Thursday, November 13, 2008

A Call To Arms

We are human, but we don’t wage war as humans do. We use God’s mighty weapons, not worldly weapons, to knock down the strongholds of human reasoning and to destroy false arguments.
I Corinthians 10:4-5 (NLT)

This time last week I was still processing through the election and what it meant for America. The immediate positive that I saw was that the race issue in America was dealt a deathblow. God in His sovereignty used the election of a black man to the highest office of the land, to remove the stigma of Jim Crow as a national policy. Jim Crow has been relegated, permanently, to the corridors of history. Hurray!

But this awesome move of God does not mean that the vestiges of racism and bigoted mindsets are completely blown away. There are some who would have us operate as if this were still 1950’s America where decisions were made based on ethnicity. We are still fighting a bigoted mindset from the likes of groups like Planned Parenthood, an organization that has the purpose of eliminating the black race from the earth while masking their diabolical agenda under the umbrella of women’s rights.
We also must fight the bigoted mindsets of those promoting same sex marriages. Time and again across this nation, the people have expressed their belief that marriage is between one man and one woman. Despite the overwhelmingly united voice of the people, the homosexual activists have taken to the streets and have taken to violence in their attempt to force America to bow at the altar of their bedroom behavior.

While they proclaim themselves advocates of tolerance, their tolerance extends only to us tolerating them. If we reject their call to join them in their bedrooms by providing them rights on the basis of what they are doing in that bedroom, we are cast as bigoted and intolerant. In a news story out of Palm Springs about California's Proposition 8 (Prop 8 Rally turns violent –, we saw large homosexual men surround an older woman, snatch a cross from her hands, stomp it and then scream at her while blocking the camera's view of her and the reporter. One of those large men had the audacity to scream that blacks fought for their rights and he was fighting for his.

The comparison of his bedroom behavior to the equal rights fight blacks had is an outrage. Millions of lives, both black and white, were destroyed in and on the way to this country as blacks were treated as cattle. I for one choose to fight against the claim of some homosexuals that their experience is in any way related to the fight of blacks before, during and after the heinous practices of slavery and Jim Crow in America. I choose to stand for the standard that the Cross of Jesus Christ (that some choose to trample) represents.

For too long those who hate life, such as Planned Parenthood, and those who hate Truth, such as the homosexual activist, have laid claim to ground that is not theirs to take. It is time that Christians across this nation lay down the idols of political party, and pick up the banners of righteousness while taking back our land. It is time we stop fighting each other on the basis of whose political ideology is best, and begin to fight the common enemy that is seeking to destroy America from within. Too many of us want to compromise the standards of righteousness in favor of political expediency. Too many of us pick up the weapons of the enemy rather than using those provided by Almighty God.

The false arguments of those who hate life and Truth must be destroyed. Not by us yelling and screaming at them and them yelling and screaming at us, but by picking up and using God’s mighty weapons to knock down the strongholds of human reasoning. Let us unite in our actions, our conversation and our deeds by proclaiming Truth and protecting life. Let us lay aside political expediency and raise a victory banner in the name of our God.

Thursday, March 20, 2008

America’s Leadership – Does Their Position on the Issues Matter?

Someone recently asked me “does a person's belief in abortion or not, have an impact on whether that person should be a public office holder?” My answer is an emphatic yes! Each elected official develops a sphere of influence as they work to persuade voters to support their platform. Most spend months, if not years, building a base of supporters who place their confidence in the belief the elected official will vote according to the promises made and platform outlined during the campaign. These voters have the expectation that when legislation is proposed or appointments are to be made, those they elect will vote according to the values and ideologies they promoted.

Abortion is one of the deeply emotional issues of our day that quickly divides groups of people, just as slavery did in the 1800s. Some say it is a decision that should be left to a woman, her God and her doctor. Others, such as me, rely on the Bible’s view of those that shed innocent blood and we demand it must stop. And then there are a host of arguments in between. There are some who support the Darwinist/Eugenics notion that only the favored races should be allowed to live, hence Margaret Sanger’s (founder of Planned Parenthood) Negro Project to control the birth rate of blacks. There are others who express concern about who will take care of all the unwanted children if abortion is stopped. And then there are those who support abortion as a means to fix the anomalies that occur in pregnancies (i.e. mental or physically impairment of babies). Whatever road you take on the issue, I submit there are real consequences to the devaluing of life.

One of those consequences is the cavalier killing of others throughout our society. An extreme example of the death angel visitations is the number of shootings that occur in school environments. Parents often think that when they send their children to school, they are in a safe environment and they need not worry as they release their children into the hands of educators. Not so. Even before the April 20, 1999 Columbine massacre, we saw a bevy of shootings across the country. In 1996 a 14 year old killed a teacher and two students in his algebra class in Moses Lake Washington. In February 1997 a sixteen year old shot and killed his principal and another student in Bethel, Alaska. Pearl, Mississippi mourns the two students that were killed by a 16 year old who also killed his mother. Another 14 year old in West Paducah, KY killed three students as they prayed! Residents of Stamps, Arkansas lost two of their students when they were shot in the school parking lot, Jonesboro, Arkansas had four students and one teacher killed at a middle school by a 13 and 11 year old. Fayetteville, Tenn. mourned one student that was shot and killed. In Springfield, Oregon two students were killed by a 15 year old. In Richmond, VA a teacher and guidance counselor were shot and wounded by a 15 year old. These were all before Columbine! Since then we have experienced another 33 school shootings around the United States, the lion share of which were committed by other teens typically between the ages of 13 and 19.

On average, more than three women are murdered by their husbands or boyfriends in this country every day, with pregnant and recently pregnant women being more likely to be victims of homicide than to die of any other cause. I found an article that gives a summary of over thirty cases where the pro-abortion husband or boyfriend killed or severely beat their partner in an effort to get rid of their child after she chose to carry the child to term rather than abort it as the man desired. In many of the cases the man then dumped the body as if it were trash or attempted to burn it to cover up his crime.

Across the nation blacks disproportionately avail themselves of the services of the abortionist. While only 13% of the population, over 35% of the abortions are performed on black women. In Georgia where I now reside, that number is even more startling, because over 58% of the abortions performed in the state are performed on black women. Is it any wonder then that the black on black crime rate follows this pattern? In 2005, homicide victimization rates for blacks were 6 times higher than the rates for whites. Offending rates for blacks were more than 7 times higher than the rates for whites. Between 1976 and 2005, 52.5% of those committing homicides were black and of those homicides, 94% of blacks killed were killed by other blacks.

This cavalier regard for life has permeated every fabric of our society and now spills over into other areas as we see more and more values related issues disintegrating. Just last week we learned that at least one in four teenage girls has a sexually transmitted disease. In the black community that number is at 48%! What stunned me about this study was not the numbers actually. What stunned me was the response of those advocating for sex education that the reason for this increase in sexually transmitted disease is due to abstinence only programs. Is it me or is this faulty logic? If the youth are encouraged to abstain but choose not too, and the disease is sexually transmitted, . . . No the issue is that Planned Parenthood and other associated organizations have duped many, including pastors and other Church leaders, into believing that self-control is impossible among our youth so we should promote their agenda of so-called “safe” sex.

Does it matter whether our candidates support abortion? Again, I say yes. Each legislator has an ability to create a legal and moral environment during their tenure in office. This is especially true of those seeking the presidency. It does matter that Barack Obama chooses to create an environment of unrestrained sex by advocating for sex education for five year olds. It does matter that he actively promotes sexual activity among teens “ in a honest and reasonable way” as he stated in a 2007 Planned Parenthood meeting. It does matter that he wants to use the bully pulpit of the presidency to promote this sexual agenda among our youth.

It matters that Hilary Clinton wants to appoint “judges to our courts who understand that Roe v. Wade isn’t just binding legal precedent, it is the touchstone of our reproductive freedom, the embodiment of our most fundamental rights, and no one - no judge, no governor, no Senator, no President - has the right to take it away.” It matters that she “will sign into law the Freedom of Choice Act, which would codify Roe v. Wade and send a renewed signal to the courts that the will of Congress and the President is to keep abortion legal”.

It matters that our legislators promote and encourage a culture of death as they support the pro-abortion initiatives of today.

Saturday, March 8, 2008

Barack – Uh Uh!

My daughter and I were watching a particular movie one night and at its conclusion she turned to me and said “Mom, write uh-uh across it and mail it back” to the minister that released it. After reviewing the audios of Barack Obama’s comments during a Town Hall meeting at Hocking College on March 3, I find myself in another uh-uh moment.

When I heard that Barack Obama had pointed to the Sermon on the Mount as justification for support of civil unions, I thought he must have been confused since I could not recall anything in the Sermon on the Mount that related to a person’s sexual behavior. Though I am no more a Theologian than Barack Obama is, I am pretty astute when it comes to understanding what I am reading, so I thought I would pull out my Bible and read the sermon again. After doing so, I went to the Internet to see if I could get the actual verbiage he used thinking that perhaps he had been misquoted. I found it and I realized that he had not been misquoted and had gone even further in his commentary by including his beliefs on abortion as well. ( (

After giving it some thought, I reached the same conclusion that some others had; perhaps Senator Obama was making reference to Matthew 7:1-6, the passages that address judging others. Hmmm. That particular passage has been used by some, on many occasions, to obliterate all the other passages of Scripture that reference behavior, whether sexual or otherwise. Even lay persons who are not trained in hermeneutics know to look for more than one passage of Scripture to bring clarity to a matter. There are at least two or three scriptures about same sex behavior that takes the Romans 1 passage out of the realm of obscurity Senator Obama is seeking to relegate it to. So why reference it? Would Senator Obama really want us to believe he is guided by Judeo-Christian values and not the principles of the some other religion, even the one whose call to prayer he describes as “one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset.”?

There is one thing none of us can judge – whether or not Barack Obama, at some point in his life, confessed with his mouth the Lord Jesus and believed in his heart that God raised him from the dead. Since the confession is one that is heart driven, only God and Senator Obama can testify to whether it was made or the sincerity of the confession. What we can do, however, is measure whether he has produced good fruit as a result of his confession, for God said you will know the false prophet by his fruit (Mathew 7:16) .

From where I am sitting that fruit is pretty rotten right about now and every American, and every follower of Jesus Christ should be on the alert, heeding the warning that is sounding.

Regardless of which side of the aisle your politics fall on, every one of us should be able to make a ‘righteous judgment” (John 7:24) about the questions that are before us. First, does it matter that a candidate for President of the United States cites only those sections of the Bible that fit his political leanings? Does it matter that a candidate considers the baby in the womb to be nothing more than a decision between a woman, her physicians and her God? I say yes it does.

Somewhere in recent history we saw a turn in our social mores and some would now require Americans to look into the bedrooms of some of its citizens. How else can we tell the sexual orientation of an individual? And, if you don’t care to partake in that particular adventure, you are labeled homophobic or some other epithet and are shouted down. Legislators , many of whom want you to acknowledge their sexual orientation, sponsor legislation designed to force all of America to accept the sexual proclivities of a few. I say yes, it does matter what a candidate’s position is on the issues.

For the past 35 years America has been asked to ignore the medical facts that acknowledge that the baby in the womb is a person. Despite the giant leaps that have been made in the medical profession, we have been indoctrinated to believe that the 4 dimensional child on the film, is a blob of tissue, an anomaly or a fetus. Never mind that the physician that aborts even the youngest baby must count its body parts before it can be determined a successful abortion. Never mind that bags and bags of human body parts have been found in garbage bags outside of abortion sites. Forget that one of the most heinous medical procedures of our time required the baby to be partially delivered before it was stabbed in the head, then pulled from the birth canal. According to some, these facts mean nothing in the face of a “woman’s right to choose”. Again, I say yes it does matter what a candidate considers good policy, especially in this area where innocent blood is shed with impunity. Where does it stop?

It stops when you and I come to our senses and begin to look at the candidates not just through the lenses of their political spin or partisan rhetoric. We must begin to examine the candidates and their issues through lenses that scrutinize the content of their character and clarifies their stance based on a Biblical world view. We can no longer continue to sit back and accept the doctrines that the pro-abortion and homosexual lobbies throw at us. We must no longer accept that our belief that the entire Bible is true is somehow intolerant, homophobic or denies a woman’s choice. We all get to choose the lifestyle, the behaviors, the positions we take. Let us exercise our right to choose to stand on what God says is right, for ourselves, our children, our nation and our government.

Friday, February 29, 2008

Margaret Sanger, Glenn Richardson, Autumn Kersey , Georgia and Idaho – What Do They Have in Common?

This week I received an article that detailed a UCLA student’s findings when she investigated seven Planned Parenthood clinics regarding donations they would find acceptable. Specifically, these clinics were asked about accepting donations that were earmarked to kill black babies. In each of seven conversations, the alleged donor stated that he wanted his money to be given to kill black babies so his child could be assured a place in a college when it was time for him to go. You read right, the gentleman stated he wanted to give money to kill black babies because “the less black kids out there the better” and in one of the conversations, Autumn Kersey, Director of Development of Idaho Planned Parenthood, stated that sentiment was “understandable”. She went on to state she sounded hesitant because “this is the first time I had a donor call and make this kind of request and I am excited and want to make sure I don’t leave anything out.” She actually stated she was excited that this person wanted to kill black babies! Go to You Tube and hear it for yourself!

If anyone thinks this type of racism/eugenics exists only in Idaho and the six additional clinics that were called, think again.

I had heard, back in November of 2007, that Glenn Richardson, Georgia’s Speaker of the House had made comments that had similar racial/eugenics overtones. Since the Bible is clear that everything should be established with two or three witnesses and having experienced some of that racial sentiment from him in my 2006 race for the 4th Congressional District, I began to ask questions. As I asked those questions, I found that there were others that had confirmed hearing the statements. One legislator that I spoke with just before the 2008 session began on January 14th, told me he had confirmed with a House Leader that was present at the time, that the comments had been made.

I attended a meeting on February 5, 2008 with Dr. Alveda King (niece of Martin Luther King, Jr.) and four other witnesses. We heard two more representatives confirm the comments were made to them. What were the comments you ask? Well, we were told that when the GA Legislature introduced the Women’s Right to Know bill in 2006, the Speaker said that passing that piece of legislation would result in GA being “overrun with black babies”. Another Legislator stated he had approached the Speaker at the end of the 2007 session to explain a vote he was making that would impact funding to organizations like Planned Parenthood. In that conversation the Speaker indicated that if the funds for birth control were halted it would “result in the birth of more black babies” and “more black babies would be born and on the dole.

Well to say the least, Alveda and I were shocked so when I was called by the Speaker’s Chief of Staff to set up a meeting, the answer was an emphatic yes! February 12, 2008 turned out to be a sad day for us individually and Georgia collectively. The Speaker while stating he did not say the words quoted above stated he may “have said something like that”. And no matter how many times Alveda and I asked him what the “something like that” was, or even to explain how race came up in the discussion at all, he refused to answer, redirecting the conversation to the statistically accurate facts concerning black high school dropouts (over 50%) in Georgia or the abortion rate of black women in Georgia (58%). He consistently attacked one of the Legislators to whom the statement had been made indicating they were at war with one another and stating he could not understand why that legislator waited two years to say anything. At no time did the Speaker clarify his position on black births in Georgia or his feelings about blacks in general. Instead, he went to the Black Caucus the next morning and characterized me as a bitter black female because he did not support my Congressional race in 2006 (at that time he told me he could not support me because he did not want the “black voters in DeKalb County” to turn out).

Glenn Richardson had the opportunity to create a culture that valued all Georgians regardless of their race or status. He could have created a culture that promoted life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for us all. Instead, he adopted the spirit of his predecessor, Tom Murphy, by continuing to promote a racist/eugenics environment. Tom Murphy and many other legislators initially spit tobacco on the Martin Luther King Holiday bill. Glenn Richardson and those like him may as well be spitting on the babies that are aborted in Georgia.

On which side of the race issue does your legislator fall? Is he or she willing to allow black babies to continue to be killed so we will not be “overrun” with them? One of the ways we can find out is if there is a vote on pro-life measures like the Human Life Amendment that defines when personhood begins. Call your legislator today and ask him or her to get the Judiciary Sub-Committee to take the HLA off the table so you can can see where they stand on the issue. Is your legislator willing to give you a voice in this process? Does he/she trust you to vote your conscience with regard to when life begins?Ask them to help you override the voices of those like Margaret Sanger, Glenn Richardson, Autumn Kersey and Planned Parenthood. Let’s join together to silence these voices that filter life and the birth of black babies through racist/eugenics lenses. Call your legislator today.

Saturday, February 23, 2008

Statesmen or Sanger-ites, Who Occupies the Gold Dome?

It has been well documented that Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, had Nazi like beliefs. She promoted population control by limiting, through birth control and abortion, the birth of those she considered misfits, weeds and/or impure – her words (see for more information). To carry out her population control plans, her organization, Planned Parenthood has opened and continues to open its abortion facilities in predominantly black, and/or predominantly poor areas of major cities. Some of her racially motivated population control schemes such as her “Negro Project”, launched in 1939, paid black preachers to sermonize her population control message.

Reports are that she had close ties with those who developed Hitler’s race purification program (see Grand Illusions, the Legacy of Planned Parenthood by George Grant for more information). And today, these abortion mills have expanded their services to include pedophilia as they advise young girls to not report the older men that impregnated them(see Spinning their dogma as a woman’s rights matter (i.e. the right to choose what to do with her body) Planned Parenthood has successfully persuaded women to kill more than fifty million babies to date.

In the Georgia hearings concerning the Human Life Amendment there was something that troubled me that I had not clearly identified. It was just this weekend that I finally figured out what it was. It was the glee with which some of African American and Jewish attendees celebrated the abortions they had or were planning to have thereby giving life to Sanger's racist agenda. As mentioned previously, a Rabbi stated that if there was passage of the Human Life Amendment it would interfere with the free exercise of his religion - Judaism. There was a lady of Jewish descent who described herself as the head of a faith based organization who stated she “praised God for Planned Parenthood”.

An African American pastor from the First Iconium Baptist Church outlined his seven steps for keeping the government out of women's business. A young African American mother lamented that her two daughters would not have the option of safe and legal birth control and abortion when they became sexually active if the HLA passed.

Ignoring the question of whether a baby in the womb is a person, these attendees placed their sympathies with the mothers and not one considered the impact of their behavior on the life of the baby. Margaret Sanger and those of her persuasion did their jobs well and their persuasive if not hynotic dogma has won the day. It was a sad day in Georgia that there were no statesmen among the legislators who would champion the cause of life in order to give babies a choice as John Quincy Adams championed the cause of the slaves of the Amistad.

Legislators, such as Ed Lindsey, Chairman of the House Judiciary Sub Committee, hiding behind arguments that there were unintended consequences in the amendment, voted to table the bill, “effectively stopping it for this legislative session”. Stating that “the federal constitution takes precedence in this country over state constitutions and Roe v. Wade is based on the U. S. Supreme Court’s interpretation of the federal constitution”, Mr. Lindsey took the same position of that espoused in the Dred Scott case that defined black men and women as property. He and those who voted with him have relegated Georgia’s babies to the trash cans of Planned Parenthoods abortion mills.

My Pastor’s wife has a saying: I can’t hear you because of what you are doing”. Mr. Lindsey and others who profess to have “deep moral concerns about abortion” betray that profession every time they vote to stop legislation that gives a voice to the thousands of babies in Georgia that are scheduled to be killed through the practice of abortion. I know there are others under the gold dome that support Sanger’s Nazi like position of Malthusian Eugenics with their words and behaviors. The coming days will expose them just as Mr. Lindsey exposed himself.

And as they are exposed it is my prayer that the 57% of Georgians that support overturning Roe v. Wade ban together to elect representatives who will support the will of the people rather than the politics of the day.

Thursday, February 21, 2008

When Does a Baby Become a Person?

The Judiciary sub-committee of Georgia’s General Assembly considered a bill this week that would have given legal definition to what a person is. This bill, titled HR 536, Human Life Amendment, basically stated there is a paramount right to life for every person. The bill was a proposed amendment to the Georgia constitution that went on to define a person to include unborn children at every state of their biological development including fertilization.

When I read this amendment, it seemed a pretty common sense definition that I think most Georgians believe is the case. After all doesn’t everyone know the baby in the womb is indeed a person? Most of us address the baby as such from the moment we confirm we are expecting. I have never met an expectant mom or dad that declared the baby in the womb to be anything other than a person and usually we have given that person a name. For example, from the moment I became pregnant with my daughter on September 1 in 1987, I called her Mary Catherine. Had she been a boy I would have named her Michael John and usually as an afterthought apologized to him in case I was having a boy. While there was a question regarding the gender of my baby, there was never a question regarding whether he or she was a person.

So as I began attending the hearings held on the 18th and 20th of this month, I thought the question was pretty black and white and I believed the Legislators would focus on allowing the citizens of Georgia to vote on whether they believed this legal definition of a person to be true. Instead of hearing arguments for or against this definition, we heard over seven hours of testimony mostly about whether a mother has a right to choose to abort the baby or whether there would be “unintended consequences” on other laws such as the death penalty or use of contraceptives . There were a host of witnesses testifying, sometimes with heart wrenching stories, concerning the right to abort or not abort the baby. There was very little testimony about the disabled or older population. I guess that was because it was recognized that the disabled and elderly are persons.

There were Rabbis and ministers that stated a woman should have the right to abort her baby. One even suggested the amendment would interfere with the free exercise of his religion if this amendment were to pass! There were mothers who stated they wanted their daughters to be able to have safe and legal birth control and abortions. There were law school professors who told the legislators that it would be a direct violation of their oaths of office to allow a change to the constitution that would impact the abortion laws in the state of Georgia. There were doctors that argued for the continuation of birth control and abortifacients. They argued that it is scientifically impossible to determine when there is conception because it takes fourteen days for the fertilized egg to attach to the womb.

Even those who were for the constitutional amendment spent more time deflecting the questions of unintended consequences than they did arguing for the legal definition of personhood. Anticipating the arguments that the bill would result in an increase in wrongful death cases, changes to the death penalty or impact living will provisions, those in support of the bill spent more time on these questions than they did on whether there is personhood at conception. Yet even those arguing against the bill because of its potential impact on invitro fertilization acknowledged there were “frozen people” located around the state.

Who won the debate? Politics. Long before the first argument for or against the amendment was made the politicians devised a way to kill the amendment without accountability for their votes. The Speaker of the House announced on February 12, 2008 that he would not allow the bill out of committee for a vote. The politicians, some of whom style themselves as pro-life, followed the mandate of the speaker by voting to table the bill. Most of them did not have the courage to give voice to the voiceless by allowing the bill on the floor of the House for a vote.

Who lost the debate? The thousands of babies across Georgia who will die without a hearing. Their voices have been silenced because these legislators were not willing to acknowledge them as persons.

Who lost the debate? Georgians whose voices will not be heard because those they elected to carry out their wishes were unwilling to ask those same people who elected them what they believe the definition of a person is by allowing them to vote come November.

The Legislators know that had they had true concerns about “unintended consequences” they could have simply devised legislation to address those concerns. They legislate on questions involving persons every legislative session, such as the death penalty, use of birth control and other medical devices and living wills. Sadly, the committee allowed the political will of one to overrule the political and moral will of millions of Georgians.

What can you do if you live in Georgia? Call your legislator and the Speaker of the House today and ask for the right to vote on the personhood amendment. If you live outside of Georgia, please pray that hearts will be changed so this vital question can be answered by the citizenry of Georgia.

Do you believe a person is one from conception to death? Take my poll!