Wednesday, March 03, 2010

The Knives are Definitely out for Catherine Ashton

The news continues to worsen for the surprise "winners" of the European Union's November 2009 power struggles and their compromise appointments. I refer to EU President Herman Rompuy and High Representative Catherine Ashton. Quoting from a new article from BBC, it is again emphasized how she is being compared unfavorably to Javier Solana's former administration under pre-Lisbon Treaty conditions:

She inherits the mantle of the veteran Spanish diplomat Javier Solana. But she has extra responsibilities, as she also represents the European Commission abroad.

Work in progress

The commission offices in the world's capitals are being converted into EU embassies - a process expected to take years. But they are not expected to take on consular duties such as issuing visas or work permits - prerogatives jealously guarded by the member states.

The criticism of Lady Ashton, coming so soon after her appointment, reflects confusion about her role, according to Richard Whitman, professor of politics at the University of Bath.

"Lisbon has created confusion about the powers that fall to her," he told the BBC.

"She has had an inordinate amount of criticism in a very short time. This is a very sensitive area for member states. They can easily get offended if she appears to privilege one institution over another."

That sensitivity was on show last week, when Lady Ashton was criticised by ministers from France, Spain and the Netherlands for failing to attend an EU defence ministers' meeting. Mr Solana, it was noted, always went to such meetings.

She had a double-booking - and opted to attend the inauguration of the new Ukrainian President, Viktor Yanukovych. That role could have been performed by Mr Barroso or the new European Council President, Herman Van Rompuy - but they were otherwise engaged.

"The EU needed to send the right political signal to the new administration in Ukraine - that's why she went," her spokesperson told the BBC.

Europe is certainly having its troubles -- since implementation of the "Lisbon Treaty" it has certainly fallen in prestige on the world stage and its compromise "leadership" of President Rompuy and High Representative Catherine Ashton -- surprises to both, are being blamed. A Lisbon II strategy is being proposed for which President Rompuy is to lead discussions, but already high controversy brews over that as well.

The prophet Daniel told King Nebuchadnezzar that the 10 toes -- some strong, some weak on the King's gigantic dream image represented 10 kings partly of iron, partly of clay "that would not cleave together." (Daniel, Chapter 2) The Book of Revelation (Chapter 17) foretold ten kings who would come together and "share power" with the Beast for one hour. God had put in their hearts to hand their power to the beast so that the words of His (God's) prophecy would be fulfilled. These same 10 kings would per both Daniel 7 and Revelation 17 make war with God's people. Sobering thoughts!

The very difficult position that Catherine Ashton was put into was summarized by Columnist Bet-El of the Guardian Co.Uk:

A British woman was parachuted into Brussels to undertake possibly one of the most crucial jobs in this particular juncture of the EU – but she has not made everything tidy and working spit-spot. Instead, there is a growing swell of discontent with her performance, in the EU institutions and among member states.

In truth, the member states have no one but themselves to blame: they chose Ashton in a manner that would have had a nanny wag her finger at each then dispatch them to a corner in shame. There was no coherence, professionalism or transparency in the process, which seemed to be totally concerned with ensuring one state or political group did not do better than any other, rather than the needs of the post. To this end, Ashton was a perfect fit as she ticked both boxes – but she did not have the professional qualifications for the job of effectively foreign minister and the director of a major new international institution, the European External Action Service(EEAS).

In the meantime, Javier Solana has been doing great things on the world stage, pontificating how Europe would be the laboratory for a very necessary world government. I can't help but wonder who he has in mind for running the Europe that he has long insisted needed to speak with a "Single Voice."

For some strange reason, I can't seem to help looking at Europe as it stands today and thinking in historically precedent terms of equally strange and evil times: WEIMAR REPUBLIC, WEIMAR REPUBLIC.

God help Herman Rompuy and Catherine Ashton. I fear their heads may be about to roll in Lisbon II and beyond!

Stay tuned!


Essential background information from Wikipedia on WEIMAR REPUBLIC

"Weimarer Republik (help·info), IPA: [ˈvaɪmaʁɐ ʁepuˈbliːk]) is the name given by historians to the parliamentary republic established in 1919 in Germany to replace the imperial form of government, named after Weimar, the city where the constitutional assembly took place. Its official name was still Deutsches Reich (German Empire), however. Following World War I, the republic emerged from the German Revolution in November 1918. In 1919, a national assembly convened in the city of Weimar, where a new constitution for the German Reich was written, to be adopted on 11 August. This liberal democracy eventually lapsed in the early 1930s, leading to the ascent of the NSDAP and Adolf Hitler in 1933. Although the constitution of 1919 was never officially repealed, the legal measures taken by the Nazi government in February and March 1933, commonly known as Gleichschaltung ("coordination") meant that the government could legislate contrary to the constitution. The constitution became irrelevant, therefore 1933 is usually seen as the end of the Weimar Republic and the beginning of Hitler's "Third Reich".
In its 14 years the Weimar Republic was faced with numerous problems, including hyperinflation, political extremists and their paramilitaries, and hostility from the victors of the First World War. However, it overcame many discriminatory regulations of the Treaty of Versailles, reformed the currency, unified tax politics and the railway system. Its constitution was seen as one of the most modern in the world[citation needed] and the Republic represented a period of cultural innovation in Germany."

Appears so very, very close to what is happening NOW!

Craig, I don't want to open a can of worms, and probably won't comment on this anymore. There is a HUGE difference between associations in the world and the church. As I said, the context was within the church, and Paul was very clear.

This is not a difficult concept...we will just have to disagree.
What I find interesting about the article (Ashton takes flak), is that one of the things she is most criticized for is NOT going to Haiti, yet she said the UN TOLD HER NOT TO GO.

I think there may be more to this than meets the eye!

The context of 1 Cor 5 is a believer, a brother, in the church -- not an unbeliever -- who was to be excommunicated for his incestuous relationship that he boasted of.

The "church" -- ekklesia -- by definition is a gathering of "called-out ones." Obviously, this does not include unbelievers. Yet, the question is: how do you bar non-believers from coming in the doors of a "church" dwelling? And, if we were to do that, then what about those who are truly seeking and not yet converted?

These are hard questions, I know.
Craig, once again, pay attention the context and my own words.

I said that a Pastor/Minister giving communion to an OPENLY, KNOWN homosexual would clearly be forbidden by scripture.

Did I say anything about barring non-believers from coming in the doors of a "church" dwelling?

The answer would be "no".

This is getting ridiculous and I don't like spending time defending something I did not say.

Let just move along ;-)

Please check your gmail. I have sent some more disturbing connections to FIDIS and the European Commision your way.

There's no such thing as the right to receive communion. There are guidelines for all Catholics, so why should gay Catholics expect different rules. They are not above everyone else. A pro-abort politician would similarly be denied communion. As for unbelievers they are welcome to come to church.


Given the recent debate between you and Craig, I thought I might add a little to the conversation. Most homosexual people fail to realize that their lifestyle is a choice. This is due large in part to propaganda that has been spread that the condition is a condition one is born with. One can easily counter this by showing that not one single person is born attracred to their same sex. However facts like this are ignored. It is usually at the point where someone becomes sexually involved that this issue rears its head, yet again this is ignored. In their hearts I believe most of this bend truly realize this as the case, despite their claims to the contrary. Beliefs and religions are matters of choice as well, so we are essentially dealing with one group with a contradictory view of another wishing to impose that view on the other. Despite the fact that both are CHOICES made by individuals. When taken in this context, no other point can be made other than this is a violation of freedom of religion. To super impose a contrary belief upon a religion can not be described in any other way. Given that the issue is whether or not the priest had a right to deny the people in question communion. One makes their own decisions. This appears to me to have been a fishing expedition in which the homosexual caught a whale.

I agree with you. One may have certain inclinations, but to assume they have no control over their actions, is to say they have no free will. Gay marriage is slowly being legalized in the US, it's already legal in Canada and certain EU states, the rest are being forced to legalize it too. The Next step is how sexual ethics should be taught in schools. We are seeing this happen in Quebec and now there's a push in Ontario too. It's being made mandatory. It won't be long before those of us who disagree with the state will be outcasts and will be seen as enemies.

Mandatory Curriculum for Ontario Schools Promotes Homosexuality, Masturbation

Obama Pushing for New United Nations Agency Dedicated to Radical Feminism

Maine Human Rights Commission Debates ‘Biology-based Bathrooms’


I didn't intend to put words in your mouth. I was extrapolating on the concept of forbidding someone to take communion. I can envision activists trying to start trouble by coming en masse to accept communion. It could conceivably get to the point of requiring "bouncers" or the like near the priest/pastor to prevent such individuals from partaking. So, then where do we draw the line? How will we stop them?

You wrote:

I said that a Pastor/Minister giving communion to an OPENLY, KNOWN homosexual would clearly be forbidden by scripture.

I'm not trying to be "argumentative" -- as that term usually has a negative connotation -- but rather I'm seeking clarification. I just don't see scripture forbidding offering communion to unbelievers. I've seen the scripture that both you and savvy used; but, I just don't see a direct or even indirect connection.
Is this a doctrine of the Catholic church?

I know we all agree that unbelievers and especially blatant in-your-face sinners who are trying to get a rise out of the "church" should not take communion. However, by denying someone communion you give them fuel for their fire, so to speak, to come after the "church." Why not just give 'em what they want:

21 If your enemy is hungry, give him food to eat;
if he is thirsty, give him water to drink.

22 In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head,
and the LORD will reward you.
[Proverbs 25:21-22 / Romans 12:20 NIV]

I understand that communion is not about food; but, in the context of the Roman verses we are to "live at peace with everyone" and "leave room for God's wrath" [vv 18-19].

Why would an unbeliever want to receive something they do not believe in?

The Early Church that compiled the Bible was clear that unbelievers should not receive communion

Justin Martyr

"We call this food Eucharist, and no one else is permitted to partake of it, except one who believes our teaching to be true and who has been washed in the washing which is for the remission of sins and for regeneration [i.e., has received baptism] and is thereby living as Christ enjoined.

For not as common bread nor common drink do we receive these, but since Jesus Christ our Savior was made incarnate by the word of God and had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so too, as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nurtured, is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus (First Apology 66 [A.D. 151]).

They also upheld belief in the real presence.

Martin Luther and various Protestant reformers did too. It was only in the past 100 years that this was discarded.

New Syrian-supplied weapon enables Hizballah to shoot down Israeli aircraft
DEBKAfile Exclusive Report
March 3, 2010, 6:30 PM (GMT+02:00)

Sophisticated anti-air IGLA missile
Syria has defied Israel's caution that handing over new strategic weapons to the Lebanese Hizballah would compel Israel to strike targets inside Syria. debkafile's military sources disclose that Damascus has just smuggled across the border a number of Russian-made IGLA-S surface-to-air missiles capable of intercepting low-flying F-16 warplanes, drones, helicopters, cruise missiles, transports and surveillance aircraft in all weather conditions, by day or night.
Tuesday, March 2, the head of the research division of Israeli Military Intelligence, Brig. Gen. Yossi Beidetz, reported to the Knesset foreign affairs and security committee that Syria had smuggled to Hizballah strategic weaponry more sophisticated that it had ever dared transfer before.
Beidetz did not specify the type of missiles, but our US sources disclosed he was referring to the advanced Russian IGLA 9K338, a shoulder-mounted missile which poses a threat to low-flying aircraft and other flying projectiles in all weather conditions. Its other prime asset is that it is virtually impossible to jam its launch and trajectory with electronic counter-measures.

The US sources could not say whether these missiles were taken out of the stock recently consigned by Moscow to Iran's Revolutionary Guards or delivered to Syria and thence to Hizballah.

debkafile's military sources report that the IGLA-S in Hizballah's hands will seriously hamper Israeli Air force surveillance activity over Lebanon and curtail its operational options against the surface-to-surface rockets when positioned to shield them against attack.
Its presence in the Hizballah armory means that the Iran-backed Lebanese Shiite extremists will be free to loose their missiles and rockets against Israeli towns in relative safety, with Israeli aircraft hard-pressed to destroy them.
Moscow and Damascus have covered the IGLA-S transaction to a third party by defining the system as defensive. However, seen from Israel, it adds another layer to Hizballah's aggressive capabilities by shielding its massive array of rockets against aerial attack.

While visiting Washington last week, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak warned that, if attacked by Hizballah, Israel would also go for its sponsors, Syria and Iran.
My two and a half cents worth-
I wonder if Craig's idea on how to handle communion isn't a bit like "casting pearls before swine"?
Just a thought. And here is another (the half cent)- When I was a young teener, I remember an even younger kid, a boy, running around with his towel when he got out his pool, wearing the towel like a majestic cape, and exclaiming how he is Queen Victoria. When I hear that homosexuality is a choice, I think of that incident, because I suspected this kid was inclined to the gay life. I know he has a choice, but I think it is like alcoholics, in that some can booze it up and not become alcoholics and habitual drunkards, and others, so it is claimed, have a predisposition for it.

Why would an unbeliever want to receive something they do not believe in?

This is a good question. There are some individuals who believe they are "Christians" and that God will look past their sins -- or they don't even believe their sins are in fact sins.

Unfortunately, we have "pastors" in the pulpit who don't even believe in sin as taught in the Bible; and, some don't even believe in a literal hell. There are universalists teaching in "Christian" churches and worse.

Frankly, I see false teachings by deceiving deceivers as being worse than this particular issue. These folks are leading souls to eternal damnation -- wolves in sheeps clothing.

Thanks for pointing out that early church leaders taught that only believers should partake of communion / the eucharist. However, I see this as a "doctrine of man" rather than something upheld in Scripture.
Anon @ 8:02pm

Regarding your "1/2 cent" comment: I agree with your viewpoint. I believe all of us have a predisposition to at least one type of sin. My struggle may not be yours and vice versa.

Where does scripture say that unbelievers should partake in communion? It really makes no sense. The Lord's supper is the Lord's supper. It's not a charity dinner.


I wrote at 7:30pm:

I know we all agree that unbelievers and especially blatant in-your-face sinners who are trying to get a rise out of the "church" should not take communion.

I'll try to use an analogy. In some states in the USA there are "no helmet" laws meaning someone can ride a motorcycle on the streets without a helmet. Therefore, we cannot forbid these riders; yet, we can and should discourage them from going without a helmet for their own safety. However, the choice and resultant consequences are their's to make.
CNN is reporting a 6.4 earthquake rattling southern Taiwan.

Surely people must start asking themselves, "What is going on here?"

I've already thought that shortly after the Chilean quake. I believe Taiwan is along the infamous "ring of fire" that Chile shares. It seems the Earth is quite active.

I do agree the choice is theirs to make. But, communion is given out by a Eucharistic minister or by a Priest and if they suspect foul play, they have a right to deny someone communion. They have a choice to make too. Since you do not believe in the real presence you won't understand how serious this really is.

Anon 8:02 and Savvy,

To an extent I agree with you both. As an example, I have always had what one might consider an addictive personality. In such I have had my issues with drugs both prescription and non prescription. This was a huge issue for me when I broke my neck, as the first thing a doctor will do when one sustains this type of injury is prescribe pain medication. I have also had more than my fair share of issues with sexual sin. However, I can directly attribute both of my issues with problems that my parents had of like nature.

That being said, these are my short comings. I would never try to cop out by saying they were conditions I was born with, despite the fact that I could make a case that the bible states they may be curses on my blood line. The homosexual issue discussed is the same. However, in this generation of no one ever wanting to take responsibility for their self, states and institutions pushing copability onto others, is it any wonder we have a generation lost in their own sin?

When taken in combination with the attempt to silence what our Father deems just, as well as His people, is it any wonder we find ourselves debating such issues? One could easily point the finger at the gay community, but in truth I feel sorry for them. We as believers have a hard enough time trying to figure out where the deception lies. Let alone to be in this type of sin, while being told by the beast that the church hates them. Is it any wonder that the homosexual community is as against us as they are? Is it any wonder that they put themselves out to be martyrs for their cause as they do?
Savvy, you wrote:

I do agree the choice is theirs to make.

OK, good, we agree.

But, communion is given out by a Eucharistic minister or by a Priest and if they suspect foul play, they have a right to deny someone communion. They have a choice to make too.

I'll defer to your knowledge of the Catholic faith here. If you're saying that by the Cathechism or some other Catholic doctrine the priest has a right to deny someone communion; then, that's something they will have to fight for.

Since you do not believe in the real presence you won't understand how serious this really is.

Fair enough.

Thanks for clarifying to me your view.

The church does not hate gays. Being gay is not a sin itself, the practise of a homosexual lifestyle is, engaging in and promoting gay sex is wrong, the same way that it's wrong to promote adultery etc.

Catechism of the Catholic Church on the inalienable dignity belonging to them by virtue of their being created in the image and likeness of God. "[M]en and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies ... must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided" (CCC 2358).

The next question is naturally whether this incident is a case of unjust discrimination. It is not. Adulterers too are made in the image and likeness of God, but someone who unrepentantly sang the praises of adultery would be equally ineligible to receive communion under canon law, which states that those "obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to holy communion" (Can. 915).

"Is it any wonder that the homosexual community is as against us as they are? Is it any wonder that they put themselves out to be martyrs for their cause as they do?"

JD, our stance has been clarified many times. We have sincerely ask them to study the Theology of the Body in order to understand why we hold the positions we hold. If someone refuses to learn there's nothing you can do. It's true that only God can enlighten their minds.

On the other hand there are celibate gays who do understand the church's position very well and choose to accept it.


I believe you may have misunderstood the point I was attempting to make. As it was not to argue the churches stance on the issue, as I am in agreement with you in this matter. My point was, that most will identify first with someone of a like mind or belief. When the gay community does this, they are often taught (even if falsely) that the church hates them. Normally when someone else comes to a point that their life and beliefs are in question, this presents a opening for salvation. However, within the gay community this becomes difficult as they have been indoctrinated to believe that they are hated by people of faith. This becomes an issue for both communities, as the church will stand on what is just, while the gay community is so lost to their sin and the engrained belief (taught by society) that the church hates them, that they feel it would be a violation of themselves to listen to what a beliver has to say. This can only serve the establishment spinning both sides against one another. It is essentially a game of psychological chess. As the beast has poisoned a group of people against the church, making them in turn hate and protest what the church stands for. The gay community is but one example of this, however the same case could be made for many different groups. This is why I say I feel sorry for them. As they have been lead so far into deception, that most of the church is ill prepared to deal with it.

Just to clarify, when I say church in no way do I mean any denomination, but the body as a whole. I would also like to say that I believe the only way to circumvent the lie of the churches hatred toward the gay community, is to expose it for the lie it is and to show who has perpetrated the lie.

Thanks for clarifying things. I do agree the establishment makes it look like Christians are against everybody else. People say Christians should get with the times and that gays are their new victims like Jews, heretics, witches etc once were. From a historical perspective all sides have had people responsible for fuelling tensions on either side.


CNN is reporting a 6.4 earthquake in taiwan....

whats next.... my goodness.
Sydney Australia is having it's Mardi Gras this week... Many here are praying and fasting as they spin deception and fall to pray.

I will say this though, it gets bigger every passing yr.

Only God can show them the way the truth and light is such a parade that promotes sin. We know God loves the person not the sin and that goes for all sin.
Revelation 12:11, "They overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony, and they loved not their lives unto the death

I've always thought about this martyrdom in terms of being burned at the stake or beheading, etc. But perhaps one application to this verse is the refusal of the mark (chip?). Such refusal of needed health care could be a slow and painful death or starvation.

I can see many, even "Christians" saying that they really don't want to take the chip, but that they "had no other choice" if they are to receive cancer care (for example).

Current events certainly change my view of that verse. Obviously, if the government is going to become our health care provider, the government "has a right" to ensure you are taking your meds properly. The chip is the answer.
Mardi Gras this week in Australia? Am I correct in assuming this is an Orthodox Confession? Ash Wednesday was at least two weeks ago in the USA for Catholics and Protestants on that Easter calendar. The Orthodox schedule, I understand, is sometime later.


With all due respect, I have been watching this "Gay Community" scene for a long time. I have seen nothing but compassion for those caught up in it. The hatred has clearly been from the organized homosexual networks (BGLT) towards the church and anything that smacks of God. There clearly has been an organized effort by some of those networks to disrupt Christianity -- even a Lansing Church was a victim of a mass storming of the Church by organized riots.

I hardly think the Church needs to repent for resisting demands that the Church compromise plain doctrine. The Cashless Society was one end time indicator. However, Jesus also warned that the times would parallel those of both Noah and Sodom/Gomorrah.


Reading your last post carefully, I believe we are saying the same thing but from different approaches.


I believe we are as well. I clarified my position because I saw that some confusion was caused by my initial statement.

At this time Sin is catching up as the events are going on all around us every where. I was most fortunate to speak to a guy who was gay for quiet along time in the work place..

I lost track of him for yrs.
While I was at work about 3yr ago
I meet him again, with his wife, He gave his Heart to Jesus and turn away from the life he once had and found a smashing lady and they married.

You wouldn't of known, he was remotely once in such activity.

This is a testimony only.

The Love of God is so great towards us He will never leave us in the state we are in Amen!

God Bless you all

There are plenty of plenty who have given up that lifestyle. One of the reasons why I don't buy the argument that this is a civil rights issue similar to blacks or Jews.


Part of our persecution is coming from the gay lobby, the other from the feminist network. These issues are dividing churches.

Savvy I agree with you there and amen!

I could only speak for this one person and don't know anyone else who is inclined to run to other....

WE do have to be careful what we say as everyone is different etc...
Lo said...

CNN is reporting a 6.4 earthquake in taiwan....

whats next.... my goodness.

IRIS Seismic Monitor

VANUATU ISLANDS reported earthquake just a few mins ago 6.4 also..
I have not found any references in the Bible in support of homosexuality. Some may interpret the way John refers to himself in the Gospel of John--the one who the Lord loved--as implying a gay relationship. I think that's faulty thinking. It does not imply such a relationship any more than saying Jesus and Mary Magdalene were an item.

Anyway, I believe it is totally incompatible with Christian living. The Apostle Paul agrees with this notion. Not everything (or everyone)goes together. Taco sauce does not go with ice cream. They are totally incompatible.

Sorry if I'm referring to the last thread item, but it seems to be the big discussion here. Whether or not the priest denies anyone communion should only be considered church business. This is a matter the church needs to deal with, not governments. That's the scariest thing. If the government of the Netherlands (or any nation) imposes itself into the matter, that is extremely concerning. With all due respect to the Dutch government--butt out!

There's another row in Malaysia, where two Muslims got into a Catholic church, took communion and then spat it out. It's a sign of disrespect . From what I heard it's illegal to defame a religion in the country, but the government is simply making excuses for these people. If Christians on the other hand had done something in a Mosque, I don't think they would be so kind.

I don't want these men punished but the gov needs to stop defending them.

Information from the office of Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina.

You'd think the Obama administration is busy enough controlling the banks, insurance companies and automakers, but thanks to whistleblowers at the Department of the Interior, we now learn they're planning to increase their control over energy-rich land in the West.

Comment: It is quite obvious that Obama has his own copy of the United Nation's Agenda 21{ Sustainable Development} plans and is deeply involved in advancing the entire protocol of Globalization for the New World Order.

The political end of the New Age movement is moving rapidly here in the US. We need more reporting from everyone reading here on how that is taking place. And yes, I do follow Glenn Beck's information.


First hand information on how Austria was taken over in the 1940s and the parallels with what is happening now in America.


This one I had already read about, and my thoughts were close to the
same regarding Agenda 21. I do see Demint suprisingly has mentioned
that these type of activities are not new or strictly exclusive to
this administration. As land grabs in the name of "conservation" have
been happening since the Carter administration, in exactly the same
manner laid out under Agenda 21 and other documents on sustainable
development. What I find hillarious about this most recent piece is
some of the animals listed as benefactors. For example the coyote,
which in many states, especially western states, is listed as an
agricultural menace. Largely due to the animal having no predator to
curb their population growth. This typically leads to a depleted
population of many species of smaller prey animals.

A similar situation is unfolding here in Michigan as the state has repopulated
wood lands with wolves, in a attempt to curb a out of control deer
population. A population which grew out of control due to overly
regulated hunting seasons, all in the name of conservation. Where
logic would have deemed a extension on the limit of hunts as the most
reasonable course of action. Now we have a wolf population growing out
of control, encroaching on areas heavily populated by people. I am
sure the solution here will be something just as ridiculous, such as
moving people away from the wolf population. Of course the reasoning
given for all of this was conservation and sustainability. Nice to see
that our leaders still are not waisting their time on frivilous things
such as logic
I am not a Creationist, but this is just another example of how the government can't stop attacking religion.

Australia Bans Christian Schools from Teaching Creationism


Can you get us a tinyurl for that cite?


How long until we can't teach it in Church either?


Here's the tiny url.

The government said it was because it could not be scientifically proven.

The Big Bang Theory can't be proven either. None of us can prove how creation came into existence. We weren't around then. There was one who was around. And all He had to say was, "Let there be light!"

Neither can some of the aspects of the european cultural heritage network known as EPOCH. However that is fully government sponsored and spread as if fact within universities. Funny the hypocritical double standards that are employed to certain groups.

Well said. In Nazi Germany Eugenics was considered science because it could be scientifically proven. under the New Age plan religions that cannot be scientifically proven will have to go. The irony is that the very people who are trying to deny reality are deciding what science is.

Hi Savvy,
I am not a Creationist, but this is just another example of how the government can't stop attacking religion.

Australia Bans Christian Schools from Teaching Creationism


I have my children in a Christian school here in South Aust.. First time I heard about it, thank you hun.
I have a personal friendship with the headmaster and his wife. I be asking questions.....

God Bless you...

I just want to say birth pangs are coming to Aust... thick and fast now.

Every time I turn around, "then suddenly happens " there will be no where to run too except the arms of Jesus.

No Problem.

Biblical admonition against effeminate males.

1 Corinthians 6:9-11 (King James Version)

9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

Now look up effeminate.

Main Entry: 1ef·fem·i·nate
Pronunciation: \-nət\
Function: adjective

Etymology: Middle English, from Latin effeminatus, from past participle of effeminare to make effeminate, from ex- + femina woman — more at feminine
Date: 15th century

1 : having feminine qualities untypical of a man : not manly in appearance or manner

2 : marked by an unbecoming delicacy or overrefinement

Think of it this way, god created man in His image, effeminate males are a mockery of God because God and His Son Jesus never acted that way in comportment or mannerisms.
Its not just about sexual relations, it is also about comportment unbefitting people who are to conform to Jesus's image.

Constance wrote: "For some strange reason, I can't seem to help looking at Europe as it stands today and thinking in historically precedent terms of equally strange and evil times: WEIMAR REPUBLIC, WEIMAR REPUBLIC."

Eurabia, as it is, is bad enough with its sucking up to Islam's Office of the Econonic Conference (OIC). And now Obama seeks to emulate Eurabia.

This is likely to end up like the 1973 European conferences with the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) that ended with massive Muslim immigration and the creation of Eurabia -- with pro-Arab hostility towards Israel in return for economic favors (oil), European support for recovery of Arab occupied lands including Jerusalem, and successful solicitation of Christian support for these policies.


Obama calls 'entrepreneurship summit' with Muslims
Mar 5 03:47 PM US/Eastern

The White House on Friday announced a "summit on entrepreneurship" to build economic ties with the Islamic world, part of President Barack Obama's outreach to Muslims.
The White House said it has invited participants from more than 40 countries over five continents for the April 26-27 conference in Washington.
"The summit will highlight the role entrepreneurship can play in addressing common challenges while building partnerships that will lead to greater opportunity abroad and at home," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said.
Obama first spoke of the entrepreneurship conference in his signature June 4 speech in Cairo to the Islamic world.
In the closely watched address, Obama said the United States was seeking a "new beginning" with the Islamic world to rebuild relations that had sharply deteriorated over the past decade.
i like information in this blog
Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Subscribe to Posts [Atom]