God , Parents and the State - To Whom do the Children Belong?

As parents, we have a duty to know the Truth, then act in obedience for the benefit of the children God has placed into our care.

Children are a Blessing, not a Burden

How anyone could look on babies as anything other than precious is beyond me. To do so is a sad commentary on the individual human heart. It must be remembered that only God can change such a condition!

God's Gift of Children - Property????????

It must be remembered this quote of Benjamin Rush, Founding Father and Signer of the Declaration of Independence, "We should teach our pupils that they do not belong to themselves, but are public property."....................­....................If you think the idea that children are property of the State is new, think again. It's been in America for awhile.

Obama & Tolerance in America - Is it Better to be a Homeschool Family or Gay

In the light of the recent national coming out of NBA veteran Jason Collins as a man who prefers sex with other men, its interesting to take note of the priorities of the President Obama and his administration.

President Obama was only too glad to make a personal call to Jason Collins to show official and personal support for his prominent revelations. And this call was made in the midst of national fanfare celebrating the announcement, American tolerance towards it and its substance.

The Romeike Family - Persecuted by the German Government for Homeschooling

On the other hand, the Obama administration has been responsible for the denial and argument against political asylum of the Romeike Family from Germany who came to the United State to seek political protection from the German Government's repeated intruding into and interrupting the raising and teaching of their children at home while not always conforming to the German society's view on social issues. The children have repeatedly been forcibly separated from their parents, housed with other families and the parents have been ordered to pay heavy fines for not conforming to government mandates. While initially being granted asylum, the Obama administration rescinded that status and has argued for their deportation to Germany saying that none of the Romeike's rights are being violated.

If you are unfamiliar with this Family and their plight, please read this information. More is available through an online search.

In the light of the Appeals Court denial of asylum, this article was written wondering if the Romeike's would have fared better if they had confessed to being a Gay couple.

So, it's more tolerable for a man to have sex with another man than it is for parents to be able to raise and train their children properly without undo government interference! Welcome to the Third Reich.

Christian Worldview - Are Christians to Suffer A Political Holocaust?

 

Note: This article was written during President Bush's Second Term

In this article from World Net Daily, Rabbi Daniel Lapin gives a stern warning to American Christians that there are concerted attempts to diminish or actually exterminate the influence and impact Christians have in the world today, especially in the political realm. He provides proof of this campaign by citing the many examples of books currently being published containing overt anti Christian rhetoric and bias.

So, presuming such a plan has been implemented, how is such a large campaign carried out to successful fruition? With hundreds of millions of Christians in the world and tens of millions in the United States and with an Evangelical Christian as President in George W. Bush, how does one eliminate such a large population group? Is it possible that a worldwide holocaust is about to begin? I admit that such a thought seems out of the realm of possibility in such a civilized era such as ours, but do we dare eliminate this possibility, seeing that we are only 60 years removed from the human blight of Adolf Hitler?

Even now, the world is being warned of the potential repercussions of Europe's rejection of Christianity by Pope Leo XVI. And America is faced with the same consolidation of Europe into one bloc of nations, The North American Union. Are we to face the same annihilation through amalgamation of law and culture Europe has experienced? Are we about to see the distinctives of America become merged with those of Canada and Mexico? If so, what are the implications for the Christian?

 

Do the policies of Hitler return under the same type of human rights concerns? Are Christians going to be eliminated because of their negative impact on the world around them? Does the morally high ground of Christians and their God become the sacrificial altar upon which their literal blood is sacrificed. Do we see the policies of Cain make a widespread return? Is this to be the reaction of Cain to the righteousness preached by the Prophet Abel? Or do we turn a deaf ear to such ridiculous notions?

Or maybe the concerted effort to eliminate Christian ideas is to subvert their Christian distinctives. Is it possible that the best way to eliminate your enemy is to convince them to join you? Are Christians even aware of such modus operandi? Is it even a consideration that Christian enemies are subtly luring Christians into beliefs and practices that Jesus Christ never condones. Are we being sold a bill of spiritual goods which the Word of God specifically condemns?

If so, what are the results of such a diabolical subversion? Could it be that the plan is to turn Christians into the same as everyone else around them. They look the same. They believe the same. They act the same. They unknowingly serve the same agendas. Their values are slowly morphed into the will of others they know not. Their ignorance is used against them. And in the name of serving God, abominations against their God are engaged in.

Does this sound rather far fetched? I can understand why if that is the case. But the realities of Jewish elimination under the righteousness of the Third Reich in the not so distant past should serve to tell us that human depravity ever lurks beneath the thin veneer of civilized man. In fact, it could be said at this time that civilization has developed cracks and gaping holes which are in danger of becoming the norm, something the Jews know about intimately.

He that has ears to hear...........

Christian Worldview - School Children, Doctors & Behavior

Ken Ham - Answers in Genesis

I came across this piece of info while perusing the blog of Ken Ham. I thought it might be interesting to ponder.

But only if you don't know what "ODD" and "IED" is. The potential ramifications of such labeling and justification of destructive behavior are apparently ignored in view of sparing the child the unsavory aspect of having the child acknowledge and properly deal with his own actions. Or having someone else deal with them, say the Criminal Justice System.

Curfews & The Role of American Parents

The issue of curfews for children occasionally resurfaces in various locations in the United States. This time the State is California. As reported on One News Now, The San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors will review a proposed daytime curfew for children under the age of 18.

These laws, when proposed, usually create a firestorm of negative response from parents and parental organizations, especially among those homeschooling their children. The reason is rather obvious from a parental viewpoint. A daytime curfew would "restrict the constitutional rights of minors and instead encourage officers to selectively detain the youngsters."

Surprisingly, Finn Larsen of Christian Educators Association International says that parents are partly to blame for the problem. ""It is unfortunate that many parents, for whatever reason, are not providing good oversight and care for their children," he laments. "So what this does is it allows the state, if you will -- the police, the government -- to have a little bit more exercise of authority in a problem that, again, is growing.""

For those who may possess a little more curiosity than the normal resident, it may be interesting to know how the State views its citizens. Does it strike you as hypocritical that any State of the Union would attempt to impose itself within the family sphere in order to alleviate a problem, especially when that problem stems from a lack of parental oversight?

The answer is very simple. It is also written into law. The fact is that the State claims ownership of its citizens through the legal doctrine known as Parens Patriae, the State is the Parent of the Nation. So, when the property of the State, in this case the parents, aren't performing their civic duty, the State has the right, nay, the duty, to step in and correct the problem. The state is simply taking care of what is legally theirs. And, ultimately, the State's property will not and cannot determine what the State will do.

If you think that this is un-American and Unconstitutional, save your breath. This concept is as old as civilization and was present in the American Revolution. Benjamin Rush, a Signer of the Declaration of Independence and Founding Father extraordinaire, had this to say about children. "We must teach our pupils that they do not belong to themselves, but are public property."

Do you remember hearing that in history class? I didn't think so! Think about it.

The Commandments of Men & Human Divinity

I've recently been involved in a blog discussion on Commandments of Men moderated by Lewis . Unfortunately, I was kicked off. And even more unfortunate are the reasons for ending my welcome on his site.

While presenting himself and his actions as being biblical and loving, his manner of responding to, what he terms "religious addiction," is rather extreme in itself. Essentially, only those who can agree with the statements, conclusions and positions regarding, what they consider extreme religious indoctrination, are allowed to participate. Like me, anyone can begin to offer comments that don't necessarily agree with the premise of a particular post, but to begin to examine and critique their statements, conclusions and positions is a completely different matter. You will be allowed to proceed only so far. Then you will be shown the exit.

This whole blog seems to stem from the unfortunate experience of Lewis with a women he came to love and was on the verge of marrying. Then, the antics of her father began to interfere with their relationship and ultimately, destroyed it. So, the bliss that was theirs, was not allowed to come to marital fruition. You can read his 16 part account here.

While the story is sad and unfortunate, the response of Lewis and others on his blog may be even more unfortunate. While seemingly rejecting the extremes he encountered in his ex future father-in-law and his attitudes and actions regarding his daughter, Lewis ends up rejecting far more. While vehemently deriding and rejecting his supposedly ungodly and unbiblical actions, he ends up rejecting many things that are truly godly and biblical. Of course, he has specifically denied this "throwing the baby out with the bathwater."

Admittedly, his own life has changed drastically in the last few years. This episode with the destruction of a valuable relationship was simply apart of the entire equation of change.

Part of the result of this change is the conclusion that God has not preserved His message to mankind in what has become known as "The Bible." The 66 books, because they are the product of man and his thoughts, are rejected as being infallible and inerrant. To trust in the works of man in the compilation of the works of various authors over several centuries is considered to be Imbibling, the over partaking of and, ultimately, worship of the written word.

So, instead of an objective standard to live his life by, he elevates Love as the ultimate standard to seek in living his life. And for this concept, the words of Jesus have merit and are to be trusted. But please don't ask him to rely too heavily on the written words of Jesus when discussing Jesus' teachings on love or any other topic for that matter. That's going a bit too far. One might find himself Imbibling again if too much is made of the words of Jesus.

So, ultimately, it comes down to following the Holy Spirit within. He's never wrong and can always be trusted to lead you to do the right thing. But, of course, there's no standard to resort to to determine whether our actions are right or wrong. That is simply a matter between you and God. So, you can't tell Lewis that he's wrong.

If, on the other hand, you are engaged in an activity that Lewis considers extreme and religiously addictive, then he has every right to point this out to you and condemn you for it as well as all the other religious addicts that may be engaged in the same thing.

What this proves is one thing that many in this Post Christian American culture have succumbed to. They have elevated themselves and their thoughts as the ultimate standard. They have become their own God. Such is the plight of Lewis and all like him.

Is Homosexuality The Same As A Little White Lie?

With The American Family Radio Network steadily becoming the preferred choice of Christians when it comes to talk radio, it can be interesting to listen to the details of their dialogue with others. I heard a short discussion today between a host and caller wherein the caller chided the host for categorizing sin, since, according to Romans 6, all sin leads to death. Therefore, in the eyes of God, homosexuality is no worse than theft. The host meekly agreed with the caller, leading the audience to believe that the caller was right.

While technically true, it must be remembered that God does distinguish between certain actions and ascribes a certain level of severity of some over others. Homosexual sin , as well as heterosexual sin (adultery and fornication), is called an "abomination." Many other actions, though forbidden by God, are not labeled as severely. These same sins, referred to as abominations, carry a more severe penalty than the less offensive ones.

God also differentiates between people while, at the same time, not being a respecter of persons. The book of James tells us that "teachers" will receive a greater level of judgment than others. Jesus Himself tells us that "to whom much is given, much is required."

It must be remembered that all Scripture is taken from a context. It comes from its immediate context as well as the broader context of the whole Bible. So while a point can seemingly be made by a single verse, that point must also fit within the evidence provided by the remainder of Scripture. Failure to do so can lead to doctrinal error which is dangerous,even for Christian talk show hosts.

Pat Robertson & The Words Of Jesus - Missing The Point

In the wake of Pat Robertson's blunder of approving of a spouse divorcing one who has alzheimers comes this article from the LA Times. It's about those who are really upset with Robertson's advice and the fact that these dissenters would normally agree with Robertson.

The bulk of the raw feeling seems to come from those who can't believe Robertson would advise someone to break their marriage vows, specifically, the section that traditionally says, "till death do us part."

While Scripture definitely agrees with the position of faithfully performing your vows, there lies a more fundamental issue that has been missed by many, but not all. The biblical position on divorce is very clear. The only legitimnate grounds for divorce is adultery. Jesus is very clear. Yet, Pat Robertson seems to have forgotten the very words of the Christ he professes to know and serve. The advice was given without any care for what the Word of God had to say on the matter. It seems that the immediate needs of a person are the only legitimate grounds for making decisions.

Welcome to apostate Christianity.

Christians, The World & Rebels

Have you ever been accused of being a rebel? Or a person who just wants to disagree with authority for the sake of disagreeing?

I have. And after awhile, it's not fun. Especially because it not true. I'll explain.

You see, I don't have a problem with legitimate authority. I don't have a problem with submitting to legitimate authority. But I refuse to willingly follow that legitimate authority as they lead me over the side of a cliff. In other words, I refuse to follow leadership when they expect me to engage in activities that I know are detrimental to me and/or my family.

Such is the current state of churches in this country. Most Pastors teach doctrine and engage in policies that are detrimental to the ones listening to and following them. The problem lies in the fact that most have not thought through their position on a variety of issues. They simply parrot what someone else has taught them, especially when it is accompanied by verses of Scripture. They don't truly take the teachings to Scripture for comparison with the totality of Holy Writ.

This doesn't mean that all they teach is wrong. It just means that whatever amount is wrong is vital to living a life as Christ would have us live, not someone else. That someone else is the World.

Most Pastors have unknowingly adopted the World's ways and thoughts concerning vital areas of life. There are various reasons for this, but the fact remains that certain policies have been adopted and implemented simply because of pressure from those who don't know their Bible and what it has to say about these vital areas.

The real problem begins to surface when these policies are not readily accepted by some in the congregation. It's not that the resistance is public in nature. It's just that they refuse to go along for the sake of going along. It matters not that they can even reasonably articulate their opposition from Scripture. Non-conformity is not allowed. Thus begins the process of applying various sorts of pressure upon these resisters to follow the lead of everyone else. It can get rather unpleasant as relationships are strained. Usually, unless conformity is attained, these relationships are severed, all in the name of God. This is sad, but true. I've experienced it myself. It is in no way easy. Nor is it desirable. But the Word of God is the Word of God. If we will one day give account according to this Book, then following it precepts is mandatory.

In the mean time, there are many wounded People of God within local congregations. They remain untreated because no one recognizes what is happening. Many are pushed aside and never accepted again as viable members of the congregation. Most of these leave, never to participate in a vibrant relationship with other Believers. God only knows how many blame God for the manner in which His People conduct themselves.

And in the mean time, there remain a certain number who faithfully follow Christ. They may not receive recognition for their actions, but God has all recorded. And He faithfully backs up His Word as His People trust Him while leading their families. Many of these are considered Rebels.

I might be considered a Rebel. But my study of Scripture hasn't revealed that I am required to follow anyone over the cliff.

The Assualt on Motherhood & God

I've read alot lately about the supposedly high position given to a mother in the family, so high, in fact, that many are saying the mother is the most important position in, not just the family, but society at large. On top of that is the use of the Bible to support such an assertion.

If you will search through Scripture, beginning in Genesis, you will find that the woman is almost always approached first when attempting to rearrange the structure of the family. When this happens, what is actually happening is that the authority of the Husband is actually being attacked. And by design, the closest one to the Husband is the Wife. What better way to put pressure on the God ordained authority structure of the family than by trying to lure the wife away from God's design.

Though the response of the wife and mother is not to be overlooked and is important, the most vital response will always come from the Husband/Father. For he has been placed by God to, not only lead the family into the His design for the family, but also to protect the family from the onslaught of those who wish to subvert it.

So, while acknowledging the God ordained importance of the Wife and Mother, it is a grave error to presume that an attack on her or the children is anything other than an attack on God's male leader of that family. It's the same modus operandi used by the Enemy since the inception of the first family. And it is pervasive in American society at large, even churches. It would behoove us all to recognize it for the danger it is.

Who is "Our" King, Judge & Lawmaker?

In this commentary by Prison Fellowship President Mark Earley, He uses a rather telling pronoun when referring to lawmakers who have recently tried to make it mandatory for 6th grade girls to receive the vaccine for the human papillomavirus. The choice of pronoun, in this case, represents an identification and personalization which might tend to make some of us uncomfortable. It is also something which fails to have Biblical or apostolic support.

Earley uses the pronoun "our" to refer to lawmakers in different states, in this case, Virginia and Texas. The remainder of the commentary allows us to see that this pronoun is also applied to the various political activities associated and governed by these same lawmakers. Earley also laments one of the results of this type of legislation, regardless of the process used to implement these directives. He says it usurps parental authority.

I don't want to be misunderstood when I say this, so read carefully. Since when are lawmakers "our" lawmakers as Christians? Since when do we identify anyone other than YHWH as our Lawmaker? The historic position of God's People in relation to Secular authority has always been one of Separation in the midst of honor and submission. The Old Testament plainly tells us that " YHWH is our judge, YHWH is our lawgiver, YHWH is our King; he will save us." In the New Testament, the Apostle Paul tells us that, "our politics is in Heaven, from whence we look for the Lord." This is after Peter speaks for himself and the apostles who had been beaten for preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ when he says, "we ought to obey God rather than men."

Are we to presume that the past servants of the Most High God have been mistaken in the proper placements of their allegiance? Were they ignorant of the current state of affairs when it came to Whom they were to render service to? Did they, to any degree, identify with Caesar and the Roman Empire? Did they give the least hint that they were serving the interests of the Roman Empire? Did they refer to the Roman lawmakers as "our lawmakers?" Obviously, they didn't.There has always been a distinct dichotomy between the people of God and Secular rulers of every stripe.

In no way does this negate the fact of earthly citizenship. We are all men and must, by our birth, be citizens of some earthly Nation or State. However, this earthly citizenship and its political obligations and responsibilities are always viewed through our primary spiritual allegiance. This primacy dictates our relationship to the Secular. In other words, we are primarily a Secular, or unholy citizen, or we are primarily a Heavenly, or holy citizen.

If you are a Secular citizen, then you primarily identify with Secular officials with such descriptive terms as "our and mine." If you are a Heavenly citizen, then you primarily refer to Secular officials with terms such as "their and your."

Which brings us back to the charge, by Earley, of usurping parental authority by making this vaccine mandatory. Case law is very consistent within the body of American Jurisprudence showing that, Government activities are strictly controlled by Governemnt law and policy. This is a Constitutional and legally consistent practice from the beginning of the United States. Coupled with the Founding idea espoused by Benjamin Rush that the student is public property, it should not be an extremely difficult propsition to understand that the children in public schools do not belong to the parents. In fact the "parents" are not the primary parent of the children in their care. The "parents" are simply the guardians, exercising delegated authority from the State.

This little known Legal Doctrine is Parens Patraei. It means that the State is the Parent of the Nation and, therefore becomes the primary parent of all who have been entrusted to their care. The State, then becomes responsible to provide the needed care and provision neccessary for their children. This is where most parents find themselves today, taking care of the State's children while thinking of those same children as belonging to them, not the State.

Sound preposterous? Tell that to the many parents who are experiencing this legal reality around the country and possess not a clue to what is taking place. They are fighting, but they are legally destined to lose because they are proceeding in ignorance. Presumed by the Courts to know the Law, they lack sufficient knowledge and understanding to protect their interests, in this case, what they presumed to be their children.

So, how do parents entrust their children to the care of the State? That's an easy one. By sending them to a State institution, an institution where the State's interests are primary. This is after all, the State's institution. Shouldn't the State have the primary right to conduct the affairs of their own creation? In spite of what anyone outside the Schools think, the Courts have consisitently agreed with that proposition.

If you don't personally agree with that proposition, the remedy is simple. Don't send your child to an Institution governed by State Law, "your law."

American Persecution of Christians??????????

All across America, atrocities are being perpetrated on the most innocent of all people groups in the known World. Maybe the saddest aspect of this inhumane treatment is that it is the official policy of the American Government. Yes, American Lawmakers are the official perpetrators of........dare we say it?............Persecution!!!!!!!!!!! That's right!

And what's mnore diabolical is the fact that this persecution is taking place against Christians. That's right, Christian America is officially against her own righteous people.

Here are the details: Christians send their children to government schools and the following happens:

1. The children are exposed to explicit sexual content as a part of the curriculum without the parents being previously notified.
2. The children aren't allowed to pray on their own.
3. The children aren't allowed to form their own Christian clubs.
4. The children's Christian club isn't allowed to use school property the same as all other clubs .

This is just the beginning of a list that could go on and on for awhile. But the obvious does not need to be stated. Christians are in trouble and suffering needlessly. What are we to do about it!!??????

Well let's see. How can this be alleviated?

It might start with helping parents to understand that, pursuant to American tradition and law, their children really don't belong to them. Their children are the property of the State.

If that sounds rather bizarre, settle down. It's simply a matter of law.

Every Parent has the fundamental right to raise their children as they see fit. That fact is not in dispute by anyone. However, once a parent send their child to a government school, the parent abandon's their right to ultimately direct the upbringing of their children. The government is then in the position formerly held by the parent. The government has become the parent. The parent has become only the guardian, following the dictates of the government. This legal doctrine is known as Parens Patraei and it's found mostly in State Court decisions.

The fact is that there is absolutely no persecution of children or parents in this nation. It is simply a matter of parents and others being ignorant of the law and their freedoms in this country under that same law.

John Edwards on Jesus and Children

In this article from BREIBART.COM, John Edwards waxes religious when he states his belief that children should be allowed to pray at school. He thinks that "allowing time for children to pray for themselves, to themselves, I think is not only OK, I think it's a good thing." But of course, he's not for teacher led prayer. That would be approaching the point of coercion and we can't have government employees taking the lead in such a personal and private action.

I am not going to pick on John Edwards for his statements and forced religious jargon. Many Democrats have taken up the religious mantle in their political quests of late and the Republicans have consistently done so for decades. So this is nothing new.

What hasn't changed in all the talk about education, political and otherwise, is the stark reality of the law in the United States. Oh sure, we have all kinds of rhetoric being thrown around the many legal battles over the rights of parents in the raising of their children, but the fundamental truth is glossed over with heated words dealing with other, more trite legal subjects.

Ever so often, the truth trickles out of a court case and its written opinion which sheds a ray of light on the darkness of the legal landscape. Such is the case in Massachusetts, as reported by WorldNetDaily, initiated by the parents of two families after their children were exposed to graphic presentations without prior notice according to law. U.S. District Judge Mark L. Wolf dismissed all Federal aspects of this case while also dismissing all state aspects but leaving the option to have the facts ruled upon at the state level. The opinion, though, tells all who will listen, what their present freedoms are regarding education as well as their options should they choose to forego exercising that fundamental freedom guaranteed by the First Amendment to the united States Constitution.

First, the fundamental freedom.

Judge Wolf states that "Parents do have a fundamental right to raise their children." This statement is significant in light of this decision being decried as " every parent's nightmare," by Mass Resistance, a parents rights advocacy group. Here we have a case brought by parents being dismissed, yet the parents are informed what their rights are! Wow!!!! Is anyone listening or reading? Anyone with the slightest legal knowledge knows that a fundamental right is the highest form of right. Pursuant to the Constitution, it cannot be taken away, but will be protected by government officials and, yes, even Judges. Could it be that the parents in this case don't really know the type of right they are attempting to exercise?

Second, the next aspect of this fundamental freedom.

Immediately following the above statement, Judge Wolf says, "They are not required to abandon that responsibility to the state." This statement is doubly significant in that it gets to the heart of the reason that this decision is "every parent's nightmare." When it comes to parents raising their children, parents are not required to send their child to a state regulated institution, nor are they or their children required to participate in activity regulated by the State! If and when a parent does, they must submit to the rules and laws of the state governing their own institutions. It's that simple!

If a parent chooses to raise their children themselves, the State cannot interfere, outside of criminal activity, because the State has no jurisdiction over such private exercises of a fundamental right. Neither can a judge officially recommend a possible course of action for the parents to take in exercising such right.

In light of this last fact, Judge Wolf continues his opinion by telling all what the options are for the two families, as well as all other families, who have abandoned their children to the State by placing them in Public Schools. They can choose to send them to Private Schools or Homeschool them, both of which are regulated by the State.

For most, this fundamental issue will be lost amidst the uproar over the Radical Gay Rights agenda being forced upon students and parents. Sadly , so will a generation of children, simply because their parents didn't know any better. So much for Christian Attoneys!