| Author | Message | ||
| Denisegilmore Registered user Username: Denisegilmore Post Number: 284 Registered: 10-2000 |
Stan, With all due respect to you I must ask--just how do you see Bush as a Christian who supports baby killing?? THAT is NOT Christian. Just because he reads "My utmost for His Hightest" does not make him a Christian. Unless you are telling me that 'as long as we read a Christian book in the morning and say a little prayer, it's okay to kill babies and cut wages for the middle class, the seniors, cut children's education funds, cut out medicaid for the disabled and other services as you are reading above with your own eyes and abosulutely okay to do away with "civil rights" embedded in our Bill of Rights that this country is founded on....Here, read below and then I'll post a post with the actual stats regarding the filibuster and how many the Republicans have elected in and how few were filibustered. But here is a start to give you insight into these Judges that Bush wants in and has a few in now. I should know, I'm living it. While I look for those stats, here's something to read and research if you like. --------------------------------- By civilrights.org staff civilrights.org May 18, 2005 With the majority leadership in the U.S. Senate widely expected to invoke what is being referred to as the "nuclear option," the nation's oldest, largest, and most diverse civil and human rights coalition warned of the dangers posed by eliminating the ability of senators to stop the confirmation of federal judges with records hostile to important civil rights protections. "This week, the U.S. Senate will be the latest battleground in an effort by conservatives to pack the federal courts with out-of-the-mainstream judges who are intent on rolling back decades of progress in the push for equality. The Senate needs to step back and remember what is at stake in this 'nuclear' fight over the confirmation of federal judges," said Wade Henderson, executive director of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights (LCCR). The "nuclear option" refers to Republican leaders' efforts to eliminate the filibuster in the U.S. Senate and involves replacing the super-majority of 60 votes now required to shut down a filibuster with a 51-vote majority. According to a statement issued late last week, Sen. Bill Frist, R. Tenn., plans to begin the "nuclear" showdown by bringing to the Senate floor the nominations of two of President Bush's most controversial nominees: Janice Rogers Brown, nominated to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, and Priscilla Owen, nominated to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Of Rogers Brown, LCCR said, "Not only does she show an inability to dispassionately review cases, but her opinions are based on her extremist ideology and ignore judicial precedent, even that set by the United States Supreme Court." LCCR called Owen's views "far outside the mainstream of judicial thought, even by the standards of the very conservative Texas Supreme Court." Henderson also pointed out that if invoked, the "nuclear option" would "clear the way for the lifetime confirmation of federal judges" such as William Pryor, who was recess-appointed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. Pryor has argued that the Supreme Court should cut back on the protections of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Family and Medical Leave Act. The decisions of another Bush nominee, District Court Judge Terrence Boyle, nominated to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, "show a highly disturbing hostility towards civil rights laws, and a "states' rights" jurisprudence that can only be described as extremist," according to LCCR. Appointing judges like these, Henderson said, would "roll back decades of civil rights progress." ------------------------------------ That's just the beginning Stan. I have more information for you and others if you are interested. And like I said, I'm neither party so this is not a party issue with me but it very much matters to me if a 200 year old tradition of the United States, called the filibuster, is yanked out from under any of the parties. Either Republican or Democratic. I know the Republicans would not want the filibuster (which they have used)yanked out from under them. I wouldn't want the filibuster yanked out from under the Republicans either. So if it were that case, I'd be standing by the Republicans on this issue. Otherwise we have no more government ruled by two parties--it's one party in charge which boils down to tyranny. I'll be back in a few. And please tell me it's okay to kill babies and even fund that and then lie to the American Public by telling them he is "anti abortion"--THEN proclaim to be "Christian." Also how can a "Christian" leader of this country proclaim to be "liberalizing" other countries when he is taking away our very own "civil rights" right here at home. Another lie from this "Christian" president. Those two questions should give you pause Stan. When you answer, please document your proof as I am doing. In respect towards you as I may learn from you things I am not privvy too yet. And I'm more than willing to learn. Your sister in Christ, Jesus. Denise | ||
| Denisegilmore Registered user Username: Denisegilmore Post Number: 285 Registered: 10-2000 |
Stan, The reason I had come to this thread was to share the last couple of posts by that blogger you did like with you. So, here are his last two entries and I'll go ahead and put his link here again as well in case you would like to make a comment to him. Now--his last two entries: ---------------------------------------------- Wednesday, May 18, 2005 Ezekiel 34 Part 1 Lets dance with a few sections of this passage, thinking about the church as the shepherds and persons with disability as the flock. I have pulled a few of the sections of Ezekial 34 out because of their particular applicability. Woe to the shepherds of Israel who only take care of themselves! Should not shepherds take care of the flock? I think the implication is that some sheep were taken care of and some were not. Apparently the shepherds took care of themselves and their families, however, there was a group of people who were ignored. Who were they specifically? You have not strengthened the weak or healed the sick or bound up the injured. You have not brought back the strays or searched for the lost. You have ruled them harshly and brutally. The weak sick and injured were not strengthened, or healed or bound up. Additionally, they didn't bring back the strays (it seems the assumption is that they knew where the strays were) or search for the lost. Once again, it seems the assumption is that they knew they were lost. Instead, what did they do? They ruled them harshly and brutally. Now I don't know about brutality of the church persons with disability, but I have experienced and read about some harsh treatment on the part of the church towards persons with disability. Examples of that treatment are provided elsewhere in this blog. So they were scattered because there was no shepherd, and when they were scattered they became food for all the wild animals. Persons with disability often live at or below the poverty line. When you are poor, you live where other poor people live. There are many nere do well people who live among the poor and like wild animals they take advantage of the poor, particularly the mentally disabled poor. But why were they scattered? Because there was no shepherd. You don't know how often I hear church leaders excuse themselves from responsibility for persons with disability because of the their lack of funds. There are funds for other programs, oftentimes for programs for people who are not scattered or weak or sick or injured. My sheep wandered over the mountains and on every high hill. They were scattered over the whole earth, and no one searched or looked for them. I was floored to find out that 20% of the population of the United States are disabled. Not all are cognitively disabled, but disabled nontheless. Why isn't the church looking for these people to bring them in. One could take the idea of being scattered as being lost, but one could also take it as that they are everywhere. They are on every high hill. But no one is looking for them. More on the rest of this section in part 2. McNair "Therefore this is what the Sovereign Lord says to them: See, I myself will judge between the fat sheep and the lean sheep. Because you shove with flank and shoulder, butting all the weak sheep with your horns until you have driven them away. I will save my flock and they will no longer be plundered. I will judge between one sheep and another. I will place over them one shepherd, my servant David, and he will tend them: he will tend them and be their shepherd. I the Lord will be their God, and my servant David will be prince among them. I the Lord have spoken. They will live in safety, and no one will make them afraid. I will provide for them a land renowned for its crops, and they will no longer be victims of famine in the land or bear the scorn of the nations. Then they will know that I, the Lord their God am with them and that they, the house of Israel are my people, declares the Sovereign Lord. You my sheep, the sheep of my pasture, are people and I am your God, declares the Sovereign Lord." Posted by: The Editor in Chief / 5/18/2005 02:48:00 PM (0) comments ------------------------------------ Sunday, May 15, 2005Ezekiel 34 A student of mine, Ms. Kimberly DeHuff shared a verse she had noticed in the book of Ezekiel. She encouraged me to read it with persons with disability in mind. It is really powerful. I provide it here fyi, and will try to unpack it a bit over the next few blogs. Ezekiel 34 The word of the Lord came to me: "Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel; prophesy and say to them: 'This is what the Sovereign Lord says: Woe to the shepherds of Israel who only take care of themselves! Should not shepherds take care of the flock? You eat the curds, clothes yourselves with the wool and slaughter the choice animals, but you do not take care of the flock. You have not strengthened the weak or healed the sick or bound up the injured. You have not brought back the strays or searched for the lost. You have ruled them harshly and brutally. So they were scattered because there was no shepherd, and when they were scattered they became food for all the wild animals. My sheep wandered over the mountains and on every high hill. They were scattered over the whole earth, and no one searched or looked for them. "Therefore, you shepherds, hear the word of the Lord: As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign Lord, because my flock lacks a shepherd and so has been plundered and has become food for all the wild animals, and because my shepherds did not search for my flock but cared for themselves rather than my flock, therefore, O shepherds, hear the word of the Lord: This is what the Sovereign Lord says: I am against the shepherds and will hold them accountable for my flock. I will remove them from tending the flock so that the shepherds can no longer feed themselves. I will rescue my flock from their mouths, and it will no longer be food for them. "For this is what the Sovereign Lord says: I myself will search for my sheep and look after them. As a shepherd looks after his scattered flock when he is with them, so will I look after my sheep. I will rescue them from all the places where they were scattered on a day of clouds and darkness. I will bring them out from the nations and gather them from the countries and I will bring them into their own land. I will pasture them on the mountains of Israel, in the ravines and tend them in the good pasture, and the mountain heights of Israel will be their grazing land. There they will lie down in a rich pasture on the mountains of Israel. I myself will tend my sheep and have them lie down, declares the Sovereign Lord. I will search for the lost and bring back the strays. I will bind up the injured and strengthen the weak, but the sleek and the strong I will destroy. I will shepherd the flock with justice. "As for you, my flock, this is what the Sovereign Lord says: I will judge between one sheep and another and between rams and goats. Is it not enough for you to feed on the good pasture? Must you also trample the rest of your pasture with your feet? Is it not enough for you to drink clear water? Must you also muddy the rest with your feet? Must my flock feed on what you have trampled and drink what you have muddied with your feet? "Therefore this is what the Sovereign Lord says to them: See, I myself will judge between the fat sheep and the lean sheep. Because you shove with flank and shoulder, butting all the weak sheep with your horns until you have driven them away. I will save my flock and they will no longer be plundered. I will judge between one sheep and another. I will place over them one shepherd, my servant David, and he will tend them: he will tend them and be their shepherd. I the Lord will be their God, and my servant David will be prince among them. I the Lord have spoken. "I will make a covenant of peace with them and rid the land of wild beasts so that they may live in the desert and sleep in the forests in safety. I will bless them and the places surrounding my hill. I will send down showers in season: there will be showers of blessing. The trees of the field will yield their fruit and the ground will yield its crops; the people will be secure in their land. They will know that I am the Lord, when I break the bars of their yoke and rescue them from the hands of those who enslaved them. They will no longer be plundered by the nations, nor will wild animals devour them. They will live in safety, and no one will make them afraid. I will provide for them a land renowned for its crops, and they will no longer be victims of famine in the land or bear the scorn of the nations. Then they will know that I, the Lord their God am with them and that they, the house of Israel are my people, declares the Sovereign Lord. You my sheep, the sheep of my pasture, are people and I am your God, declares the Sovereign Lord." Very powerful to think of the shepherds as we in the church, whether we be in leadership or not, and the sheep being those who are disabled or disenfranchised. McNair Posted by: The Editor in Chief / 5/15/2005 04:12:00 PM"" http://www.disabledchristianity.blogspot.com/ -------------------------------------------- God Bless you. Denise | ||
| Denisegilmore Registered user Username: Denisegilmore Post Number: 286 Registered: 10-2000 |
Stan, Here's some background on some of the Judges. Click on the pictures and you will get their background and what they stand for. http://saveourcourts.civilrights.org/nominees/index.html P.S. I'm still looking for those stats within all my documents. In Christ with respect and love towards you always. Denise | ||
| Denisegilmore Registered user Username: Denisegilmore Post Number: 287 Registered: 10-2000 |
Well Stan, Hard as I'm searching, my brain has gone blank as to where I stored the "stat" sheet regarding the filibuster. One day here it will be found--no doubt about it. Until then, here's some history for you (which you probably already know) and others who may not know, about the filibuster or as it is termed in today's language the "nuclear option." Hope that helps gives some of the back ground and also on the insight into the filibuster. And the sight above "save our courts" is a great site with many links about the Judges, the history and what's going on in our Court System these days. Hopefully it helps everybody. Blessings as always and please remember, I'm bi-partisan so I take no sides but I do know that eliminating the filibuster---well, we might as well not call this a democracy with only one side voting on the issues--that is NOT constitutional. Until later my friend, Denise | ||
| Denisegilmore Registered user Username: Denisegilmore Post Number: 288 Registered: 10-2000 |
Oh and Stan, One more thing, I just wanted to say that we have a Great God to bring two Christians together like you and I, who are both willing to have dialogue on topics normally forbidden until the last few years. This is how the Holy Spirit works in us Stan and it's a marvelous thing that we can respectfully discuss these issues, even if we disagree and know that we are still brother and sister in the Lord Jesus Christ. Bless His Name. And thank you Stan. With love through Christ our Lord. Denise | ||
| Denisegilmore Registered user Username: Denisegilmore Post Number: 289 Registered: 10-2000 |
Found the Stats Stan, A paragraph with the link: "Despite the campaign to paint Senate Democrats as obstructionists, the fact is that the Senate approved more than 200 people for federal judgeships during Mr. Bush's first term. Only 10 were blocked by Democrats, who had sound reasons to do so." http://www.earthjustice.org/policy/judicial/commentary/pryor_commentary.html Only 10 out of all of the Judgeships and for very good reasons. Like this Pryor, with a guy like him in office I'm a dead woman. And he's not the only one. So there's alot of information on the save our courts link. Hopefully you are studying this through and not just giving it a myopic viewing. Blessings to your household, in Christ Jesus. Denise | ||
| Denisegilmore Registered user Username: Denisegilmore Post Number: 294 Registered: 10-2000 |
This is a site to read and remember also: http://www.ushmm.org/priv_acc/index.php?content=access/ http://www.ushmm.org/outreach/euthan.htm | ||
| Denisegilmore Registered user Username: Denisegilmore Post Number: 295 Registered: 10-2000 |
Conservative Vs. Liberal No Longer An Issue By Chuck Baldwin June 3, 2005 Let's get real. The political battle between conservatives and liberals is no longer an issue worth discussing. Except for rhetoric, there is little substantive difference between them. The hype, scare tactics, and fear mongering used by both sides is merely for the purpose of raising money and electing people to positions of power. However, neither side has any real plans to change public policy or the overall direction of the country. How long have we voters heard Democrats and Republicans warn us of the imminent dangers of the other party while assuring us that they and they alone can be trusted to save the country? It's the same redundant message every two years, and has been for as long as I can remember. However, the grim reality is, no matter whom we elect, no matter which party controls Congress or the White House, the direction of the country doesn't change. Fundamental liberties continue to be lost, the federal government continues to burgeon, and America continues to evolve into a socialist-Fascist society. Furthermore, that people call themselves Christians also matters little. The Religious Right moves in lock-step with the socialist- Fascist direction of the country along with the godless left. At the end of the day, it doesn't matter whether a politician claims to be conservative or liberal, Christian or unbeliever (which, of course, hardly any politician claims to be). Nothing changes. What Americans must come to understand is that there is really only one issue that counts today: will America be an independent, sovereign nation or will it become part of a global empire complete with global government and a global economy? Obviously, there are many sub-issues that will help decide that question, but ultimately this is the single most important issue facing this generation of Americans! And when one ponders that question, he or she can easily see that both Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives, Christians and unbelievers are culpable in leading or assisting America's entrance into internationalism. There seems to be but a handful of people, from either end of the political spectrum, that remotely understands this reality. Of course, many people are blind as bats as to what is happening to our country. All they know is working, paying taxes, getting drunk on the weekends, and immersing themselves in sports or self pleasure. Others see what is happening and because they lack a proper education or background are intrigued by it. Still others know exactly what is happening and are doing everything they can to hasten the pace. Regardless, America continues on the fast track to globalism. What people need to realize is that internationalism is incompatible with freedom. Once internationalists achieve their dream of global government, Americans will rapidly lose their liberties and independence. No one's life, liberty, or property will be secure. People will become servants to an all-powerful state. We will live our lives under ubiquitous state surveillance. There will be no appeals, no checks and balances, and no separation of powers. The rise of globalism also means the end of Christianity as a major influence in America culture and society. Our Christian history and heritage will be expunged. Beyond that, true Christian people will find that they have no friends within this new global order. We will come to share the purges and persecutions that our brothers and sisters who lived under Stalin's Russia and Mao's China endured. Do you find it interesting that those Christians who refuse to oppose the efforts of internationalists today are actually helping to forge the chains and build the scaffolds that will ultimately be used against both them and their children tomorrow? Whether they realize it or not, that is exactly what they are allowing to happen. It is time that all freedom loving Americans discard their infatuation with political parties, labels, and titles. They must quickly cast off their propensity to put pragmatism over principle and stop allowing themselves to be blindly led by these pompous Pied Pipers of internationalism. Liberal or conservative? Democrat or Republican? Christian or unbeliever? It no longer matters! We are fighting for the survival of our nation. Any man, regardless of race, religion, political label, or economic station who understands that this is a battle between globalism and independence is our friend, and any man who understands it not will ultimately do us more harm than good, his political and religious affiliation notwithstanding. © Chuck Baldwin NOTE TO THE READER: Under Bill s. 1618 TITLE III passed by the 105th U.S. Congress, this email editorial cannot be considered Spam as long as the sender includes contact information and a method of removal. To be removed, see instructions below. To subscribe to these columns, send a message to majordomo@chuckbaldwinlive.com with the words subscribe chuck-wagon in the body of the message. To unsubscribe put the words unsubscribe chuck-wagon in the body of the message. Chuck Baldwin's commentaries are copyrighted and may be republished, reposted, or emailed providing the person or organization doing so does not charge for subscriptions or advertising and that the column is copied intact and that full credit is given and that Chuck's web site address is included. Editors or Publishers of publications charging for subscriptions or advertising who want to run these columns must contact Chuck Baldwin for permission. Radio or television Talk Show Hosts interested in scheduling an interview with Chuck should contact chuck@chuckbaldwinlive.com. When responding, please include your name, city and state. And, unless otherwise requested, all respondents will be added to the Chuck Wagon address list. Please visit Chuck's web site at http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com. | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 392 Registered: 3-2005 |
Denise, Thanks for posting this article. There are a lot of good points. I am very disappointed in the Republican party right now. They are really letting us down when it comes to abortion etc. I do respect President Bush, and pray for him daily. I believe he is truly a man of God, and is doing his best. But our hope is not built on a political party. Our hope is built on nothing less than Jesus' blood and righteousness. All other ground is sinking sand. Blessings to you Denise, Stan | ||
| Denisegilmore Registered user Username: Denisegilmore Post Number: 296 Registered: 10-2000 |
Stan, This thread is titled 'Terri Schiavo and President Bush.' It encompasses more than politics. There is no way on this earth that I can be accused nor can it be insinuated that I'm here debating political parties. As that is surely not the case. Anyone on this earth can read this entire thread to see this very real fact. So please, do not come back with a statement that insults my intelligence and my integrity. Have you ever heard the saying "He/She is so Heavenly bound that they are no earthly good?" The fact of the matter is this is a Christian forum. As Christians, we are to do right and call evil for what it is--evil. Not plea to a cop-out by stating the obvious for which all Christians should already have a working knowledge of the "Milk of the Word." We all know Who our Hope is built upon. This does not mean we do nothing good nor does this mean we remain silent when we see evil all around us. We are to hate the evil according to Scripture. We are to name the evil, we are to rebuke the evil, we are to Watch and Pray as Jesus Christ, my God and your God commands us to do. Just what do you suppose we are to watch for if we don't name it? It is not just false prophets/esses. Jesus Christ of Nazareth had much to say regarding Mercy, Justice, Hate, the lame, the blind, the naked, the Evil, Love, and much much more. It's in the Old and New Testaments--read 'em if you don't believe me. We are to be watchmen at the gate as it were as well as proclaiming the Gospel, teaching, rebuking, edifying, reproving, warning others, and exhorting amongst many other duties as 'mature Christians.' Now, with stating Who our Hope is built upon I can see no reason for any thread talking about anything EXCEPT the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Yet, lo and behold, there are many many topics on this forum and some even talk about a dead woman who claimed to be a prophetess--her name was Ellen G. White. (see, I too can state the obvious). And it did absolutely nothing to discuss issues in this thread. Nor did it do a thing to help facilitate a discussion regarding the issues of this thread. Namely, doing what we, as Christians, should also do--helping those less fortunate by speaking about the issues that address this Country of ours and our treatment of the disabled and the outcasts and other Countries that also face these same issues. Now if you want we will turn to Scripture and let's just see what we ought to and ought not to do. (this has nothing whatsoever to do with a particular political party either.) Start with Matthew 25, especially the sheep and the goats teaching that Jesus Christ of Nazareth Himself tells of us. Let me know what you think of Christians who won't help uphold the lame, the blind, the needy, the hungry, the unborn, the outcasts, the lepers and we can go from there because I've ample Scripture to uphold the teachings of Jesus Christ before the face of everyone who reads this thread. (including Bush). Just like this thread in it's purpose. The purpose of this thread is to hopefully pull a few heads out of the sand to see the realities of evil going on around us. You can try to live in a bubble if you like but that bubble is going to pop on you soon enough and then what? What will you do when someone you know is suddenly the next one to be starved to death? What will you do if your retirement and Social Security are taken from you? What will you do in the way of adding comfort to those who are reading this thread who just might be suffering some grave injustices? Remain silent? Pretend they don't exist? Preach the Gospel and hope the crippled will just disappear? Preach the Gospel and make believe that that solved those darned crippled and blind peoples problems so we need not talk about their issues? Use our God Almighty as your "straw man" (which is a very low and dispicable thing to do) to opt out of discussing these issues because they happen to involve politics too? And not just politics but it happens to be pointing out the "elephant in the living-room"--the wrong doings of our President of this Nation? Not just the President but others of YOUR POLITICAL PERSUASION (which I believe happens to be irking you the most in this discussion). And not just those of your political persuasion but both sides and all sides as you can note in my NON PARTISAN stance. And you want to try to back away by bringing the Gospel into this and political parties as your entire reply to the many many things I've addressed as a Christian woman who happens to be disabled but I'm more disabled by the very Christians who all of a sudden can only repeat what we already know: #1--The Gospel--#2--Who we build our Hope upon. What do you suppose people like me who are Christians are to do when Christians themselves are too timid to speak of real life issues that are facing us? We come to a Christian website and find that most Christians do exactly as you have just done with your last post--we find the great cop-out of stating the obvious--the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Well, that is our Great Hope, no doubt about that. And needless and naming the obvious once again, the Gospel is on many threads on this forum already. So, does this mean that when real issues are brought to the forefront of people with disabilities we don't talk about them?? Just thought I'd ask. But please, since you have now brought up the obvious i.e. Scriptural Truth of Who is our Great Hope. Please elucidate a bit and tell me what this God of mine and yours says regarding the lame, the blind, the poor, the widowed, the lepers, the users, the blind guides, the evil, the warmongers, the liars, the greedy, murderers, thieves, those who call good evil and evil good, the prophetic end times we are warned about when we see the things going on that we are seeing in today's news et-cetera. Because that's where I was heading, but since you decided to jump the gun and proclaim the obvious we might as well go ahead and discuss what Jesus Christ of Nazareth and the Old and New Testament writers proclaimed about what we are seeing, why we are seeing it, what to do about it, how to comfort one another regarding it, answer questions such as "should we oppose the evil or just pretend it's not happening," or "is it okay to fight for our lives if somebody tries to kill us?" Or "John the Revelator talked about the mark of the beast and much is spoken about the tribulation and the anti-christ by the Apostle Paul and Jesus Christ Himself talks about the tribulation and many topics that fit inside this thread, is it okay to discuss them here?" Or "so what is our God given right regarding what to do or not to do regarding these things?" And a real good question might pop up like "As a Christian man/woman, what can I learn from those less fortunate and how can I help?" Or perhaps "As a Christian person who is disabled, I'd like to know what God's Word says about those who oppress others or kill others like me." For all we know, there are many hundreds of people who are not Christian but are disabled and perhaps, given a chance, this thread could be used to show Christian love, compassion, mercy and a genuine concern about these types of issues of theirs. And who knows, maybe somebody out there may not be so decieved by the anti-christ system already setting up shop in this world of our political arena and those other agengies, peoples, media and an entire network that stem from there. See, the possibilities are endless Stan to help, add knowledge to this thread, and perhaps even learn a thing or two while doing so. And after you answer some of these questions perhaps you might be interested in this site: http://watch.pair.com/charter.html and this next site is a very good one to think upon: http://www.fulfilledprophecy.com/2010.html And of course, we have Scripture that talks about the oppressors, the oppressed, and of all things--the political/religious end time agenda that we are to watch for. It tells us many things Jesus Christ Himself stated regarding the lame, the blind, the outcasts, the warmongers, the helpless, and those who helped and those who didn't help the hungry, the thristy, the naked, the ones in prison, the needy, the widows, the orphans, and the hypocrites and much much more. As I've stated, there are many topics that fit into this thread as it is titled "Terri Schiavo and President Bush." THAT emcompasses all the stuff in between the have nots and those that have everything. It is also addressed in Scripture and....... One of Jesus Christ last acts on earth was to clear the Temple of the money changers and He brought in the lame, the blind, the deaf, the mute, the outcasts et al. Prior to that, they were forbidden to enter the Temple. All ground is sinking sand with an exception of the teachings of Jesus Christ of Nazareth. Blessings to you Stan, Denise | ||
| Denisegilmore Registered user Username: Denisegilmore Post Number: 297 Registered: 10-2000 |
" IT WOULD BE A MISTAKE to assume that Americans are safe from having life-sustaining treatment rationed like this just because we don't have a national health service. Burke is fighting a broader movement in the bioethics field, "Futile Care Theory," that is also gaining traction here." London THE MOST IMPORTANT BIOETHICS LITIGATION in the world today involves a 45-year-old Englishman, Leslie Burke. He isn't asking for very much. Burke has a progressive neurological disease that may one day deprive him of the ability to swallow. If that happens, Burke wants to receive food and water through a tube. Knowing that Britain's National Health Service (NHS) rations care, Burke sued to ensure that he will not be forced to endure death by dehydration against his wishes. Burke's lawsuit is even more important to the future of medical ethics than was the Terri Schiavo case. Schiavo was dehydrated to death--a bitter and profound injustice--because Judge George W. Greer ruled both that Terri was in a persistent vegetative state and (based on statements she allegedly made during casual conversations some 20 years ago) that she would not want to live under such circumstances. In other words, Terri Schiavo lost her life in order to safeguard her personal autonomy, though she never made the actual decision to die. But Burke, who is fully competent, worries that his wishes will be ignored precisely because he wants food and water even if he becomes totally paralyzed. Receiving food and water when it is wanted certainly seems the least each of us should be able to expect. But, it turns out, whether Burke lives or dies by dehydration may not be up to him. According to National Health Service treatment guidelines, doctors, rather than patients or their families, have the final say about providing or withholding care. Burke won his case at the trial court level when a judge ruled that denying the tube-supplied food and water a patient wants "would be a breach of claimant's rights under . . . the European Convention on Human Rights." This should be uncontroversial. But the General Medical Council, the medical licensing authority, appealed, joined by the British government. Why do Britain's medical establishment and government insist that Burke be denied a right to decide whether he receives tube-supplied food and water? It all boils down to two concepts that are increasingly intertwined in modern bioethics theory and practice. First is the so-called quality-of-life ethic that presumes to judge the worth of patients' lives according to their mental and physical capacities. Under this view, doctors or bioethicists may judge a life to be of such low quality that it is not worth extending, irrespective of the patient's wishes. The second issue is money--an especially potent factor for England's increasingly strained socialized medical system. Accordingly, the secretary of state for health argued before the Court of Appeal that while patients have the right to refuse life-sustaining treatment, they don't have a corresponding right to receive it. Even though the Burke case does not involve high tech medical procedures--he is not asking for a respirator or kidney dialysis, after all--the government claims that the trial court's ruling undermines the authority of doctors to make the "clinical judgment" about whether a patient's "treatment would be of benefit," based at least in part on the question of "the resources which are available." The right of doctors to exercise such control is "absolutely fundamental to the day-to-day functioning of the NHS." In support of the government's position, the secretary of state filed a statement by Elizabeth Woodeson, the head of scientific development and bioethics at the Department of Health. Her testimony demonstrates the threat that contemporary bioethics poses to the lives of vulnerable patients. As Woodeson explained, the National Health Service established the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (given the creepily inappropriate acronym NICE) to issue "clinical guidelines" that blend efficacy of outcomes, quality of life judgments, and economics: An assessment is made of the cost of the treatment per additional year of life which it brings, and per quality adjusted life year (QALY) . . . which takes into consideration the quality of life of the patient during any additional time for which their life will be prolonged. The clinical and cost effectiveness of the treatment under review is then used as the basis for a recommendation as to whether or not . . . the treatment should be provided in the NHS. . . . The Secretary of State believes that . . . clinicians should be able to follow NICE guidelines without being obliged to accede to patient demands. . . . If that principle were undermined, there would be considerable risk of inefficient use of NHS resources. In other words, medical care is effectively rationed by the National Health Service under guidelines set by bioethicists based on their beliefs about the low quality of life of patients whom they have never met. While the views of patients and families are to be taken into account when deciding whether to provide treatment, they are not determinative. This top-down approach is what Leslie Burke is rebelling against. He knows that many bioethicists have a low opinion of the quality of life of people with profound disabilities. Burke doesn't trust doctors, much less bioethicists, to judge whether his life is worth living. "I feel strongly that my body and my being are mine," Burke insisted when I visited him recently at his Lancaster home. "But my desire [to live] can be overridden" based on prejudice against the disabled. "I am no different than anybody else, but I am not seen that way anymore." Adding heft to Burke's concerns: When I privately discussed his case with a prominent British physician who I expected would sympathize with Burke's views, I was taken aback when he told me crossly, "Burke is only thinking of himself rather than looking at the bigger picture." How thoughtless of him. IT WOULD BE A MISTAKE to assume that Americans are safe from having life-sustaining treatment rationed like this just because we don't have a national health service. Burke is fighting a broader movement in the bioethics field, "Futile Care Theory," that is also gaining traction here. Futile care theory is a one-way street when it comes to patient autonomy and end-of-life care. Futilitarians assert that patients have an absolute right to refuse life-sustaining treatment but are not similarly entitled to insist that their lives be maintained. Indeed, under futile care theory, as under the NHS rationing approach, whether a seriously ill or disabled patient's request to be kept alive is granted depends on whether doctors and bioethicists see the patient's life as worth living and spending medical resources to sustain. For the last several years American hospitals have been quietly promulgating futile care protocols that empower their ethics committees to authorize doctors to unilaterally refuse wanted care. These futile care policies are beginning to be imposed on unwilling patients and their families. As is usually the case in such matters, the first victims are on the far margins. Thus, in Houston, Sun Hudson, a 5-month-old infant born with a terminal disability, was taken off a ventilator in March over his mother's objections based on a Texas law that defers to futile care theory. Under the law, once a hospital bioethics committee determines that the treatment should not be rendered, the patient or family has a mere 10 days to transfer the patient's care to another hospital. This can prove difficult in this era of managed care and HMOs, since the affected patients are usually the most expensive to treat. After 10 days without a transfer, the outcome is usually death following the unilateral withdrawal of treatment--as occurred in Sun Hudson's case. In another Houston case, one with ironic echoes of Terri Schiavo, the wife of Spiro Nikolouzos wants tube-feeding for her persistently unconscious husband, based on his previously stated desire to live. But unlike Schiavo's, Nikolouzos's personal wishes are not deemed determinative: A hospital ethics committee voted to refuse to continue his tube-supplied food and water and ventilator support. He would have died, but a San Antonio hospital unexpectedly agreed to provide the care. Then its ethics committee also decided to cut off care, but Nikolouzos was transferred to a nursing home. For the moment, Nikolouzos is being allowed to stay alive. But the final decision about the matter isn't his wife's: Under futilitarian Texas law, it belongs to committees of bioethicists and doctors. In this darkening atmosphere, the Leslie Burke case could not be more important. If Burke loses on appeal, patients in Britain will be stripped of the basic human right to receive food and water through a feeding tube. Such a ruling should send a cold shiver through disabled, elderly, and dying patients everywhere. Moreover, given the increasing propensity of some Supreme Court justices to look overseas when deciding issues of American law, a Burke loss could plausibly end up reinforcing futile care laws in this country. There will undoubtedly be protracted litigation on this issue in coming years. How Leslie Burke fares may determine whether futile care theory is allowed to metamorphose from ad hoc health care rationing into an explicit--and expanding--duty to die." --------- Wesley J. Smith, a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute and an attorney and consultant for the International Task Force on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide, is the author, most recently, of Consumer's Guide to a Brave New World. http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/005/645igjun.asp?pg=1 | ||
| Denisegilmore Registered user Username: Denisegilmore Post Number: 298 Registered: 10-2000 |
Here is Leslie Burkes website: http://www.willtolive.co.uk/les_burke/main/index.shtml | ||
| Denisegilmore Registered user Username: Denisegilmore Post Number: 299 Registered: 10-2000 |
http://watch-unto-prayer.org/rockefeller.html | ||
| Denisegilmore Registered user Username: Denisegilmore Post Number: 300 Registered: 10-2000 |
""Capitol Hill, home to America's lawmakers, is well known as a place where strange things happen. Few have been as strange, however, as the recent "crowning" of the Rev Sun Myung Moon, eccentric head of the "Moonies". Republicans and Democrats alike are in damage-limitation mode after it was revealed they were guests of the Korean-born businessman at a ceremony during which he declared he was the Messiah. Video footage of the event, in which the politicians can be seen bowing their heads to the 84-year-old, is on the internet. Where in Washington, D.C. is Sun Myung Moon? Track Moon's antics at John Gorenfeld's blog View the 'Coronation' video In the footage, Congressman Danny Davis, a Democrat from Illinois, can be seen carrying a pillow bearing one of two ornate crowns that were placed on the heads of Mr Moon and his wife Hak Ja Han Moon." Read the rest here: http://www.religionnewsblog.com/7644-Politicians_filmed_bowing_to__Moonie__cult_leader.html | ||
| Denisegilmore Registered user Username: Denisegilmore Post Number: 301 Registered: 10-2000 |
http://www.cuttingedge.org/newsletters/index.html | ||
| Denisegilmore Registered user Username: Denisegilmore Post Number: 305 Registered: 10-2000 |
Here is another ministry that is somewhat like the one above. They both are enlightening and will answer many questions as to why we are seeing what we are seeing in this world today and on our news. It will also answer any questions as to why I began this thread in the first place. Because all of these things are beginning with the disabled and disenfranchised first here in America. However, everyone is included after the disabled. That is, if you are a Christian. http://www.libertytothecaptives.net/ | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 436 Registered: 3-2005 |
Denise, Thanks for posting that very last link above. They have some great critiques of how the gospel gets obscured by the Rick Warren Purpose Driven Life theology. I haven't had a chance to review the Tim Lahaye critique, but it looks interesting. Stan | ||
| Denisegilmore Registered user Username: Denisegilmore Post Number: 307 Registered: 10-2000 |
Stan, For articles on Rick Warren and his teaching that is spreading like wild fire here's another ministry that addresses many things too. Just scroll down to where it says "Spirit led or Purpose Driven" and you can read a great amount about this movement. http://www.crossroad.to/index.html Then there is this site that addresses some things that I'm sure will interest you also. This is not about Rick Warren but is very important to know also. It lists a whole lot of things currently being taught and by whom and their connections to one another: http://watch.pair.com/charter.html And this here lists all of their topics and sites: http://watch.pair.com/default.html#new I'm happy you enjoy that last site, it is absolutely a great eye opener to many things. You know Stan, the way things are going in this world it can get frightening how easy any one of these things can decieve people. Seems like this world has lost it's mind. And I don't believe I'm too far off the track with that statement as you'll see once you begin to read many of their articles. And the other sites listed also. It's amazing at what's going on all around us. I'm very happy you're back! You make my heart joyful. Thank you. Blessings to you and yours always in Christ Jesus Name. Denise, your friend and sister in our Lord Jesus of Nazareth. | ||
| Tisha Registered user Username: Tisha Post Number: 91 Registered: 3-2005 |
As one who has studied "The Purpose- driven Life" series, I'd like to comment! I went to the above mentioned website. I read quite a bit, but not all of it yet. While I agree with some of what was said there, I take exception to the blanket dismissal of the "tools" being used. Since I have a degree in Applied Behavioral Science, with an emphasis on Organizational Development, I may be biased! However, I think that God gave us minds to use. One way to use them is to look at how systems operate, whether it is an electrical system, plumbing system, political system, or any human system such as family, church, workplace, etc. I don't believe by using what we have learned about systems as a way to reach unbelievers is inherently wrong. It seems as if the crossroads website authors view anything that is embraced by non-believers as wrong. I say that it is how it is used that makes it right or wrong. The methods themselves are not "evil". By staying so "traditional" that unbelievers will not even take a look at what is offered, we close the door of opportunity to win souls for Christ. By being sensitive to nonbelievers, we show that we care. That doesn't mean that we use unbiblical methods or theology. Jesus met the people where they were and then showed them a better way. We do not need to change our moral standards, or deny our faith in order to reach unbelievers. But when we use "insiders" language and structure it makes those "outside" feel unwanted. We are humans that have feelings as well as "head knowledge". Meeting these needs is not unbiblical. We can keep our focus on Christ, be strong in our belief, and still reach out to unbelievers. We can preach Bible-based sermons and still be sensitive to growing believers. The mocking tone and distrust of those who use "marketing" techniques is unfortunate. We are "marketing" Christianity in everything we do. "Marketing" does not need to be a bad word! We want nonbelievers to be interested in why we have assurance of Salvation. We want them to ask questions of us, to want more information! We are told to not hide our light under a bushel. That is "marketing"! As long as we are truthful and do not practice "bait and switch" as some churches do [:>)], as long as we stick to the Bible and Jesus, we can "market" Christianity! The above mentioned authors seem to think that anything modern, cultural is wrong. They mock Warren's statement that "God loves variety". God is the Creator of variety! What is wrong with that - again as long as it is Biblical? Some of what I read on the crossroads website sounded like Salvation by works! Of course I am sensitive to that so may be reading in more than was intended. But they did say that someone coming to Christ needed more understanding of Salvation and sin before just saying "Jesus, I believe in you and I receive you". I believe that by saying this prayer, if you truly mean it, you have recieved Christ. The understanding and maturity as a Christian comes as you follow Christ and study the Bible. Accepting Jesus FREE gift of Salvation is the important FIRST step, not something to be done later when you understand it all or have learned to lead the Christian life. When the "Purpose-driven Life" is taken as a whole, it can teach, or renew understanding of our TRUE purpose. When our purpose is to please God and not ourselves, we come into closer relationship with Him. While I can find fault at times (especially coming from my SDA background), I can look at what Warren is saying and see the big picture. It is true that I may take exception to some part of his theology, but that is often the case with any author I read (except the Bible). When a Church uses the "Purpose-driven life" series, it is important to include teaching that upholds the beliefs of that Church - which is the same in all Christian Churches regarding Salvation, but may vary in non-salvational issues. I think Warren is trying to show us a way to really LIVE a Christian life - how to put into practice the Biblical truths. While his way is not the only way, it does give some good "food for thought". I'll take what Warren teaches, compare it against the Bible and decide for myself (with the Holy Spirit's leading) what to follow and what to ignore. But that is true of all I read! So - that's my two-cents worth! -tisha | ||
| Melissa Registered user Username: Melissa Post Number: 928 Registered: 7-2003  |
Sometime back, there was a website posted criticizing an Atlanta woman for using PDL when she was held hostage by a man who kidnapped her. I found this article in Christiainty Today that gave a different perspective then that article did. Granted, it is Rick Warren's perspective of the incident, but I found nothing in his response that would cause me to see RW as a fraud/fake Christian/interested in deluding Christianity. Here's the story: http://www.usatoday.com/life/books/news/2005-03-22-warren-purpose-driven_x.htm Denise, I read the crossroads article, and frankly found it to be nothing close to accurately reflecting my real-life experience with the study program. Our small group was CHRISTIANS. While we did not bar non-Christians (our church does not promote forbidding non-Christians from mingling with Christians), our group was all Christians. Certainly, we were encouraged to invite non-Christians...not for "church growth", but to introduce them to Christ...with the idea that they might not come into a church, but would meet with a group and thereby have a different avenue to learn about Christ. It was nothing near as sinaster and underhanded as trying to delude the Christian faith, but to actually find different ways to reach the un-saved...rather than making them come to our church building. I don't understand the attacks on small groups. Further, I really didn't understand his attack on the commitment to the group. Who is going to feel safe to be transparent and accountable to a group if you think they're going to run around and gossip about your private issues, or if they don't really care about you at all? I wouldn't have any one to share with if I didn't "feel" they were safe to talk to. My life as a Christian does involve MORE than just Bible study. I try to incorporate my faith in every area of my life, so sometimes we talk about my retarded child. No, it's not studying the Bible, but is it "wrong" for the body of Christ to support me in dealing with my child ... or at least listening to me when I'm struggling? I just didn't understand why he was so negative towards small groups. I read an article in Christianity Today. It was an interview WITH Rick Warren. One quote from one article says "Rick Warren insists his passion is the local church and his goal is not fame but "to build an army of the faithful."" ... "Life is not about you, says Warren. It's not about your bliss or your self-actualization. It's about God and finding your life purpose in him. Warren summarizes Christian theology by emphasizing five broad purposes that God has for us: living for God's pleasure, becoming part of his family, becoming more Christlike, serving God and others, and sharing the message." There have been some valid complaints towards his use of scripture, but I haven't seen anyone relying on him for biblical interpretation such as an EGW. I have never met with a group that didn't study scripture with the intent of understanding what it says, not merely our "interpretation", though we have certainly connected on a personal level, talked about our kids, family, work.... I don't know about the comparisons he's making about other programs...Unless he's insinuating RW plagarized his book by taking things from other sources. Here is some of what the BIBLE has to say about "purpose" Rom 8:28 But we know that to the ones loving God all things work together for good, to those being called according to purpose; Rom 9:11 for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of the One calling, 2Co 1:17 Then purposing this, did I indeed use lightness? Or what I purposed, did I purpose according to flesh, that it may be with me yes, yes, and no, no? Eph 1:11 in whom we also have been chosen to an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of the One working all things according to the counsel of His own will, Eph 3:11 according to the eternal purpose which He accomplished in Christ Jesus our Lord, 2Ti 1:9 the One having saved us and having called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace given to us in Christ Jesus before eternal times, 2Ti 3:10 But you have closely followed my doctrine, the conduct, the purpose, the faith, the long-suffering, the love, the patient endurance, 2Ti 3:11 the persecutions, the sufferings, such as happened to me in Antioch, in Iconium, in Lystra, what persecutions I bore. And the Lord delivered me out of all. It seems God does have a PURPOSE, and trying to live by that purpose MIGHT?? be following the Spirit? My apologies if it sounds I"m ranting. |
