Saturday, February 24, 2007

In the latest highly publicized court case involving the forward propulsion of the radical Gay agenda within the United States, we learn that the exercise of parental rights and control over the upbringing of their children "… would undermine teaching and learning…" within the context of a public school classroom. World Net Daily reports that the federal civil rights case of David Parker has been dismissed in Massachusetts by U.S. District Judge Mark L. Wolf. Mr Parker. along with his wife, Tonia Parker and Joseph and Robin Wirthlin initiated their suit by alleging that " district officials and staff at Eastbrook Elementary School violated state law and civil rights by indoctrinating their children about a lifestyle they, as Christians, teach is immoral"......."refusing to follow state law." Specifically, the school officials, on at least two occasions, presented to children information promoting the gay lifestyle without notifying parents, who could then choose to remove their children from this teaching.

Many have been ouraged by this ruling, taking it as a victory for purveyors of the Homosexual and Lesbian lifestyles. Part of the outrage stems from various statements by Judge Wolf in His official ruling, which can be accessed here. While outrage is understandable, what is more outrageous is that part of the ruling which has been left unmentioned and unexplained. While attention has been focused on official statements which surely can be disagreed with by most in this country, the foundation upon which those statements stand has been left completely unexamined by all, including Attorneys, Ministers, Politicans and Pro Family Advocates.

This foundation is a little known legal doctrine known as Parens Patriae. Succinctly put, it means that the State, the Government, is the parent of the Nation. Though not specifically mentioned in this case, as well as many other federal cases, it nevertheless undergirds the arguments of the State of Massachusetts as well as the official ruling of Judge Wolf and his particular statements. Most knowledge and understanding of this fundmental doctrine can be found in many State level cases and their final dispositions.

Within the doctrine of Parens Patriae also resides another far reaching truth which you may find hard to believe. Parens Patriae also means that the State owns your children. That's right! Your children belong to the State! They are State property!

Preposterous, you say!? Well, you may disagree, but I challenge you to look up the phrase Parens Patriae and cases within your State. Believe me, they are in every State of the Union and you will not have difficulty finding the evidence. You may be shocked, though, that such a legal reality could be found within the United States, a land known for Liberty. Actually, the concept is as old as the united States and has been advocated since its inception. I'll give you one example.

There were three movers and shakers among the Founding Fathers when it came to Education, two of which were Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Rush. Rush was arguable the most accomplished in the field and had this to say about the education of youth.

"Let our pupil be taught that he does not belong to himself, but that he is public property."

You would expect a statement of this nature out of The Communist Manifesto or Mein Kampf, wouldn't you? Yet this is from a Founding Father and signer of the Declaration of Independence. Not exactlythe language of liberty!

So, what does this mean for us today? If your child is actually public property, what is the legal position of parents in relation to their child? What is the legal position and responsibilities of the State to the Parents? And you thought you understood education!

Tuesday, February 20, 2007

This past fall when the words of Pope Benedict incited a violent response from radical Muslims in various parts of the world, the focus of the World was on the Pontiff. Curiosity had many waiting to see the outcome of this diplomatic exchange.

Well, before the leader of the Vatican State could complete his scheduled trip to the Middle East, spokesmen for Islam had plenty to say, none of which edified Pontifical self esteem. In addition, the President of the United States, George W. Bush was included in such lowly verbiage.

The statements make very interesting reading! Please see above!

Any insights to offer?

Monday, February 19, 2007

In a startling move for many religious types, it looks as if Anglicans and Roman Catholics will again be joined at the hip. In a major move towards melding the religions of the World, the Vatican would welcome back one of its long lost Protestant rebels.

Can you imagine what Luther and Calvin are saying now?

On the heals of President Vladimir Putin's announcement of the possibility of "a new cold war" comes this bold warning by Russian General Nikolai Solovtsov to Poland and the Czech Republic.

"If the governments of Poland and the Czech Republic take such a step ... the Strategic Missile Forces will be capable of targeting these facilities if a relevant decision is made," Solovtsov told reporters in Moscow, asserting the U.S. plan could upset strategic balance of power in the region.

So, has the United States become the World's antagonist? Or do we just happen to be on every Nation's "Bad Guy" list?

Are the Russians to be taken seriously? Or is this an idle threat offered by a pompous Military leader?

This article from the BBC reveals potential attack plans by the United States against Iran should the Iranian state refuse to cease plans for nuclear capability.

Could such a leak be planned? If so, why? What could be gained by such a move?

Who stands to gainwith such a confrontation?

Sunday, February 18, 2007

Of all the personalities clamoring for our attention, who would have guessed that Madonna would have it by this type of statement!

This is typical Madonna, as this article reveals. By that I mean that Madonna chooses Jesus as an example we all should emulate. She includes him among other notable personalities, specifically, Ghandi, Martin Luther King and John Lennon.

Kinda makes one wonder just what Jesus she is talking about. I don't think it is the historical Jesus as revealed in Scripture.

Here is a quote from the above article by Pat Boone:

"If there were an evil genius coordinating the perfect plan to undermine the basis for all morality in America, one who had control of most influential media – movies, television, popular music, newspapers, magazines, radio and even ad agencies; if this genius could infiltrate the churches and many humanitarian organizations and convince them that the "old rules" no longer apply; and if he had the power to intimidate political leaders and judges into abandoning the "old rules" as well … he couldn't change our lives much more radically than they're already being changed."

Do you find yourself agreeing with Pat Boone? If so, what is the proper response? How do you combat the onslaught of cultural change?

If not, in what way do you disagree with at Boone? And what is your response to the radical changes taking place?