In a turn of events that's both absurd and sad at the same time, writer Anne Rice a former queen of occult and vampire writings who ostensibly turned to God in 2005 has chosen to reject Christianity, and has chosen to make quite a show of it by using Facebook to announce it. In her own words:
"I quit being a Christian. I'm out. In the name of Christ, I refuse to be anti-gay. I refuse to be anti-feminist. I refuse to be anti-artificial birth control. I refuse to be anti-Democrat. I refuse to be anti-secular humanism. I refuse to be anti-science. I refuse to be anti-life. In the name of ...Christ, I quit Christianity and being Christian. Amen."
[I do wonder: is she refusing to be "anti-gay" (whatever that might mean) because her son Christopher Rice is openly homosexual... and thus she doesn't want to deal with the issue from a biblical perspective?]
Sadly, it is failry apparent that Anne Rice, a Roman Catholic, never really knew biblical Christianity, and didn't have a true born again experience through Jesus Christ. Lets face it -- few people, if any, are led into a true relationship with Jesus through that Mary-worshiping, idol-glorifying, pedophile-priest-protecting, Pope-exalting, Bible-violating abomination of a "church" known as Roman Catholicism. And for her to even describe "Christianity" in such harsh and stereotypical terms shows how little she really knows of true biblical Christianity, and brings to mind the words of the apostle John in 1 John 2:19 :
They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us.
Truly an unfortunate turn of events. May the Lord have mercy on this woman's soul before she departs this life.
The terms "freedom of religion" and "freedom of worship" might sound very similar, but the underlying meanings are actually quite different. It seems like the Obama administration is making a shift from the concept of "freedom of religion" to the softer "freedom of worship" position.And frankly, this is a very big deal. If this idea catches on, the implications for Christians, especially in terms of religious freedom as it relates to our ability to proselytize, could be HUGE.
* By Randy Sly
* 7/16/2010
* Catholic Online (www.catholic.org)
Words matter - listen carefully to our current administration
Since the initially strong language on religious freedom used in President Obama's Cairo speech, presidential references to religious freedom have become rare, often replaced, at most, with references to freedom of worship. A purposeful change in language could mean a much narrower view of the right to religious freedom.
WASHINGTON, DC (Catholic Online) - The change in language was barely noticeable to the average citizen but political observers are raising red flags at the use of a new term "freedom of worship" by President Obama and Secretary Clinton as a replacement for the term freedom of religion. This shift happened between the President's speech in Cairo where he showcased America's freedom of religion and his appearance in November at a memorial for the victims of Fort Hood, where he specifically used the term "freedom of worship." From that point on, it has become the term of choice for the president and Clinton.
In her article for "First Things" magazine, Ashley Samelson, International Programs Director for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, stated, "To anyone who closely follows prominent discussion of religious freedom in the diplomatic and political arena, this linguistic shift is troubling: "The reason is simple. Any person of faith knows that religious exercise is about a lot more than freedom of worship. It's about the right to dress according to one's religious dictates, to preach openly, to evangelize, to engage in the public square. Everyone knows that religious Jews keep kosher, religious Quakers don't go to war, and religious Muslim women wear headscarves-yet "freedom of worship" would protect none of these acts of faith."
In the administration's defense, Carl Esbeck, professor of law at the University of Missouri, is quoted by Christianity Today as saying, "The softened message is probably meant for the Muslim world, said. Obama, seeking to repair relations fractured by 9/11, is telling Islamic countries that America is not interfering with their internal matters."
Let's be clear, however; language matters when it comes to defining freedoms and limits. A shift from freedom of religion to freedom of worship moves the dialog from the world stage into the physical confines of a church, temple, synagogue or mosque. Such limitations can unleash an unbridled initiative that we have only experienced in a mild way through actions determined to remove of roadside crosses, wearing of religious t-shirts and pro-life pins as well as any initiatives of evangelization. It also could exclude our right to raise our children in our faith, the right to religious education, literature or media, the right to raise funds or organize charitable activities and the right to express religious beliefs in the normal discourse of life.
Here we go again. Another one bites the dust.
This time the Quakers "Christian" denomination has come out in support of gay marriage.
No surprise here. I fully expect that within a generation the majority of church denominations will support homosexual marriage, with a relative few opposing it. Clearly, the devil is busy. The only good thing in this is that this helps clearly show us who the apostate denominations are. Obviously, the gay issue isnt the single measure of apostasy in a denomination, but to me, approval of homosexual marriage is a distinct sign of spiritual deadness.
So lets see which denomination will be the next domino to fall. The way things are going, we'll probably see a few more fall before this year is over.
==========================
Sunday July 11,2010
By Pete Maclaine
QUAKERS are calling for gay people to be allowed the same marital status as their heterosexual counterparts.
The Religious Society of Friends last year sanctioned the proposal of same-sex marriages after backing gay “unions” for two decades.
They are calling for a meeting with Home Secretary Theresa May to bring pressure in Parliament.
The Government, meanwhile, has refused to extend the term “marriage” to same-sex couples, although it has recognised “civil partnerships” which give homosexual couples almost exactly the same rights of inheritance, pensions and property as heterosexuals.
At their gathering in York in 2009, more than 1,500 Quakers agreed to “treat same-sex, committed relationships in the same way as opposite-sex marriages, reaffirming our central insight that marriage is the Lord’s work and we are but witnesses”.
The latest edition of the manual Quaker Faith and Practice is to be changed so that “same-sex marriages can be prepared, celebrated, witnessed, recorded and reported to the State as opposite-sex marriages are”.
Quakers have agreed not to break the law by taking part in same-sex marriages until they are legally recognised.
The gathering approved the statement: “We will not at this time require our registering officers to act contrary to the law but understand that the law does not preclude them from playing a central role in the celebration and recording of same-sex marriages.”
Although other Christian churches and other religions have approved blessings for same-sex civil partnerships, the Quakers are the UK’s first mainstream religious group to approve marriages for lesbians and gays.
Gospel music industry worker Walter Hawkins died yesterday.
=====
By John S. Marshall
The Associated Press
Monday, July 12, 2010; 1:28 AM
RIPON, Calif. -- Walter Hawkins, a Grammy Award-winning gospel singer, composer and pastor from Oakland, died Sunday. He was 61.
Walter Hawkins, who was battling pancreatic cancer, passed away at his home in Ripon, Calif., his older brother Edwin Hawkins said.
"Today, I lost my brother, my pastor, and my best friend," said Edwin Hawkins. "Bishop Hawkins suffered bravely but now he will suffer no more and he will be greatly missed."
Born in Oakland, Hawkins studied for his divinity degree at the University of California, Berkeley.
While at the university, he recorded his first album titled "Do Your Best" in 1972.
The next year, Hawkins became a pastor and founded the Love Center Church in Oakland, where he also formed a choir.
The national debt picture continues to get worse and worse, as we can see from this USAToday article below. However, just in case you thought it was bad that the US national debt [supposedly] hit the $13 trillion mark recently, there's more bad news. The REAL national debt is more like $74 trillion (!), as we'll see below:
Article from USA Today:
The men and women charged with figuring out how to reduce federal deficits and debt got some more bad news this morning: the numbers keep getting worse.
That was the news from the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, which for the firsttime took into consideration the new health care law, heralded by President Obama and Democrats for reducing deficits in the long run.
The report doesn't contradict that. It simply points out that any long-term savings from the health care law, such as from Medicare savings, aren't enough to turn deficits around.
Moreover, the report casts doubt on whether Congress will stick to the tougher aspects of the law. If it doesn't -- for instance, if it doesn't cut Medicare payments to doctors -- the fiscal picture will be far worse.
First, the numbers: Debt held by the public will rise from 62% of the economy to 79% over the next 25 years. If assumptions are made about what Congress is likely to do -- for instance, maintain some tax cuts and avoid Medicare cuts to doctors -- that percentage will increase to 185% of the economy in 2035.
CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf told President Obama's fiscal commission that health care costs remain the primary problem. The health care law passed this year, he said,"made a dent in the problem but did not substantially diminish that challenge."
The 18-member bipartisan fiscal commission is charged with proposing changes that
would reduce the federal budget deficit -- $1.5 trillion -- and the cumulative national debt
Now in case you think a $13 trillion debt is an outrage (and it IS), then hold on to your seat. This next article shows why the real debt is more like $74 trillion.
Of course we could go on a long rant about why our leaders have dug us into a deep hole that will only lead to economic calamity. But the real outrage is that most of the American sheeple as a whole have been asleep at the wheel, and allowed this to happen right under our collective noses!
From the Idaho Freedom Foundation:
Budget expert says national debt is $74 trillion, not $13 trillion
May 25, 2010 | posted by Jay Howell
Lately, we've been hearing a lot about how the national debt is approaching the $13 trillion dollar mark. But one accountant who’s been studying the federal deficit and national debt for nearly 20 years says $13 trillion is just a fraction of our real national debt, which is closer to $74 trillion.
According to InvestorWords.com, “National Debt” is defined as “the sum of all previously incurred annual federal deficits. Since the deficits are financed by government borrowing, national debt is equal to all government debt outstanding.” But according to Sheila Weinberg, CEO and founder of the Institute for Truth in Accounting, in order to accurately calculate the nation’s debt load, unfunded liabilities such as Medicare, Medicaid, veterans’ benefits, etc., must be figured in.
Weinberg said when the government cites the national debt as “only” $13 trillion, it's a bogus number. “The big programs, Social Security and Medicare, they’re eating a huge part of the debt. Ask your readers if they believe the government owes them Social Security and Medicare benefits. If they do, then the real number is actually $74 trillion.”
Weinberg said the government doesn’t consider that they “owe” Social Security and Medicare benefits beyond the checks they’ve already written. In fact, in the U.S. Treasury’s 2008-2009 “Notes to the Financial Statements” report, it specifies in Section R (Social Insurance):
“A liability for social insurance programs (Social Security, Medicare, Railroad Retirement, Black Lung, and Unemployment) is recognized for any unpaid amounts currently due as of the reporting date. No liability is recognized for future benefit payments not yet due.” (emphasis ours)
Posts
