Monday, January 31, 2011

Who Are the Haters?

Just listened to an interview with Shirley Phelps-Roper of the infamous Westboro Baptist Church:

The interview was conducted by an atheist Jew and an atheist Catholic.

Some people say the Westboro Church needs to be "more loving, like Jesus was." They say Jesus "hung out with prostitutes."

But Jesus also spit fire out at religious hypocrites, and the people who hate the Phelpses the most have a religious exterior. Those who hate the Phelpses claim to be more like Jesus than the Phelpses.

Meanwhile, Shirley Phelps is clearly enjoying herself hanging out with those who make no pretense at being religious.

Just like Jesus.

As much as I enjoy the Westboro folks and their videos, they would never let me join their church. I was once denied membership in a church because I didn't believe in the imminent Second Coming of Christ, and I'd bet I'd meet a similar fate at Westboro.

(Besides that, the Westboro folks are just too "worldly" for me. Even though I can agree with nearly everything Shirley said in the interview, the interview reveals that the folks at Westboro Baptist watch a whole lot more TV and play more video games than I ever will. They are way too normal for me.)

It is interesting how Westboro premillennialism has mutated into a kind of Hyper-Calvinism (though, contrary to some, they are still Calvinists). "Hate" is not their problem. Their real problem is their belief that Jesus is going to return before sundown, and there's just no time to reason with people and persuade them to repent. I believe the Westboro folks are wrong on this, the source of their deep pessimism, and not that for which most people criticize them.

Those who hate the Phelpses don't seem to have time to reason with or persuade them either. What's their excuse?

Who are the real "Hatemongers?"


Harrisonville Stops Speech

Tea Party Threatens Violence

Conversation from Facebook

I can relate.

Sunday, January 23, 2011

Second-Class Citizens

Elton John, whose many fans have purchased over 250 million copies of his records, and whose personal net worth is hundreds of millions of dollars, says he feels like a "second class citizen."

My heart bleeds.

His despondency, he says, is a result of Californians voting to amend the state constitution to retain the definition of "marriage" that conforms to God's definition -- one that has existed for thousands of years -- a relationship between a man and a woman.

This critic of California law is actually a British citizen.

His fellow Brits, Peter and Hazelmary Bull, are Christians who own a bed and breakfast hotel in the U.K. They have a few fans, but not quite as many as Sir Elton.

A homosexual couple recently asked to share a bed in Peter and Hazelmary's B&B. Believing this to be a violation of Leviticus 18:22, they refused to serve the homosexuals. According to the Daily Mail, "They operate a strict policy which only allows married heterosexual couples to share rooms at their B&B in Cornwall."

Naturally, the homosexual couple sought to use the institutionalized violence of the state to enslave the Bulls (by forcing them to serve the homosexuals against their will), or to confiscate their property.

Naturally, the judge ruled in favor of the homosexuals and against the Christians.

Their attorney said, "This guesthouse is Mr. and Mrs. Bull's own home."

"My heart bleeds," the judge said in effect.

The judge explicitly acknowledged the fact that the Bulls would be forced to act against conscience in order to comply with the ruling.

So who, exactly, is a "second class citizen?"

U.K. Commentary: Yes, gays have often been the victims of prejudice. But they now risk becoming the new McCarthyites - Mail Online

Sunday, January 16, 2011

Iowa Law Review

I just discovered that one of my web pages was cited in an article in the Iowa Law Review.

Footnote 15

I guess I should feel more honored than ridiculed, though I always say, "Bad press is better than no press at all."

(My response to the claim in Footnote 14 is here.)

Religious Freedom Day

The Washington-based Freedom House has announced that Freedom is in decline worldwide.

Nevertheless, President Obama has declared today "Religious Freedom Day."

The day chosen is the anniversary of the enactment of the Statute for Religious Freedom in Virginia, 1786. That statute begins:

Whereas, Almighty God hath created the mind free;
that all attempts to influence it by temporal punishments or burthens, or by civil incapacitations tend only to beget habits of hypocrisy and meanness, and therefore are a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, who being Lord, both of body and mind yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either, as was in his Almighty power to do,

Did Allah create the mind free? Not according to the Taliban. Nobody in Virginia, 1786, would have agreed that Muhammad or Krishna was "the holy author of our religion."

"The HOLY author of OUR religion?" Oops! The ACLU would have us say, "the Secular author of our agnostic tolerance."

In his official proclamation, Obama says,

Though our Nation has sometimes fallen short of the weighty task of ensuring freedom of religious expression and practice, we have remained a Nation in which people of different faiths coexist with mutual respect and equality under the law. America's unshakeable [sic] commitment to religious freedom binds us together as a people, and the strength of our values underpins a country that is tolerant, just, and strong.

In a Christian nation, no religion that requires human sacrifice exists "with mutual respect and equality under the law." No religion that prescribes terrorism should be respected.

Freedom is in decline around the world because too many people tolerate false religions. The condemnation of tyranny and oppression is fundamentally a religious and moral act. Only Christianity provides the worldview which can consistently oppose coercion of mind and body.

Samuel Adams called himself "The Last Puritan." He was a radical Puritan, going back to the roots. Our alternatives are the pursuit of purity, maturity, and consistency in Christianity, or the opposite: impurity, immaturity, the breakdown of logic and moral standards as everything is tolerated. Including tyranny.

Consistently Christian Puritanism is self-imposed intolerance of immorality and irrationality, but does not include coercion of mind and body of others.

Thursday, January 13, 2011

Tea Party Threatens Violence

Here, especially the comments:

The Fred Phelps Freak Show - Tea Party Nation

See my previous post: Harrisonville Stops Speech

If Fred Phelps were a black liberal, the Tea Party folks would never, ever say these things in public, because they want to maintain their image against the Lamestream Media who would jump at these words and say "See!?! We told you!!"

But the media won't jump on threats of violence directed toward those the media already hates, so these ugly threats will be ignored. Or "tolerated."

Some violence is politically correct, and the media will turn its collective head when bullies pounce on a politically incorrect figure.

Shame on the Tea Party Nation.

They reveal themselves to be cowardly bullies.

In case some comments get pulled from the website, here's a few:

Permalink Reply by Ken B 21 minutes ago
Rolling Thunder, a group of bikers, meets him in my state. The cops say he wants someone to assault him and his inbred group so he can sue them and pay his bills. The bikers get between the inbreds and the mourners and if the inbreds make noise by shouting, they are drowned out by motorcycle engines.

Permalink Reply by Pat Chadwell 21 minutes ago
As long as Berry was in AZ Fred Phelps would not show up... Also the local AZ bikers said if he showed up they would step in to help take control of them....In other words push them all out of town.....

Permalink Reply by Rocky Venti 21 minutes ago
Send him up here to northern California. We will be glad to "welcome" him to the area...

Permalink Reply by Pat Chadwell 16 minutes ago
Yep right in the middle of Shasta Lake would be a great place for them all...

Permalink Reply by Daniel Tabib 17 minutes ago
It can't just be about drowning out the noise. It needs to be about making the noise go away. These people have no respect for human life and there needs to be something that can be done outside of violence to make this stop.

Permalink Reply by Deborah Sue Porter 13 minutes ago
I am a Christian, and by denomination, a Baptist, and it horrifies me every time I hear the press refer to this family as a "Baptist" "church". From what I understand this so-called "church" consists of only one family who continue to dishonor the name of Christ with their despicable behavior. Too bad a lot of people only hear the word Baptist and associate it with one denomination. True Christians love and pray for unbelievers. They do not add emotional distress to grieving families at funerals.

Permalink Reply by raymond bober 12 minutes ago
let him come to New Jersey...We can arrange for Nicky, Guido, Tony and a few more of the boys to meet him here

Permalink Reply by John S 10 minutes ago
Fred Phelps band of clowns was given quite a welcome in both Harrisonville and Weston Missouri recently. I think they might see the writing on the wall.

Permalink Reply by Gary 6 minutes ago
Check this out! Right after Mohamed OBAMA tells all the children that we must all get along, this guy calls him out!

Permalink Reply by J. Sparks 6 minutes ago
Bullies only understand one language --- violence. Bloody their nose and they'll leave you alone. Being a Harley-riding man of many, many years all I can say about Rolling Thunder is -- God Bless them and I pray they continue to block this idiot and his freak show.

Permalink Reply by martha _arizona 4 minutes ago
The Baptists kicked him out of the affiliation. Phelps has been at this since the 50s. He was also an atty., but was disbarred. He and his family have quite a history of disruption at gay and military funerals and attacks against various individuals. They have lost cases against them and still they don't stop. Nothing stops them from spewing their satanic hatred.

Permalink Reply by Bob Bowser 2 minutes ago
Interestingly this band of inbreds are actually lawyers... In Topeka there are several buildings on them with the Phelps name on them... and I have been told they are all related.

If foresters could ever clone the Phelps' genetic code, they'd make millions growing powerpoles that don't need to be trimmed... you see, there are no branches on the Phelps family tree.

The prophets in the Bible were masters at inflicting "emotional distress" on unjust, oppressive emperors and lazy, idolatrous citizens who preferred statist security rather than personal responsibility. If you don't like what the prophets say, refute the message, don't physically suppress the messenger.

Tuesday, January 11, 2011

FDA Food Safety Modernization Act

I received a constituent form letter from Sen. Claire McCaskill regarding the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (P.L. 111-353). I know there are people out there who know more than I do about this issue, and can save me some research time by pointing me to resources that might answer these questions more accurately (vigilantly) than Sen.McCaskill has. Please leave a comment if you can help me.

Dear Mr. Craig,

Thank you for contacting me regarding food safety legislation. I appreciate hearing from you, and welcome the opportunity to respond.

Recently, the Senate passed and the President signed into law the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (P.L. 111-353). This bipartisan legislation, which I supported, provides important new protections for American consumers while also ensuring that family farmers, small producers, farmers' markets, and local gardeners are not subject to new federal requirements.

Federal, state and local agencies share responsibility with the food industry for ensuring the safety of the food supply in the U.S. Unfortunately, a number of recent incidents have highlighted some gaps in our food safety system. Our food safety laws, which were enacted in the early 20th century, have not kept pace with the major changes in production, processing and marketing that have taken place in recent years. Each year, thousands of Americans are made seriously ill from foodborne illnesses and many result in death.

The Food Safety Modernization Act will improve the safety of our food supply in a number of ways. This legislation authorizes the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) to issue mandatory recalls in the event that businesses do not voluntarily recall harmful foods. Previously, the FDA possessed authority to order food recalls only for infant formula. This legislation will also subject imported foods to increased scrutiny. Under the new law, the FDA will be able to require certification for high-risk foods, and deny entry to foods that lacks certification or that are from a foreign facility that has refused U.S. inspectors. The Food Safety Modernization Act will also require grocery stores and other food retailers to notify consumers if they have sold foods that have been recalled.

I know that many Missourians have concerns about this legislation. For instance, many have raised questions about how this legislation will affect local organic farmers, their neighborhood farmer's market, or the garden in their back yard. As a lifelong Missourian whose family worked at a feed mill, I understand that agriculture is more than a primary driver of Missouri's economy; it is a part of our state's cultural fabric. I would not have supported any legislation that jeopardized this culture and this legislation does not.

In order to ensure this, I supported an important amendment provisions to the Food Safety Modernization Act, offered by Senator Tester of Montana (himself a small producer), which will ensure that family farmers and other local producers are exempt from new federal requirements. To be clear, food sold through farmers' markets, bake sales, road side stands, public events, community supported agriculture, and organizational fundraisers is exempt from new regulations.

For your information, I have included with this letter a document providing answers to frequently asked questions regarding the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act.

I am pleased that a broad, bipartisan coalition of senators joined together to support this important legislation. It ensures that American families can be confident that the food their families enjoy is the safest in the world, while safeguarding the ability of family farms and small producers to continue doing what they do best.

Again, thank you for contacting me. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future if I can be of further assistance to you on this or any other issue.


Claire McCaskill
United States Senator

P.L. 111-353: Frequently Asked Questions

Will P.L. 111-353 outlaw home gardens and family farms? NO.
P.L. 111-353 does not outlaw home gardens or family farms. In fact, the bill explicitly states that the produce standards “shall not apply to produce that is produced by an individual for personal consumption.” In addition, the bill also contains an exemption from regulations for small facilities and small farms, which was purposefully included to protect America’s family farms. This includes food sold through farmers‟ markets, bake sales, road side stands, public events, community supported agriculture, and organizational fundraisers.

Will P.L. 111-353 criminalize seed savings? NO.
P.L. 111-353 does not create any new rules in regard to the practice of saving seeds for use from year to year, and does not outlaw, criminalize, or require any specific agricultural or growing practice.

Will P.L. 111-353 outlaw traditional organic growing methods? NO.
Section 105 of S.510 explicitly states that new produce safety standards cannot “include any requirements that conflict with or duplicate the requirements of the national organic program.”

Will P.L. 111-353 bring everyone who grows any food under the jurisdiction of the Department of Homeland Security? NO.
P.L. 111-353 maintains the same food safety jurisdiction that exists under current law.

Will P.L. 111-353 include new recordkeeping requirements for farms? NO.
P.L. 111-353 does not require that farms keep any new food safety-related records.

Will P.L. 111-353 charge farms and small businesses new registration fees? NO.
P.L. 111-353 does not charge registration fees of any kind.

Will P.L. 111-353 imprison people who sell raw milk? NO.
P.L. 111-353 does not establish any restrictions on the sale of raw milk. The bill merely directs the FDA to review existing regulatory hazard analysis and preventive control programs in existence, such as the Grade “A” Pasteurized Milk Ordinance, before creating any new hazard analysis and preventive control rules.

Will P.L. 111-353 require American food producers or farmers to be subject to WHO rules, UN food safety standards, or Codex Alimentarius? NO.
P.L. 111-353 requires the FDA to come up with a plan to work with foreign countries that import food into the United States to ensure that Americans who purchase imported products can be assured of their safety, but does not require the adoption of any international standards. The bill also explicitly clarifies that dietary supplements remain subject to U.S. jurisdiction, not the Codex Alimenatrius.

Will P.L. 111-353 require farms and more facilities to register with the FDA? NO.
Under the Bioterrorism Act of 2002, certain food businesses were considered “facilities” and had to register with FDA. Farms and restaurants were exempted. This definition is not changed in P.L. 111-353. If an entity does not need to register now, it will not need to register under P.L. 111-353.

Will P.L. 111-353 give the FDA new authority to inspect farms? NO.
P.L. 111-353 increases inspections for registered food facilities but does not hange FDA‟s jurisdiction over farms.

Monday, January 10, 2011

10th Amendment Radio Marathon

The Tenth Amendment Center is holding a radio marathon in celebration of the publication of Common Sense by Thomas Paine on this day, January 10, 1776.


The event features Charles Goyette, Anthony Gregory, David Theroux, and Tom Woods, among others.

In Common Sense, Paine appealed to the Christian heart of the emerging nation, quoting the Bible to attack monarchy. But in Age of Reason, Paine attacked Christianity, and all of America's Founding Fathers abandoned him.

Sunday, January 09, 2011

Politics and Religion

I received an email today from someone telling me I shouldn't mix politics and religion. My response:

Politics is religion externalized.
Politics is how religion is implemented.
All politics is religious.
It always has been, and it always will be.
You cannot separate religion and politics.

Christianity is the only religion that is
anti-politics. All other religions favor

"Politics" comes from the Greek word "polis."
It was all about religion in the Greek world,
and it's all about religion today.

Today politics is about the religion of Secular Humanism:

In the Garden of Eden, Adam was told to
"exercise dominion over the earth."

This meant tilling the garden (Genesis 2:15) and
engaging in peaceful, voluntary trade with others.

Some people don't want to work. They don't
want to till the garden. They want to TAX
those who till the garden.

Other people who don't want to exercise dominion
over the earth by tilling the garden aren't
willing to steal from others, but they want to
escape personal responsibility and are content
to become the slaves of those who do the taxing,
and receive "security" in return.

So there are three kinds of religion, and
three kinds of politics:

• Dominion Religion
• Power Religion
• Escape Religion

Religions like Buddhism are escape religions,
and are always taken captive by power religions.

Islam is a power religion.
Keynesianism is a power religion.

Politics is the path to salvation in
non-Christian religions:

Sometimes members of escape religions
complain about being taxed by believers
in power religions, but in reality,
they like being taxed, because they like
being fed. They like "security."

God wanted Israel to live in peace and
abundance by exercising dominion in the
promised land. But a whole generation
of Israelites wanted to return to the
security of Pharaoh. God destroyed
them in the wilderness. When the
new generation entered the promised land,
they said they wanted a king like all
the other nations around them.

The desire for politics (power religion)
is a rejection of God. (1 Samuel 8)

Christianity is the only religion which
is against humanistic politics.

If you reject Christianity, then you condemn yourself
to politics.

Kevin Craig
Powersite, MO 65731-0179

Saturday, January 08, 2011

"Hello Parent One? This is Child Two."

Obama State Department deletes 'Mother, 'Father' from forms for more correct 'Parent One, 'Parent Two'

That's the headline from the Los Angeles Times.

"More correct."

Certainly more politically correct.

The Times reports,
Deleting the customary "mother" and "father" terminology, says Jennifer Chrisler of the Family Equality Council, "allows many different types of families to be able to go and apply for a passport for their child without feeling like the government doesn’t recognize their family.” Chrisler's group has long lobbied for the changes.
So does the government recognize traditional families?

No longer.

There is no neutrality. If the government does not promote Biblical values, then the government is at war with them.

Abolish passports.

Abolish the State Department.

Keep abolishing.