished reputations, risk driving people of faith out of the public square," he said.

Wolf hopes, though, that in the face of these religious freedom infringements, Christians will not "retreat form the public square" but "boldly stay, regardless of the cost." He then recalled the "rich Christian tradition of civil disobedience in the face of unjust laws" exemplified by Dr. Martin Luther King.

After recalling the many biblical figures who were jailed for remaining faithful to God, and theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer, who was imprisoned and put to death for opposing Hitler, Wolf asked, "Is prison the fate of people today who dare to stand up for what their conscience, informed by their faith, dictates?"

Wolf ended by quoting the Manhattan Declaration's implied promise of civil disobedience in the face of religious conscience violations: "I will fully and ungrudgingly render to Caesar what is Caesar's. But under no circumstances will I render to Caesar what is God's."

Wolf is currently Distinguished Senior Fellow at the 21st Century Wilberforce Initiative, a religious freedom advocacy organization he joined after retiring from Congress.

While in Congress, Wolf was one of the most outspoken defenders of global religious freedom. He authored the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, which created the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom and the post of Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom within the State Department. The act also allowed for sanctions to be placed on nations that infringe upon its citizens' religious freedom.

http://www.christianpost.com/news/is-prison-the-fate-for-christians-deemed-intolerant-religious-freedom-champion-frank-wolf-asks-harvard-audience-139084/

[Mark]

US Government Actively Trains To Round-Up And Destroy Christians, Resisters - The Purge Of God From The Military Was Lead-In To War Against Americans

Before Jade Helm and other disturbing military exercises, along with the documentation of massive military movement across the country started topping the headlines, many believe there was an orchestrated effort to take God and/or men of faith from the military in order to facilitate the US declaring war on its own citizens, specifically those of faith.

PHASE ONE - THE MILITARY PURGE

Since 2009 when Barack Obama took office there has been an unprecedented amount of high level military members who have been "purged" from the armed forces, with veterans Speaking out about what is happening, shown in the specific quotes below, via End Of The American Dream website:

Retired Army Major General Paul Vallely: “The White House protects their own. That’s why they stalled on the investigation into fast and furious, Benghazi and Obamacare. He’s intentionally weakening and gutting our military, Pentagon and reducing us as a superpower, and anyone in the ranks who disagrees or speaks out is being purged.” (Source)

Retired Army Major General Patrick Brady: “There is no doubt he (Obama) is intent on emasculating the military and will fire anyone who disagrees with him.” (Source)

Retired Army Lt. General William G. “Jerry” Boykin: “Over the past three years, it is unprecedented for the number of four-star generals to be relieved of duty, and not necessarily relieved for cause.” (Source)

Retired Navy Captain Joseph John: “I believe there are more than 137 officers who have been forced out or given bad evaluation reports so they will never make Flag (officer), because of their failure to comply to certain views.” (Source)

Phase one was about getting rid of any high level military member that would get in the way of the ultimate endgame strategy.


PHASE TWO- PURGING GOD AND FAITH FROM THE MILITARY

Faith is also under an all-out attack within the military with Chaplains threatened for promoting Christian beliefs, specific religious beliefs being termed "extremist," and the military "environment" being called "hostile" to Christians.

“People of faith are going to stay away from the military,” said Mr. Berry in an interview with The Washington Times.

“I can’t tell you how many moms and dads I’ve spoken to who say, ‘My son or daughter wants to join the military, [but] in light of what you’ve described, I’m not sure I want to let them join the military anymore,’ and I don’t blame them. I would have serious reservations about my own kids joining,” Mr. Berry said.

Douglas Lee, president of the Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty, whose job it is to find people who want to be chaplains and make sure they’re also qualified to serve in the military, said growing religious hostility within the military is making it harder for him to find potential recruits and for the armed forces to maintain the chaplains it does have.

“I know people who get out, officers and chaplains, who’ve said, ‘I can’t serve the way I want to in this environment,’” said Mr. Lee, who also served as an Army chaplain. “People who’ve said, ‘Because of the religious liberty challenges I see, I think I’ll serve somewhere else.’”

In September 2014 USA Today and many news outlets reported that the Air Force officially withdrew the requirement "that all airmen who take the oath of enlistment and officer appointment conclude with "so help me God," to appease atheists.

To understand why that particular change is so concerning to those of faith, people must understand that the first military oath under the Constitution was approved by Act of Congress 29 September 1789 and while minor changes have been made since then, historically the "so help me God," has been part of the oath.

The wordings of the current oath of enlistment and oath for commissioned officers are as follows:

"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).

"I, _____ (SSAN), having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God." (DA Form 71, 1 August 1959, for officers.)

Phase one and two appear to be specifically geared toward removing faith from the military, but subsequent actions show the systematic removals and discouragement were only part of the orchestrated plan.

PHASE THREE - TARGETING RELIGION



When the initial reports were published showing that certain training materials used at a briefing with an Army Reserve unit based in Pennsylvania listed Evangelical Christianity, Catholicism and even “Islamophobia” as examples of “religious extremism, along side of groups like Ku Klux Klan, Hamas and al-Qaeda, the initial reaction was disbelief, with the Army instantly pushing back saying this wasn't "official" training material, but when seen in light of the aforementioned points, shows a chilling and insidious agenda being implemented.

It gets worse though as we see that not only is the US government labeling religious groups, along with the conservatives, constitutionalists, preppers, survivalists and others, as extremists and greater threats than the terror group ISIS, but according to a AC-130U Aerial Gunner in AFSOC, posted by Steve Quayle in October 2013 in his SQ alerts, warns that for training purposes, Churches are used as "Enemy Headquarters."

Picture this: at 9,000 feet in a 30 degree-bank orbit, an AC-130 Gunshipwith firepower enough to handle most any Close Air Support (CAS) Call forFire tasking is above any town USA. Along with a simulated stack of a UAVat 6 to 7,000 feet, and a fast mover over top.

I will try to give you a feel for the mission execution: Pattern is(Simulated) cleared, and we have clearance to go HOT over the target (unless we have a Kill Box, then it is open season). First simulated round of 105MM HEI is sent through the roof of the building, this stirs the enemy, and soon their running in every direction. Time to go DTA (Dual Target Attack) mode, with 105's still addressing the building structure, we then (simulate) bring the No. 1.(25MM) or No. 2 (40MM) gun on line to assist to eliminating any IR signatures that are (simulated) running out the doors and windows. I will let you fill in the rest.

Everything during the event during a Dry-Fire mission is simulated..No live rounds ever get chambered or move towards the guns. What I want to make you aware of is our use of Churches as Enemy Headquarters. Could it be that leadership is desensitizing us (Special Ops crews) the Quiet Professionals in possible future missions in firing on "Churches"? There might be nothing to this training, but I thought you might want to see if your sources might know.

Barack Obama has stated publicly that "Whatever we once were, we are no longer a Christian nation," he has mocked the bible and let us not forget before he was ever elected, he referred to people in small towns as clinging to their "guns and religion," as a way to explain their frustrations. (SEE - Contrast Barack Obama's Quotes About Islam With His Quotes About Christianity)

Christianity is under attack across the globe but what many do not understand is that it is also under attack here in the US, within the military, within the court system and by the Obama administration and as we see Christians being slaughtered around the world, this is what many believe is coming to America as well.

ANP was reminded earlier, via email, of Obama's open border policies where terrorist groups have openly stated they are eyeing the open border to into America, as well as thousands of Muslim, Syrian refugees are being imported by the Obama admin into cities all across America. (SEE - With Christians On Chopping Block, 190 US Cities Secretly Selected To Help Destroy America From Within - Is Your City On 'The List'?)

This is especially noteworthy because interviews with smugglers provide evidence that ISIS members and other terrorists are hiding within those refugees.

If you look to the recent news on Christians being slaughtered across the globe, you will note they are being murdered by Islamic extremists, which is why our source tells us "Imagine the blood bath as Christians are dis-armed" while "armed and trained Muslims are turned loose on the surviving dis-armed Christians."

Former SNL star and actress Victoria Jackson has a must-read article titled "Obama Hates Christianity," with line items that include examples of Obama's hostility toward people of biblical faith, acts of hostility from the Obama-led military toward people of biblical faith and hostility toward biblical values.

Those examples include, but are not limited to:

November 2010 – Obama misquotes the National Motto, saying it is “E pluribus unum” rather than “In God We Trust” as established by federal law.

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.

May 2009 – Obama declines to host services for the National Prayer Day (a day established by federal law) at the White House.

April 2009 – When speaking at Georgetown University, Obama orders that a monogram symbolizing Jesus’ name be covered when he is making his speech.

[...]

May 2013 – An Air Force officer was actually made to remove a personal Bible from his own desk because it “might” appear that he was condoning the particular religion to which he belonged.

November 2011 – Even while restricting and disapprobating Christian religious expressions, the Air Force Academy pays $80,000 to add a Stonehenge-like worship center for pagans, druids, witches and Wiccans at the Air Force Academy.

June 2011 – The Department of Veterans Affairs forbids references to God and Jesus during burial ceremonies at Houston National Cemetery.
January 2010 – Because of “concerns” raised by the Department of Defense, tiny Bible verse references that had appeared for decades on scopes and gunsights were removed.

June 2013 – The U. S. Air Force, in consultation with the Pentagon, removed an inspirational painting that for years has been hanging at Mountain Home Air Force Base because its title was “Blessed Are The Peacemakers” — a phrase from Matthew 5:9 in the Bible.

Read the entire article here. Also see -  America’s Most Biblically-Hostile U. S. President

In the first video below the article Judge Jeanine Pirro  discusses Obama’s anti-Christian, pro-Islamic comments at the National Prayer Breakfast in February 2015, saying they were so revealing that after six years, she’s finally figured the Democrat president out. (Via TPNN)


PHASE FOUR - DESENSITIZING LAW ENFORCEMENT AND THE US MILITARY TO FIRE ON AMERICANS

TARGETSLAWENFORCEMENT.jpg

Desensitize definition, Merriam-Webster Dictionary: "1:  to make (a sensitized or hypersensitive individual) insensitive or nonreactive to a sensitizing agent; 2:  to make emotionally insensitive or callous; specifically :  to extinguish an emotional response (as of fear, anxiety, or guilt) to stimuli that formerly induced it

Friday's ANP article by Stefan Stanford titled "Jade Helm: Training To Kill Mom And Take Over Our Towns," is the perfect example of how law enforcement and the US military are being desensitized to enable them to consider shooting at American citizens if ordered to. The article described recent targets being used by Marines in training exercises, one of which is described as "soccer mom," showing a woman with manicured nails and a wedding ring holding a weapon. According to this Marine Corps press release, this "realistic military training" exercise occurred in February 2015.

This is reminiscent of 2013 reports, discussed in an ANP article from March 2015, where targets of pregnant women, elderly and children were being used by law enforcement to represent who should be considered a "threat." Those targets were removed after a public outcry, but the the February Marine training shows that those types of targets are still being used.

We consistently see denials about whether the US military would follow orders, if given, to fire on Americans and it is easy to understand the visceral reaction to that thought. Understand that many would not, will not, and are remaining in a position, deliberately, in order to be in the right place, at the right time, to stand with Americans.

Others though, may not stand with Americans.

Consider the recent reports that illegal immigrants will be allowed to join the US military, or reports that Chinese and Russia troops have been allowed to train on US soil for the "first time in history," during the Obama administration.

Via ANP in March 2015:

In August 2013 it was reported that 15,000 Russian troops were requested by the Obama administration for a “training” exercise on US soil to "assist FEMA" during emergencies and disasters. That followed May 2012 news of Russian troops carrying out "joint anti-terrorism drills in America, with Huffington Post stating it marked the "fist time Russians have trained on US soil."

It is noteworthy that both China and Russia are permanent members of the United Nations Security Council to which the Obama administration signed away America's sovereignty to, meaning the UN could request both Chinese and Russian troops invade the US in order to disarm gun owners, using the "small arms and light weapons" language which is part of the UN treaty on arms regulations, shown above.

FINAL PHASE OF PREPARATION - JADE HELM, MILITARY MOVEMENT AND OTHER TRAINING EXERCISES

mdl.jpg
(Above photo - US Government train rounding up citizens in Florida)

In a recent chronology of Jade Helm related ANP articles, we have seen the evolution of information, with the most crucial bullet points from all those articles provided in a follow up piece, but what that evolution of information shows is the US government is preparing for something huge, some event that will require military intervention here on US soil, whether that event occurs during the July to September Jade Helm exercises, or whether these types of training exercises are just the final phase of preparation for a planned event at a future date, is unknown, but there is no doubt whatsoever that 'something" is coming and the government is preparing for it.

If the information provided above is indicative of a long-term orchestrated plan, then this "event" whether it is an economic collapse, an EMP attack that would knock out our grids, cause food shortages and riots, an attack from a foreign entity or even a false flag event, will include massive civil unrest or the military, at the behest and under the first orders from the White House, would not be preparing for the "round-up" of US citizens and destruction of Christians. They also wouldn't be preparing and actively practicing on targets of "soccer mom," or armed troops conducting drills by "chasing down unruly citizens inside a mock internment camp while role players chant for food and water," as they did in Arizona last month.

CLERGY RESPONSE TEAMS

Unfortunately even members of the clergy have actively been enlisted to "quell public unrest if martial law is ever declared,"  showing this long term prep has been going on far longer than just the last 6-7 years and that many in the pulpit have will actively betray their congregations.



BOTTOM LINE

Whatever it is that is coming, the government has been planning for it for years, which is why many believe it will be an orchestrated event and in looking at the timeline of the military purge to the attempt to remove religion and God from the military, to the targeting and labeling of US citizens to Jade Helm and other exercises being conducted not on government land, but all across America, listing some states as "hostile," - there is logic in that belief because it does appear that the US government is actively preparing to wage war on its citizens.

FINAL NOTE TO THE MILITARY

I have pointed this out before, but this message for the military, given to Steve Quayle before Jade Helm was even exposed, is critical and can be found on his prophecy pages, dated February 11, 2011:

Prophecy given to Steve Quayle - February 6, 2011

Hear oh land of the broken covenant for I have a controversy with America!

TO THE PENTAGON

I am against your plans to make war against my people and my land. Is it a small thing in your eyes for you to make war against me saith the Lord? You trust in the technology of the “Fallen Ones” and the hidden and secret weapons that you believe will keep you safe. Has it not dawned on you that as you study in your war colleges that betrayal and destruction have come from traitors within and armies without?

The son of perdition has been a liar since the beginning of time, and as all empires before you have fallen, littering in the pages of history so is yours. Your lives in an instant will flash before you. Repent and turn away from your evil schemes. Just as Judas sold my son Jesus out for thirty pieces of silver, so you have sold me out, For it is I the Living God who gave you the victories over your foreign enemies when you sought to preserve that which was Just. Are you so deceived and seduced that you cannot see the illuminated ones will utterly consume you and their promises will fail to give you your expected outcome?

TO THE GATE OPENERS

I ask you a simple question. Who do you think bound the demons and the fallen angels,, that you seek so feverishly to loose in the first place? For it was I, the Living God out of the love for my creation (mankind) that bound them at the first time and will seal them in chains the final time. The promise of eternal life apart from me will not deliver you from my wrath and my judgments. And now I say, to my generals, colonels, and captains and all of those who still call themselves by my name-to the fighting men and women let not your heart’s be troubled. For I will strip the veneer off those who feign to serve me so you can see the evil one’s plans behind those who send you to your death. The time is at hand that you will have to do what I have put in your heart to do. You will have to resist the orders that have been given to you to destroy your brethren with all that is within your reach. I will lay out my plans clearly before you in dreams and visions and Holy Angelic encounters. For I the Lord will protect and provide for your families as you seek me in prayer and fasting and seek me with all your hearts.

Emphasis mine.

http://allnewspipeline.com/Purge_Of_God_From_Military.php

[Mark]

IF YOU ARE A BORN AGAIN CHRISTIAN! AND SERVING IN THE US MILITARY. GET OUT NOW!! YOUR FIRST ESTATE IS THE KINGDOM OF GOD, NOT THIS FALLEN WORLD! GET OUT NOW! I AM A VETERAN! GET OUT NOW! THEY WILL COME FOR YOU FIRST!

Marine court-martialed for refusing to remove Bible verse

A United States Marine was convicted at a court-martial for refusing to remove a Bible verse on her computer – a verse of Scripture the military determined “could easily be seen as contrary to good order and discipline.”

The plight of Lance Corporal Monifa Sterling seems unbelievable – a member of the Armed Forces criminally prosecuted for displaying a slightly altered passage of Scripture from the Old Testament: “No weapon formed against me shall prosper.”

Sterling, who represented herself at trial, was convicted February 1, 2014 in a court-martial at Camp Lejune, North Carolina after she refused to obey orders from a staff sergeant to remove the Bible verses from her desk.

She was found guilty of failing to go to her appointed place of duty, disrespect toward a superior commissioned officer, and four specifications of disobeying the lawful order of a noncommissioned officer.

    As it now stands – Sterling is unemployed and looking for work. It’s a process made harder because of the bad conduct discharge from the military. Hopefully Liberty Institute will be able to restore this Christian Marine’s good name and expunge the charge.

The Christian Marine was given a bad conduct discharge and a reduction in rank from lance corporal to private.

Both lower court and the appellate court ruled that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act did not apply to her case because displaying a Bible verse does not constitute religious exercise.

However, a religious liberty law firm and a high-powered, former U.S. solicitor general have taken up her case and have filed an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces.

“If the government can order a Marine not to display a Bible verse, they could try and order her not to get a religious tattoo, or go to church on Sunday,” said Liberty Institute attorney Michael Berry. “Restricting a Marine’s free exercise of religion is blatantly unconstitutional.”

Sterling wised up and finally got legal counsel. Now representing her are the Liberty Institute along with former U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement, also a law professor at Georgetown University.

Clement most recently won a Supreme Court victory on behalf of Hobby Lobby against the Affordable Care Act.

Liberty Institute and Clement plan to argue that the appellate court should have applied the Religious Freedom Restoration Act in Sterling’s case – protecting her right to post Bible verses as a form of religious exercise.

According to the appellate court’s decision, they were not convinced “that displaying religious text at a shared government workstation would be protected even in a civilian federal workplace.”

They also considered the fact that Sterling’s desk was shared by other Marines.

“The implication is clear – the junior Marine sharing the desk and the other Marines coming to the desk for assistance would be exposed to biblical quotations in the military workplace,” the court declared. “It is not hard to imagine the divisive impact to good order and discipline that may result when a service member is compelled to work at a government desk festooned with religious quotations.”

Festooned with religious quotations?

Attorney Berry points out that other Marines were allowed to decorate their desks. However, the lower courts refused to allow that evidence to be admitted. And at the time of the incident – Sterling was not sharing a desk.

“This was a conflict between her and her supervisor,” he told me. “Her supervisor clearly said she did not like the tone of the Bible verses.”

Berry said the supervisor cursed at Sterling and ordered her to immediately remove the verses. She refused the order. The following day, she discovered the verses had been removed and thrown in the trash.

“Adding insult to injury, the government charged her with the crime of failing to obey a direct order because she did not remove the Bible verse,” Berry said.

According to court documents, the military maintains the “verbiage” – “No weapon formed against me shall prosper” could “easily been seen as contrary to good order and discipline.”

“Maintaining discipline and morale in the military work center could very well require that the work center remain relatively free of divisive or contentious issues such as personal beliefs, religion, politics, etc.”

Liberty Institute attorney Hiram Sasser told me it was outrageous “that such a small strip of paper could so frighten a drill sergeant.”

“This is a very scary time when you are not allowed to have a very small printed Bible verse in your own personal workspace because it might offend other Marines,” Sasser told me. “Our Marines are trained to deal with some of the most hostile people on the planet. I don’t think they are afraid of tiny words on a tiny piece of paper.”

The Bible verse incident happened in May 2013. A few months later she was accused of failing to wear an appropriate uniform because of a medical condition.

Berry told me he believes the military was trumping up the charge sheet “to make it look that things were worse than they were.”

As it now stands – Sterling is unemployed and looking for work. It’s a process made harder because of the bad conduct discharge from the military.

Hopefully Liberty Institute will be able to restore this Christian Marine’s good name and expunge the charge.

Anything less could jeopardize the standing of every person of faith serving in the Armed Forces. Should that happen – God help us all.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/05/26/marine-court-martialed-for-refusing-to-remove-bible-verse.html

[Mark]

Franklin Graham Says There Is No Tolerance for Christians in Culture After Marine Court-Martialed for Keeping Bible Verse on Her Computer

The Rev. Franklin Graham has spoken out on a case concerning a Marine Corporal who was court-martialed for refusing to remove a Bible verse from her computer at work, stating that it shows that there is no tolerance in culture for Christians.

Marine Lance Cpl. Monifa Sterling was court-martialed earlier this week after she was convicted Feb. 1, 2014, for refusing to remove the verse "No weapon formed against you shall prosper" (Isaiah 54:17) from her computer.

"Unbelievably, she was criminally prosecuted by the U.S. government for displaying this encouraging scripture on her computer in her workspace. Give me a break, really? Can our society be at a point where a supervisor can order a young Marine to remove a Bible verse from her computer? Others are able to display secular messages without any opposition, but Sterling was targeted by her supervisor," Graham wrote in a Facebook post on Wednesday.

"Today there's a tolerance in our culture for everything — except the things of God and His Word. The Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces has been asked to review Lance Cpl. Sterling's case — let's pray that this kind of targeting and persecution of Christians by our government will be stopped."

Fox News' Todd Starnes noted that Sterling represented herself at the trial, and was found guilty of disrespect toward a superior commissioned officer and four specifications of disobeying the lawful order of a noncommissioned officer.

Sterling was given a bad conduct discharge, while her rank was reduced from Lance Cpl. to private, after both the lower court and the appellate court ruled that displaying Bible verses at work is not protected under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

The Liberty Institute has now taken up her case, however, and has filed an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the U.S. Armed Forces.

"If the government can order a Marine not to display a Bible verse, they could try and order her not to get a religious tattoo, or go to church on Sunday," attorney Michael Berry said. "Restricting a Marine's free exercise of religion is blatantly unconstitutional."

Last week Graham stood up for an Air Force general after the Military Religious Freedom Foundation called on Maj. Gen. Craig Olson to be court-martialed, this time for giving credit to God during a speech at a National Day of Prayer event.

Olson received heavy criticism from the MRFF, which said in a letter to Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Welsh that he should be "aggressively and very visibly brought to justice for his unforgivable crimes and transgressions" for saying that God helped him throughout his military career.

Graham argued that atheist groups are attempting to "bully Christians into silence" with such actions.

"Are Christians the only group of people who cannot identify themselves publicly in this country? Are we the only voices who cannot speak?" the evangelical asked.

Read more at http://www.christianpost.com/news/franklin-graham-says-there-is-no-tolerance-for-christians-in-culture-after-marine-court-martialed-for-keeping-bible-verse-on-her-computer-139675/#hhEhutMGQrfZLY7p.99

[Mark]

They Want To Use ‘Hate Speech Laws’ To Destroy Freedom Of Speech In America

Hate speech laws are going in all around the world, and progressive activists in the United States want to use these kinds of laws to destroy free speech in America.  You see, the truth is that these hate speech laws that are being implemented all over the planet are not just about preventing speech that promotes violence or genocide against a particular group of people.  Instead, these laws are written in such a way that anyone that says something that “offends” or “insults” someone else is guilty of “hate speech”.  Even if you never intended to offend anyone and you had no idea that your words were insulting, in some countries you can be detained without bail and sentenced to years in prison for such speech.  Today, there are highly restrictive hate speech laws in Canada, in Mexico and in virtually every single European nation.  The United States is still an exception, but the truth is that our liberties and freedoms are being eroded every single day, and it is only a matter of time until “hate speech laws” are used to take away our freedom of speech too.

If you don’t think that this could ever happen in America, you should consider what the American Bar Association has to say on the matter.  This is the national organization that represents all of our lawyers, judges, etc.  So when the ABA speaks on legal matters, it carries a significant amount of weight.  The following is how the American Bar Association defines “hate speech”…

    Hate speech is speech that offends, threatens, or insults groups, based on race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, disability, or other traits.

Did you catch that?

If I say something that offends or insults you, there is a very good chance that I have just committed “hate speech” according to the ABA.

And support for these kinds of laws is growing.  In fact, one survey found that 51 percent of all Democrats now support hate speech laws.  It is only a matter of time before progressives start pushing for them in a big way.

Sadly, many of these progressives don’t even understand that our Constitution protects free speech.  Just consider what CNN anchor Chris Cuomo recently had to say about this…

    Hate speech is not the same thing as free speech, wrote CNN anchor Chris Cuomo on the ultimate forum for public discourse: Twitter.

    Amid debate about free speech after a shooting at an anti-Muslim protest in Texas , a user tweeted at Cuomo: “Too many people are trying to say hate speech (doesn’t equal) free speech.”

    In response, Cuomo, who has a law degree, said, “It doesn’t. Hate speech is excluded from protection. Don’t just say you love the Constitution … read it.”

No, I think that it is Cuomo that needs to read the Constitution.  The fact that he gets to deliver “the news” to millions upon millions of Americans is absolutely frightening.

But without a doubt, we do need to have a conversation about “hate speech” in the United States.  If I offend or insult you, that does not mean that I “hate” you.  And if I disagree with you, that does not mean that I “hate” you either.

Some of the things that are considered to be “offensive speech” these days are absolutely ridiculous.  For example, just consider the following excerpt from a recent article by Paul Joseph Watson…

    Here’s an actual list of things that according to the University of Wisconsin are racist:

    – Asking someone where they are from or where they were born.

    – Telling someone they speak good English.

    – Telling someone that you have several black friends.

    – Saying that you’re not a racist.

    – Complimenting an Asian person by telling them they are very articulate.

    – Asking an Asian person for help with science or math.

    – Uttering the phrase “There is only one race, the human race.”

    – Saying that you think America is a melting pot and that when you look at someone you don’t see race.

    – Believing that the most qualified person, regardless of race, should get the job.

    – Thinking that every person, regardless of race, can succeed in society if they work hard enough.

    – Telling a black person who is being too loud to be quiet.

    – Telling an Asian or Latino person who is too quiet to speak up.

    – Mistaking a person of color for a staff member when you’re in a store.

    – Calling something “gay”.

    – Doing an impression of someone’s dialect or accent.

Could you imagine going to prison for any of those “offenses”?

But this is where our country is heading if we don’t stand up for our rights.

Right now, the progressives are on a roll.  In the wake of the recent Supreme Court decision on same sex marriage, some progressives are already talking about going after the tax exemptions of churches that oppose it.  In fact, the New York Times recently published an article entitled “Now’s the Time To End Tax Exemptions for Religious Institutions“.

But of course the ultimate goal is far more insidious.  In the end, they want to shut down all speech that offends them in any way…

    The American Unity Fund is a heavily funded new super-PAC looking to blanket the country with LGBT anti-discrimination laws. In effect, those laws aim to wipe out any alternative voice to the LGBT agenda. The effort is being spearheaded by billionaire hedge fund manager Paul Singer and another wealthy hedge fund manager, Tim Gill. Gill’s operations—the Gill Foundation and Gill Action—have been dedicated to “nonpartisan” gains for the LGBT lobby on the legislative and judicial fronts.

Those that do not believe that this could ever possibly happen in “the land of the free” should consider what has already happened in our neighbor to the north…

    Anyone who is offended by something you have said or written can make a complaint to the Human Rights Commissions and Tribunals. In Canada, these organizations police speech, penalizing citizens for any expression deemed in opposition to particular sexual behaviors or protected groups identified under ‘sexual orientation.’ It takes only one complaint against a person to be brought before the tribunal, costing the defendant tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees. The commissions have the power to enter private residences and remove all items pertinent to their investigations, checking for hate speech.

Of course the same kind of thing is already happening over in Europe as well.  For instance, one Christian pastor in Northern Ireland is being prosecuted for calling Islam “a doctrine spawned in hell”…

    An evangelical pastor in Northern Ireland is under fire and will be prosecuted after calling Islam “satanic” and claiming that its doctrine was “spawned in hell” during a controversial 2014 sermon that streamed over the Internet.

    Pastor James McConnell, 78, of Whitewell Metropolitan Tabernacle in Belfast, Northern Ireland, made his comments — which included calling Islam “heathen” — in a sermon delivered last May, the BBC reported.

    “The Muslim religion was created many hundreds of years after Christ. Muhammad, the Islam Prophet, was born around the year A.D. 570, but Muslims believe that Islam is the true religion,” he preached. “Now, people say there are good Muslims in Britain. That may be so, but I don’t trust them.”

    McConnell continued, “Islam’s ideas about God, about humanity, about salvation are vastly different from the teaching of the holy scriptures. Islam is heathen. Islam is satanic. Islam is a doctrine spawned in hell.”

Once such laws are in place in the United States, it won’t be difficult for the government to find you if you are committing “hate speech”.  As I have written about repeatedly, the U.S. government already monitors virtually everything that is said and done on the Internet.  The following is an excerpt from an article that was recently authored by Micah Lee, Glenn Greenwald, and Morgan Marquis-Boire…

    The sheer quantity of communications that XKEYSCORE processes, filters and queries is stunning. Around the world, when a person gets online to do anything — write an email, post to a social network, browse the web or play a video game — there’s a decent chance that the Internet traffic her device sends and receives is getting collected and processed by one of XKEYSCORE’s hundreds of servers scattered across the globe.

    In order to make sense of such a massive and steady flow of information, analysts working for the National Security Agency, as well as partner spy agencies, have written thousands of snippets of code to detect different types of traffic and extract useful information from each type, according to documents dating up to 2013. For example, the system automatically detects if a given piece of traffic is an email. If it is, the system tags if it’s from Yahoo or Gmail, if it contains an airline itinerary, if it’s encrypted with PGP, or if the sender’s language is set to Arabic, along with myriad other details.

And as I wrote about yesterday, western governments are already using paid trolls to identify and combat “extremists” on social media websites such as YouTube, Facebook and Twitter.

We are rapidly becoming a “Big Brother” society, and if we don’t stand up for our freedoms and liberties now, it is inevitable that we will eventually lose just about all of them.

Unfortunately, most of the population is absolutely clueless about all of this.  In fact, as Mark Dice demonstrated the other day, many Americans don’t even know what we are celebrating on the 4th of July.  As a society, we have become extremely “dumbed down”, and we have lost connection to the values and principles that this country was founded upon.

http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/they-want-to-use-hate-speech-laws-to-destroy-freedom-of-speech-in-america

[Mark]

Oregon declares war on Christian faith

In one of the most egregious anti-Christian acts committed by a state official in recent memory, Oregon Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian not only upheld the ridiculous $135,000 fine levied against Aaron and Melissa Klein for declining to bake a cake for a lesbian commitment ceremony, but he ordered the Kleins to "cease and desist" from making any public comments about their religious convictions relative to this case.

This is an outrage and a travesty, and it must be rebuked and resisted. Who does Mr. Avakian think he is?

The fine itself is unconscionable, as the amount of $135,000 was determined by tallying up the alleged emotional damages experienced by the lesbian couple, who as Thomas D. Williams noted, "accused the Kleins of 'mental ****,' adding that they had suffered a 'loss of appetite' and 'impaired digestion,' which remarkably led to 'weight gain.'"

If anyone here was "raped," it was the Kleins (by the government) not this couple (by the Kleins).

The list of 178 (!) purported damages compiled by the two lesbians includes the following (this is not a spoof; the list is real): "concern for privacy at home; concern for safety at home; dislike of going to work; distrust of former friends; distrust of men; fear of not being able to get another job; fear of being alone; felt mentally raped, dirty and shameful; future job opportunities damaged; hysteria; inability to find work; irritability with family and friends; loss of opportunity for bonding with infant; migraine headaches; nightmares; not wanting husband (?) to touch her; pale and sick at home after work" – just to name a few.

The proper response of the court (and Mr. Avakian) should have been: "Are you kidding me? All this because a Christian couple declined your business on religious grounds at a time when same-sex 'marriage' wasn't even legal here?"

As Laurie Higgins observed, "This wowzer list of ailments purportedly resulted from not being able to purchase a wedding cake from one bakery. How, pray tell, do these two function in a diverse world?"

I don't doubt that the women felt hurt, but they are either completely exaggerating what they experienced or they have quite a few other, deep emotional problems that need to be addressed that are no fault of the Kleins. On either score, any fair court would have recognized the absurdity of the list.

Yet in the increasingly anti-Christian, pro-homosexualist world in which we live, the Kleins were found guilty of being true to their faith and punished severely for it.

Aaron and Melissa Klein (Oregon bakers)Perhaps the Kleins can countersue the government of Oregon for 10 trillion dollars based on the emotional damages they have experienced, not to mention the loss of their very livelihood due to the attack that has come against them? If the lesbian couple deserved $135,000, then the Kleins deserve at least 10 trillion.

Seriously, though, did these women really not know that plenty of Christians do not support gay "marriage" and cannot in good conscience participate in it? Were they suddenly so traumatized by something they have known to be true all their lives?

But not only was the fine completely out of line, Avakian's reasoning was just as faulty, as he claimed that, "This case is not about a wedding cake or a marriage. It is about a business's refusal to serve someone because of their sexual orientation. Under Oregon law, that is illegal."

This is patently false, since the Kleins had never once refused to serve homosexuals. They simply refused to participate in a gay "wedding" ceremony by providing the cake.

But why play by the rules when it's open season on Christians and their faith?

Avakian, however, was not done. As Williams explains, "The Oregon official imposed a gag order on the couple, mandating that they 'cease and desist' from speaking publicly about not wanting to bake cakes for same-sex weddings based on their Christian beliefs."

To ask once again, who does Mr. Avakian think he is?

Thankfully, the Kleins have not backed down, as Aaron said in an interview following the verdict: "He wants to silence anyone who opposes his point of view. Unfortunately, he's doing this with the wrong Christian, because I fight back."

This is yet another example of gay activist overreach (either by gay activists themselves or by their straight allies), and it must be confronted in the strongest of terms.

To state things, then, plainly and directly:Mr. Avakian and the State of Oregon, your bullying will backfire. You are on the wrong side of justice, and your attempts to steal our freedoms of religion and speech will be to your lasting shame.

Furthermore, Mr. Avakian, I sincerely pray that you will humble yourself and recognize the error of your ways.

I'm sure the Kleins would like nothing more than to forgive you to your face and give you a great big hug. Not only are Christians moral people, they are forgiving people.

But please do not associate forgiveness with weakness. We are quite committed to stand for what is right.

As Aaron stated clearly, "For years, we've heard same-sex marriage will not affect anybody. I'm here firsthand to tell everyone in America that it has already impacted people. Christians, get ready to take a stand. Get ready for civil disobedience."

That time has come.

http://www.onenewsnow.com/perspectives/michael-brown/2015/07/06/oregon-declares-war-on-christian-faith

[Mark]

Navy Chaplain Cleared of 'Intolerance' Charges After Sharing 'Biblical View' on Sexuality

A Navy chaplain whose "biblical viewpoints" on marriage and sexuality landed him in hot water has been exonerated and will be allowed to keep his post.

A married gay sailor had complained when Navy Chaplain Wes Modder, responding to the sailor's questions, explained that his Pentecostal faith considered homosexuality to be a sin.

"From my perspective when I'm asked a question about homosexuality, I'm going to give a biblical viewpoint in accordance with my ordaining church, the Assemblies of God," Modder explained on "Fox and Friends."

But Modder's commanding officer recommended that he be relieved of his duties, prevented from career advancement and brought before the Navy's Board of Inquiry, where he could be discharged.

The Navy, however, formally rejected the request and has cleared Modder of all wrongdoing.

Kelly Shackelford, President of the Liberty Institute, said punishing Modder for expressing his religious views would have been a violation of the law.

"We have laws that are real specific about chaplains being chaplains and not being able to be persecuted or punished because they're being a chaplain from their faith," Shackelford. "This is exactly what we want chaplains to do."

He said that everyone in the military should know what their freedoms are so that they can't be bullied out of them, and that the Institute's website provides "religious freedom kits."

http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/10/26/navy-chaplain-cleared-intolerance-charges-after-sharing-biblical-views-sexuality

[Mark]

Take This Test To See If Most Americans Would Consider You To Be A ‘Religious Extremist’

Are you a religious extremist?  For years, world leaders have been endlessly proclaiming that we need to eradicate “extremism”, but what actually is “extremism”?  Many would point to the ISIS jihadists over in the Middle East that are beheading people that don’t agree with them as examples of religious extremists, and I think that very few people would argue with that.  But our politicians (especially the liberal ones) rarely use the term “Islamic terrorists” anymore.  Instead, they tend to use the term “religious extremists”, and that has a much, much broader connotation.  In fact, if you are a Bible-believing Christian, you are probably included in that category.

Most Bible-believing Christians would never think of themselves as being similar to radical jihadists in the Middle East, but that is precisely how many of their fellow Americans very them.  The Barna Group has just released a shocking new study which found that 45 percent of all “non-religious” Americans believe that “Christianity is extremist”…

    The perception that the Christian faith is extreme is now firmly entrenched among the nation’s non-Christians. A full forty-five percent of atheists, agnostics, and religiously unaffiliated in America agree with the statement “Christianity is extremist.” Almost as troubling is the fact that only 14 percent of atheists and agnostics strongly disagree that Christianity is extremist. The remaining four in ten (41%) disagree only somewhat. So even non-Christians who are reluctant to fully label Christianity as extremist, still harbor some hesitations and negative perceptions toward the religion.

Even more troubling is what the study discovered about how the general population views specific religious activities.  There has been a tremendous shift in society, and behaviors that were considered to be completely mainstream a few decades ago are now considered to be “extremism”.

Are you ready to take a test? Look over the Barna infographic that I have shared below very carefully.  Have you ever participated in any of these “extremist activities”?…



If you have ever participated in any of the activities listed in category 1 or category 2, you are a “religious extremist” according to most Americans.

Of course every single one of the behaviors in category 2 would potentially apply to me, so I guess that would make me an “extremist” according to this definition.

This is where our society is heading.  Of course “Christian extremists” are not normally put into prison in the United States quite yet, but hatred toward our faith in rapidly rising in society.  Church attendance is dropping like a rock, the Christian faith is relentlessly mocked in movies and on television, and incidents of hostility toward Christians have doubled over the past three years.

And the truth is that even the federal government and the military are rapidly turning against Bible-believing Christians.  For example, the slide that I have posted below comes from a U.S. Army Reserve Equal Opportunity training brief that described “Evangelical Christianity” and “Catholicism” as examples of “religious extremism”…



Once this came out, there was a huge uproar and some people got into trouble over this.  But it should be exceedingly alarming to people of faith that U.S. military personnel were being trained that evangelical Christians are on the same level as the Ku Klux Klan.

And of course this is far from the only example of this phenomenon.  In fact, Christians have regularly been described as “extremists” and “potential terrorists” in official U.S. government documents since the day that Barack Obama first stepped into the White House.

The following is an extended excerpt from my previous article entitled “72 Types Of Americans That Are Considered ‘Potential Terrorists’ In Official Government Documents“…

*****

Below is a list of 72 types of Americans that are considered to be “extremists” and “potential terrorists” in official U.S. government documents.  To see the original source document for each point, just click on the link.  As you can see, this list covers most of the country…

1. Those that talk about “individual liberties”

2. Those that advocate for states’ rights

3. Those that want “to make the world a better place”

4. “The colonists who sought to free themselves from British rule”

5. Those that are interested in “defeating the Communists”

6. Those that believe “that the interests of one’s own nation are separate from the interests of other nations or the common interest of all nations”

7. Anyone that holds a “political ideology that considers the state to be unnecessary, harmful,or undesirable”

8. Anyone that possesses an “intolerance toward other religions”

9. Those that “take action to fight against the exploitation of the environment and/or animals”

10. “Anti-Gay”

11. “Anti-Immigrant”

12. “Anti-Muslim”

13. “The Patriot Movement”

14. “Opposition to equal rights for gays and lesbians”

15. Members of the Family Research Council

16. Members of the American Family Association

17. Those that believe that Mexico, Canada and the United States “are secretly planning to merge into a European Union-like entity that will be known as the ‘North American Union’”

18. Members of the American Border Patrol/American Patrol

19. Members of the Federation for American Immigration Reform

20. Members of the Tennessee Freedom Coalition

21. Members of the Christian Action Network

22. Anyone that is “opposed to the New World Order”

23. Anyone that is engaged in “conspiracy theorizing”

24. Anyone that is opposed to Agenda 21

25. Anyone that is concerned about FEMA camps

26. Anyone that “fears impending gun control or weapons confiscations”

27. The militia movement

28. The sovereign citizen movement

29. Those that “don’t think they should have to pay taxes”

30. Anyone that “complains about bias”

31. Anyone that “believes in government conspiracies to the point of paranoia”

32. Anyone that “is frustrated with mainstream ideologies”

33. Anyone that “visits extremist websites/blogs”

34. Anyone that “establishes website/blog to display extremist views”

35. Anyone that “attends rallies for extremist causes”

36. Anyone that “exhibits extreme religious intolerance”

37. Anyone that “is personally connected with a grievance”

38. Anyone that “suddenly acquires weapons”

39. Anyone that “organizes protests inspired by extremist ideology”

40. “Militia or unorganized militia”

41. “General right-wing extremist”

42. Citizens that have “bumper stickers” that are patriotic or anti-U.N.

43. Those that refer to an “Army of God”

44. Those that are “fiercely nationalistic (as opposed to universal and international in orientation)”

45. Those that are “anti-global”

46. Those that are “suspicious of centralized federal authority”

47. Those that are “reverent of individual liberty”

48. Those that “believe in conspiracy theories”

49. Those that have “a belief that one’s personal and/or national ‘way of life’ is under attack”

50. Those that possess “a belief in the need to be prepared for an attack either by participating in paramilitary preparations and training or survivalism”

51. Those that would “impose strict religious tenets or laws on society (fundamentalists)”

52. Those that would “insert religion into the political sphere”

53. Anyone that would “seek to politicize religion”

54. Those that have “supported political movements for autonomy”

55. Anyone that is “anti-abortion”

56. Anyone that is “anti-Catholic”

57. Anyone that is “anti-nuclear”

58. “Rightwing extremists”

59. “Returning veterans”

60. Those concerned about “illegal immigration”

61. Those that “believe in the right to bear arms”

62. Anyone that is engaged in “ammunition stockpiling”

63. Anyone that exhibits “fear of Communist regimes”

64. “Anti-abortion activists”

65. Those that are against illegal immigration

66. Those that talk about “the New World Order” in a “derogatory” manner

67. Those that have a negative view of the United Nations

68. Those that are opposed “to the collection of federal income taxes”

69. Those that supported former presidential candidates Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin and Bob Barr

70. Those that display the Gadsden Flag (“Don’t Tread On Me”)

71. Those that believe in “end times” prophecies

72. Evangelical Christians

*****

Are you starting to get the picture?

There is a systematic attempt by the radical leftists that dominate our society to demonize Bible-believing Christians.  They want to portray us as “religious extremists” that are just as dangerous as ISIS is.

Given enough time, they would not just come after us with words.  Throughout history, we have seen the same thing happen with so many other groups.  First they were marginalized, then they were demonized, then they were criminalized, and then ultimately they were marked for elimination.

If you are a Bible-believing Christian, you need to get ready for intense persecution, because it is most definitely heading our way.

ALL LINKS AT SITE: http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/take-this-test-to-see-if-most-americans-would-consider-you-to-be-a-religious-extremist

[Mark]

'New Morality' Movement Pushes Big to Silence Christians

Some say American Christians are paranoid, that they're feeling targeted and persecuted. But is it possible America is facing a growing anti-Christian agenda?

Some on the frontline of the culture wars have responded with a resounding "yes." They feel it up close and personal – right in their faces.

"I'm particularly sensitive to that because I'm Jewish," Brian Camenker, with Mass Resistance, told CBN News.

"I saw what happened to Jews in the 1930s and '40s and much of that same thing is happening to Christians now," he said. "There's an organized movement to demonize Christians."

Maggie Gallagher, with the American Principles Project, agreed.

"What we're seeing very clearly is an effort to target them [Christians] legally when possible and then to humiliate or deprive them of social respect," she said.

Much of this comes from abortion and gay rights groups and their supporters.

"They see Christianity as refusing to affirm the things they wish to indulge in," said Peter Sprigg, senior fellow for policy studies at the Family Research Council.

Both Sprigg and Rev. Bill Owens, with the Coalition of African-American Pastors, are frequent targets of gay rights groups.

"They cannot accept any moral code that says what they do is wrong and in order to avoid any sort of guilt that might come upon them if anyone says that what they're doing is wrong, they want to eliminate that kind of communication from the culture altogether," Sprigg explained.

Owens continued, "There's a strong agenda to silence Christians. You see it every day. You can't walk out of your house and not see something anti-Christian."

Some say gay and transgender rights groups have carefully mimicked the Civil Rights movement.

"They have copied that movement, studied it, dissected it, and they knew exactly what to do," Owens said. "And one of the things they had to do was silence the Christian community."

These folks say one reason the gay rights movement co-opted the civil rights movement is that today's society see opponents of civil rights as narrow-minded, bigoted, and racist. They're hoping their opponents will be seen through the same lens and unfortunately, Christians are often these modern-day opponents."

"If you disagree, you're a bigot and a hater and a racist, right? So you put that together and it's a pretty powerful agenda," Gallagher said. "I suspect it's a minority of the Left who actually believes it, but powerful organized minorities often drive culture and politics in different ways."

"We often talk of this as a threat to religious liberty, and it is that," Sprigg said. "But if you really drill down, the religious liberty of Muslims, Jews and Hindus is not being attacked. It's the religious liberty of Christians."

"And it's not over," Camenker warned. "I mean now that they have gay marriage, they're doing their push for these severe anti-discrimination laws to punish Christians who don't go along with the agenda."

It's not that these folks just want moral neutrality. Their new laws push a new morality.

"The Left's idea is that to be a good person you have to believe that the only thing in the world that cannot be changed is sexual orientation," Gallagher explained.

"And the moral message they send is that it is morally wrong to disapprove of homosexual conduct. It is morally wrong to disapprove of transgender conduct," Sprigg added.

"That two men in a loving union are just the same as a husband and wife, that children do not need mothers and fathers, that the ability to create new life is not significant enough to build a social institution around," Gallagher said.

"They perceive Christianity as being a source of oppression. That's partly because they don't understand Christianity. They don't understand that Christ came to set us free, not imprison us," Sprigg said.

Last year's Supreme Court decision making gay marriage the law of the land super charges the legal efforts many Christians believe will increasingly demonize their biblical beliefs and them along with it.

http://www.charismanews.com/us/55601-new-morality-movement-pushes-big-to-silence-christians

[Mark]

Christian Baker Can Be Forced to Make Gay Wedding Cakes to Stay in Business, Colorado Supreme Court Says

Colorado's highest court declined to hear an appeal from a Christian baker who was found guilty of discrimination for refusing to service a same-sex wedding ceremony.

The Colorado Supreme Court decided Monday to not hear an appeal from Jack Phillips of Masterpiece Cakeshop, Inc., who had been found guilty of discrimination by the Colorado Civil Rights Commission.

"Upon consideration of the Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the Colorado Court of Appeals and after review of the record, briefs, and the judgment of said Court of Appeals, IT IS ORDERED that said Petition for Writ of Certiorari shall be, and the same hereby is, DENIED," read the decision.

In 2012, Phillips declined to make a cake for a gay wedding. In response, a complaint was filed against Phillips before the Civil Rights Commission, which in May 2014 found him guilty of violating Colorado's Anti-Discrimination Act, or CADA.

As part of his punishment, Phillips was ordered to undergo sensitivity training and he had to provide the Commission with updates on any cake orders he refused to take, providing an explanation for this reasoning.

The same-sex couple filing the complaint against Phillips was represented by the American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado.

In August of 2015, the Colorado Court of Appeals sided with the Civil Rights Commission, prompting Phillips to file a petition for appeal with the state supreme court last October.

"It was the duty of the Court of Appeals to adopt a reasonable interpretation of CADA that 'avoid[s ] constitutional conflict.' But it did the opposite," stated the petition.

"By equating an artist's conscience-driven, message-based objection to creating expressive items that offend his beliefs with person-based discrimination based on sexual orientation, the court places CADA in direct conflict with the fundamental rights to free speech and free exercise of religion, and wrongly subordinates these rights to public accommodations law."

Phillips is being represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative law firm that has given aid to other businesses in the country facing similar legal complaints.

Regarding the state supreme court's refusal to hear the appeal, ADF Senior Counsel Jeremy Tedesco said in a statement that they "are evaluating all legal options."

"We asked the Colorado Supreme Court to take this case to ensure that government understands that its duty is to protect the people's freedom to follow their beliefs personally and professionally, not force them to violate those beliefs as the price of earning a living," stated Tedesco.

"Jack, who has happily served people of all backgrounds for years, simply exercised the long-cherished American freedom to decline to use his artistic talents to promote a message and event with which he disagrees, and that freedom shouldn't be placed in jeopardy for anyone."

Although Colorado's legal system has concluded that Phillips cannot deny service for a same-sex wedding, the state's Civil Rights Division of the Department of Regulatory Agencies did conclude that a bakery can refuse to bake a cake with Bible verses on it.

In April of 2015, the Division ruled that Azucar Bakery of Denver was not guilty of discrimination when it refused to make a cake that would have included Bible verses denouncing homosexuality.

Read more at http://www.christianpost.com/news/christian-baker-gay-wedding-cake-colorado-supreme-court-162689/#cW5At7D41A57AzGA.99

[Mark]

Christian Student Faces Expulsion For Opposing Homosexuality

Educational campuses have long been a battleground for discussing and debating different ideologies. Usually, the exchange of different beliefs and perspectives are encouraged, however when it comes to Christians who might be opposed to homosexuality, there is no debate. 

You will be persecuted and even expelled if your views don't align with the status quo that homosexuality is not only acceptable but to be encouraged and supported.

The latest victim of this battle on campus is Felix Ngole, aged 38, who was asked to leave the University of Sheffield, where he was in the second year of a Masters in social work. What is amazing about Ngole's case is that his comments in support of the Biblical teaching on marriage and sexual ethics were not even made on campus, but on his personal Facebook page, which is only able to be viewed by his friends.

However, the post was still brought to the attention of the faculty at Sheffield who determined after a hearing that Ngole would no longer be recognized as a University student due to the committees belief that he "may have caused offence to some individuals" and had "transgressed boundaries which are not deemed appropriate for someone entering the social work profession."

Ngole believes his case sets a dangerous precedent against Christians wanting to serve in social work as well as the nature of free speech on campus and has enlisted the support of the Christian Legal Center where he released the following statement:

"The way that I have been treated raises very serious issues about the way students in English universities are being censored in their views and beliefs.

"If the personal statements of students on their own social media pages, and amongst their own 'friends' are now to be used to judge whether they are 'fit and proper people' to serve in professions such as law, medicine, teaching and social work, then very serious questions need to be asked about the freedoms in the UK.

"A university is not the proper body to judge whether a potential student is a fitting person to join a professional body. That is for the professional body concerned. If universities are now to scrutinize their student's social media accounts, then students should be warned about that at the very start of their studies, and should be given the opportunity to decide whether it is the sort of university they want to attend.

"If each university is making its own, arbitrary decisions, who is monitoring these decisions and how can students ensure that, across all universities, there is good, fair and equal assessment of such issues?

"However, there is a far more serious issue at stake. Further education is a time when all students should be helped to explore their beliefs, through interaction and debate. If they are censored from even sharing their ideas or beliefs as part of a discussion on Facebook then how can that happen? Even the Soviet Union did not restrict students like this!

"If these sort of judgmental procedures were in place when David Cameron and other Cabinet ministers were in Oxford, and some were members of the Bullingdon Club, one wonders whether they would have been prevented from continuing their courses as well!

"The university claims my views are discriminatory but I am the one being discriminated against because of my expression of Christian beliefs. I wonder whether the university would have taken any action if a Muslim student who believes in Shari'a law, with its teaching about women and homosexuality, had made comments on his Facebook page. I dont think so."

Read more at http://www.prophecynewswatch.com/article.cfm?popular_news_slot=1R#eOrmYx1TPph1Mzo1.99

[Mark]

US Marine Court-Martialed for Posting Bible Verse on Her Desk

A US Marine was court-martialed after she posted a Bible verse at her desk.
Monifa Sterling’s case was heard in federal court on Wednesday.

Marine Monifa Sterling posted this Bible verse at her desk.
Her superiors found it offensive.



    A federal appeals court on Wednesday weighed the case of a former Marine court-martialed in part for expressing her Christian faith while on the job – though the Marine’s lawyer faced tough questions from judges who suggested she was “thumbing her nose at a superior” with her actions.

    Monifa Sterling, while with the Marines, had posted biblical verses at her desk, despite orders from a superior to remove them. At issue in Wednesday’s case is the extent to which a federal law on religious freedom protects members of the Armed Forces like her.

    The central issue of free speech on government property, especially within a military context, has made this case closely watched. But several judges hearing the case at a 45-minute oral argument seemed skeptical Sterling had done enough to assert her right to post the messages.

video: http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/04/us-marine-court-martialed-posting-bible-verse-desk/

[Mark]

SUNY Buffalo Professor Says Republicans And Christians to Blame For Orlando Terror Attack

The American left is proving on a daily basis that they are unwilling to accept reality and will use their petty prejudices to blame everyone but the actual terrorist for the Orlando attack.

This professor is just the latest example.

The Daily Caller reported:

Public College Prof: ISIS Is A ‘Distraction,’ Christians Real Culprit For Orlando

A University at Buffalo (SUNY-Buffalo) professor is claiming any attention given to Islamic State and Islamic radicalism after the Orlando shooting is “deliberate misdirection” distracting people from the much greater threat of Christians and the Republican party.

“This was an American killing Americans because they were queer and that has not been forcefully articulated,” Jonathan Katz said in a news release put out by the school. “What we are trying to do here is camouflage the root of the problem, which is a long history of violent political rhetoric and homophobic policies by Republican officials and their conservative allies.

Katz, an art history professor, also claims to be the first full-time academic to earn tenure in the field of gay and lesbian studies, which he taught at the City College of San Francisco.

The school characterizes Katz’s statements as “research news,” though Katz’s comments appear to simply be his opinion as an art professor. Katz’s opinion is that blame for Omar Mateen, a radical Muslim who pledged allegiance to ISIS both before and during his massacre of 49 people at a gay nightclub, should rest with Christian conservatives, whom he describes as “our enemies.”

The American people are smarter than than this professor.

He and his progressive pals are just telling themselves what they want to hear.

http://www.progressivestoday.com/suny-buffalo-professor-says-christians-blame-orlando-terror-attack/

[Mark]

US Marine Court-Martialed for Posting Bible Verse on Her Desk

A US Marine was court-martialed after she posted a Bible verse at her desk.
Monifa Sterling’s case was heard in federal court on Wednesday.

Marine Monifa Sterling posted this Bible verse at her desk.
Her superiors found it offensive.



    A federal appeals court on Wednesday weighed the case of a former Marine court-martialed in part for expressing her Christian faith while on the job – though the Marine’s lawyer faced tough questions from judges who suggested she was “thumbing her nose at a superior” with her actions.

    Monifa Sterling, while with the Marines, had posted biblical verses at her desk, despite orders from a superior to remove them. At issue in Wednesday’s case is the extent to which a federal law on religious freedom protects members of the Armed Forces like her.

    The central issue of free speech on government property, especially within a military context, has made this case closely watched. But several judges hearing the case at a 45-minute oral argument seemed skeptical Sterling had done enough to assert her right to post the messages.

video: http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/04/us-marine-court-martialed-posting-bible-verse-desk/

Ex-Marine Punished for Bible Verses on Desk Loses Appeals Case

A United States appeals court has ruled against a former Marine who was court-martialed and discharged in part for refusing to remove cutouts of a biblical phrase from her work station.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces in Washington ruled Wednesday, 4-1, to uphold the bad conduct discharge of Lance Cpl. Monifa Sterling, deciding that there was no "substantial burden" placed on her religious freedom rights when her supervising officer at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina demanded that she remove slips of paper taped to her desk that read "No weapon formed against me shall prosper."

Although the saying is a paraphrase of Isaiah 54:17, the court majority believes that Sterling, who had a contentious relationship with her staff sergeant and felt as though she was being bullied, posted the verse in order to be "combative."

"Appellant did not inform the person who ordered her to remove the signs that they had had any religious significance to Appellant, the words in context could easily be seen as combative in tone, and the record reflects that their religious connotation was neither revealed nor raised until mid-trial," the court's majority opinion states.

Sterling's lawyer, First Liberty Institute senior counsel Michael Berry, told The Christian Post that the Supreme Court ruled in Muhammad Ali's 1971 case, Clay v. United States, that the courts have no business interpreting the authenticity of one's religious practices.

"The Supreme Court unanimously said that 'we can't question how sincere his beliefs are. That is just inappropriate for a court to do,'" Berry said. "That is what the court is doing here, basically what sports writers were trying to do to Muhammad Ali."

Sterling's troubles date back to May 2013, when she refused to comply with her staff sergeant's request that she remove the biblical message from her work station, which she shared with other Marines. Sterling refused her commanding officer's order. When Sterling later returned to her desk, she saw that her cutouts had been removed.

Along with other charges that Sterling did not comply with officer demands, Sterling was court-martialed. In total, she was charged with one specification of failing to go to her appointed place of duty, one specification of disrespect toward a superior commissioned officer, and four specifications of disobeying the lawful order of a noncommissioned officer.

In February of 2014, she represented herself at her court martial trial and was found guilty. She later received the help of the First Liberty Institute, a legal firm devoted to restoring religious liberty in America. Along with her legal team, she appealed the charges relating to her refusal to remove the bible verse to the Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals. However, that court also ruled against her.

Berry accuses the court of ignoring Sterling's testimony about how she was being bullied and posted the biblical reference as a source of comfort.

"She tried to talk about that during her trial but the judge shut her down," Berry explained. "That is just a fundamental failure to understand what a Bible verse can do for somebody who is going through a tough time."

The majority opinion also states that Sterling did not previously ask to have a religious accommodation allowing her to post scripture at her work station. However, Judge Kevin Ohlson wrote in dissent that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act does not "empower judges to require a believer to ask of the government, 'Mother, may I?' before engaging in sincere religious conduct."

The majority asserts that Sterling's case is not one that deals with "patently religious" behavior, such as the need for Muslim women to wear a hijab or for Sikh men to grow a beard.

"That is a wrong and dangerously wrong argument and position for the court to take," Berry told CP. "What that is doing is putting courts and judges in the position to start determining how important somebody's religious practice is to their faith. Of course, faith and religion is very personal to people in this country and not something that courts should be dictating."

Berry told CP that Sterling plans on appealing the court's ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court. He argued that the courts are sending the wrong message that although RFRA applies to citizens, churches, and religious organizations, military service members have to "prove just how sincere and important their religious exercise is."

"That is just outrageous. We have 1.3 million people on active duty in the military. The latest survey shows that approximately 75 percent identify as religious in some form or fashion," Berry said. "That's over 750,000 people who are basically being told that if you want protection of this federal law you are going to have to prove how important your religion is to you."

As a result of the convictions, Berry said that Sterling is having a hard time finding decent employment.

"The fact that you have a federal conviction on your record is stigmatizing. It has already had an effect on her," he explained. "It has been very difficult for her to find any kind of meaningful employment above minimum wage. This is now hanging over her head. It can affect her veterans benefits that she might be eligible for. The consequences are really going to carry on for decades beyond the decision itself. That is something too that people often lose sight of."

http://www.christianpost.com/news/appeals-court-rules-against-marine-court-martialed-bible-verse-monifa-sterling-167847/

[Mark]

ACLU Targets Christian Crime: Police Who Believe in Bible Can't Be Trusted to Protect Citizens

The American Civil Liberties Union is targeting an Oklahoma police department for posting scripture verses on the department Facebook page.

ACLU attorneys say the Mounds Police Department's use of scripture on their Facebook page is a "clear violation of the central tenets of the American government."

"By promoting one specific religion on its official Facebook page, the Mounds Police Department has established clear preference for that faith above other faiths and above no religious faith at all. This kind of government interference with our religious freedom is simply not permissible under United States or Oklahoma law," said Brady Henderson, legal director for the ACLU of Oklahoma.

Henderson also went on to say that because of the scripture verses, the police department cannot be trusted to protect its citizens.

"The actions of the Mounds Police Department call into question whether or not the department can be trusted to adequately protect all those living under its jurisdiction, including members of minority faiths and those of no religious faith at all. By establishing a preference for the Christian faith, the department undermines confidence in their ability to perform their duties in a manner consistent with our understanding of one of our most basic and cherished liberties," he said.

Despite the backlash, Chief Antonio Porter told FOX 23, he isn't fazed by the ACLU and continues to post scriptures verses to the department Facebook page every day.

"With all the negativity in the world, it is time for people to start coming together with positive words and prayer," Porter said.

Oklahoma state Sen. James Leewright came out publicly in support of the Mounds Police Department.

"Your scriptures and uplifting words are a part of what makes Mounds and Creek County the place we call home," Leewright said in a letter. "Thank you for being a positive voice in your community and reminding us all to be thankful for the blessings the Lord has given us. Your are a true blessing to Mounds."

http://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/us/2017/september/aclu-targets-christian-crime-police-who-believe-in-bible-cant-be-trusted-to-protect-citizens

[Mark]

Christian school banned by city and Supremes let it happen

The U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear a case in which a Michigan township changed its zoning laws to prevent a Christian school from entering the community.

http://www.wnd.com/2018/04/christian-school-banned-by-city-and-supremes-let-it-happen/