Thursday, April 30, 2015

Christian Values Under Attack!

An interesting article from http://www.ucg.org/ about the attack on Christianity. This follows this post about youth violence. This follows this post about a gay high school. For a free magazine subscription or to get the books recommended for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886- 8632.
Please follow me here for continued posts.

Christian Values Under Attack!

by Ralph Levy

Add to my study list

The college years are often some of the greatest times of challenge for young people brought up in Christian homes. A college degree is essential for so many occupations. Yet four or more years of college or university often tear young Christians away from their foundation, at times destroying values and beliefs taught them by their parents and their churches.
Is it possible to survive college and hold on to Christian values? If so, what are the keys? And what are the big dangers in college life?

Challenge number one: anti-Christian philosophies

No matter where you go, you will probably have professors who don't share your beliefs, and who may even be openly hostile to them. Humanism and the various forms of Marxism or Communism are still popular philosophies in the world of postsecondary education. And even though these beliefs have less popularity outside of college, you will still need to be prepared to face them.
When I went to university in England, I suddenly found myself in a radical political environment. Those who didn't seek radical political change in some form or other were definitely in the minority. “Leftist” groups of many different stripes seemed to abound. The ideas of famous German philosopher Karl Marx were everywhere. Having never studied Marx before, I became fascinated, and then somewhat pulled in, before I finally (thankfully!) rejected those ideas.
Marx taught that history is driven by conflict between social classes, not by national, racial or religious conflict. The opening words of his Communist Manifesto read as follows: “The history of all … society is a history of class struggles.” From this flows the idea that as lower classes rise up in rebellion against their oppressors, society moves forward toward an ultimate utopia free of class distinctions and injustice.
I came to see the falseness and futility of these ideas. It was the Holy Bible, the Word of God, that helped me to see it. The Bible makes plain that evil isn't determined by who has his hands on the means of production in society. People from lower classes can be just as evil, just as selfish and just as prone to mistreat their neighbors as those from the privileged classes. And overturning it all, as Communists desire, might lead to only loss of freedom, bankrupt economies and, often, far worse abuses of power.
Another very common, but unchristian, philosophy encountered in college is humanism. Essentially, humanists believe “the solution is within us.” They view human nature as inherently good and suggest that humankind's problems would be solved if only the good in us can be coaxed out. Most humanists deny any idea of the uniqueness of man or of life after death.
Again, humanism conflicts with what the Bible teaches us. The prophet Jeremiah made it very clear when he declared, “O Lord, I know the way of man is not in himself; it is not in man who walks to direct his own steps” (Jeremiah 10:23) and “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked; who can know it?” (Jeremiah 17:9). Of course, God knows this and is willing to help us change, once we make the choice to live the way He commands. King David of Israel discovered this and wrote of the changed heart in Psalm 51. Praying to God, he said, “Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a steadfast spirit within me” (verse 10).
The solutions taught on many college campuses are really misleading. Humanity can't make it without God's help, no matter how reasonable the proposed solution may sound or how radical it may be!

Challenge number two: drugs and alcohol

A recent survey found that 49.7 percent of college students reported participating in “binge drinking” (defined as five or more drinks in one sitting) in the two weeks prior to completing the survey. The same survey showed that 64.5 percent had experienced a hangover from excessive drinking, 55.3 percent reported having been nauseated or vomiting, 40.5 percent had “done something I later regretted” and 12.3 percent reported they had been taken advantage of sexually while under the influence of drugs or alcohol.
Of all the students in the survey who had experienced unwanted sexual intercourse, 82.6 percent said they were under the influence of drugs or alcohol when this occurred, while 76 percent of those reporting unwanted sexual touching said they were under the influence at the time (2001 Statistics on Alcohol and Other Drug Use on American Campuses ).
Abuse of alcohol and drugs is a big problem among college students. So what's a Christian to do? The Word of God makes it plain: “Hear, my son, and be wise … Do not mix with winebibbers [in other words, avoid the parties where people are getting drunk or taking drugs!] … for the drunkard … will come to poverty” (Proverbs 23:19 -21).
And don't forget that you can always get up and leave. If the drugs begin to circulate or people are getting drunk, the Christian can always say, “Thank you for the invitation, but I have to leave now.” You might be surprised to see others get up and leave with you!

Challenge number three: sexual immorality

Recent research shows fewer high school students are having sex now compared to 10 years ago and that the majority of high school graduates are virgins. But the picture changes drastically in college.
A report in the December 2001 issue of Archives of Sexual Behavior indicates that 71 percent of unmarried college students reported being sexually experienced. Breaking it down further, 64 percent reported one sexual partner in the 30 days prior to the survey, while 30 percent reported no sexual partners in that time. Presumably, the remaining 6 percent had been with two or more partners in the month prior to the survey.
College will present challenges to young Christians wanting to remain morally pure! Perhaps the greatest challenge to your character and determination will come in this area. How can you protect yourself?
First, choose your environment carefully. It may be wise to stay at home or with close relatives while in college. That way you can avoid the noise, drugs and excessive drinking you would have to face in many college dorms.
If you're going away from home, it's a good idea to find roommates with whom you share certain basic values. Look for people you'll get along with and who will commit to having no drugs, no illegal or excessive drinking and no boyfriend or girlfriend sleepovers. Sit down and discuss these things with potential roommates before committing to sharing a room with them.
If there's no choice but to live in a dorm, you might try to find one where other Christians are living. Fraternities and sororities are often the most free-living dorms, and should usually be avoided. But there are fraternities and sororities that are organized on a set of values, such as service to the community or basic Christian morality.
Anything you can do to be in the company of people who will help you maintain your Christian values is something to be pursued. The Bible tells us that “evil company corrupts good habits” (1 Corinthians 15:33), and, conversely, that “whoever walks with the wise becomes wise, but the companion of fools suffers harm” (Proverbs 13:20, New Revised Standard Version). Like it or not, we're all heavily influenced by the company we keep.

A source of help: true Christian fellowship

One of the big keys to holding on to your Christian faith during the college years is the Church. Keep going to Church! In fact, during this time when your faith is being assaulted, you really need more time with like-minded Christians than you did before. Spiritual camaraderie and adding to your Christian knowledge offer tremendous encouragement.
Hold on to your source of strength during your college years. Take the time for prayer, for study of the Scriptures and for true Christian fellowship to help you through. Build the bonds in Christ, and survive the college years—with your Christian faith not just intact, but strengthened! VT

Obama: Importing the Third World and Giving Them Deluxe Refugee Benefits

An interesting article from www.vdare.com about the benefits immigrants are receiving. This follows this post about amnesty and Black Americans. This follows this post about the TPP. This follows this post on HOW amnesty is funded in ways other than the DHS. Remember, “Amnesty” means ANY non-enforcement of existing immigration laws! This follows this comment and this post about how to Report Illegal Immigrants! Also, you can read two very interesting books HERE.
Please follow me here.

Obama: Importing the Third World and Giving Them Deluxe Refugee Benefits

By Brenda Walker

The Senate Immigration Committee held a hearing on Thursday titled, Eroding the Law and Diverting Taxpayer Resources: An Examination of the Administration’s Central American Minors Refugee/Parole Program. Chair Jeff Sessions used the forum to sort through the radical changes made unilaterally by the administration regarding thousands of illegal aliens flooding north from Central America.
The upshot is the Obama administration is opening the border to huge numbers of backward Third Worlders who will need lots of government freebies to survive and will gratefully vote Democrat in the future.

One of the experts testifying at the hearing was Jessica Vaughan of the Center for Immigration Studies, and she appeared Friday on Fox News with Neil Cavuto:

VAUGHAN: What the administration is doing is two things: first, in order to justify admitting huge numbers of folks from Central America, a lot of them are kids, they’ve basically unilaterally changed the definition of who is a refugee to cover people who live in very violent places where maybe a criminal organization goes around threatening people or if women suffered domestic violence at the hands of their husbands. They’re even saying female single heads of households can qualify the same as somebody who is persecuted for their religious beliefs and allowing them to come into the country and immediately qualify for the huge array of services and benefits. . .
CAVUTO: Once granted refugee status, an individual has open access to federal welfare, to your point, work permits, ability to receive green cards, citizenship. What the administration’s doing here is it stated that extends parole to such individuals in the United States as well, further contravening law — is that true?
VAUGHAN: That’s the other thing. Yes, if someone doesn’t meet even their expanded definition of a refugee, what they would like to do for many of the Central Americans and they’ve already done it in the case of Haitians say, we’re going to admit you under a status called parole, or actually let them enter as parolees, and just say even though you came under parole, we’re going to say you’re a refugee to get all of these services at the expense of the federal government and also state taxpayers who have to pick up the tab for lots of resettlement services that are provided. The huge expansion of these programs is going to get enormously costly for the communities where these folks resettle because they tend to cluster in different places around the country and it becomes a big burden and a distortion in the job market and in all sorts of other ways.
We as a country want to be generous to real refugees and when it’s appropriate to allow some people to come here to be resettled, but the Obama administration is basically going out and recruiting people in parts of the world that you know have more difficult circumstances and say come on in and we’ll support you, completely at odds with this idea that eventually immigrants would be self-sufficient. Instead they’re becoming dependent on the government.
CAVUTO: Yeah, and we certainly widened the pool in a definition of who’s eligible as a result.
VAUGHAN: At this point, it could be anybody in the world if you extend it that way.

Share this

Wednesday, April 29, 2015

Youth Violence: Where Does the Blame Really Lie?

An interesting article from http://www.ucg.org/ about youth violence. This follows this post about female gangs. This follows this post about a gay high school. For a free magazine subscription or to get the books recommended for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886- 8632.
Please follow me here for continued posts.

Youth Violence

Where Does the Blame Really Lie?

by Howard Davis

Add to my study list

In the 1960s, Bill Roberts went from youthful innocence to the killing fields of Vietnam in months. Now, 30 years later, Bill has again felt an adrenaline rush like the deadly terror of guerrilla warfare he experienced long ago. This brush with death was not a war in Southeast Asia. It was in Portland, Oregon, a prosperous Northwest American city of one and a half million. And the enemy wasn’t Vietnamese guerrillas, but gun-toting gang members in a schoolyard.

Bill Roberts is now a school principal, caring for my children. He is still a soldier, but in a social crisis which has shed America’s innocence. His battleground runs throughout the underside of our culture. His war is the deadly explosion of youth violence that began some 20 years ago and is shouted in newspaper headlines around the country today.

Within the United States the prison population—which is comprised predominately of young men—is up to some 1,750,000, up from 750,000 in only 10 years. Youth violence now pulsates throughout American life. No one—rich or poor, white or minority, urban or rural—seems to be immune.

Easy targets for solutions are hard to come by because the American problem with youth violence is not primarily a trend fueled by desperation and poverty. It is mainly driven by a culture in which children treat human beings as if they are of no more value than the electronic video-game figures youngsters kill off by the hour for their self-amusement.

With the lines between fantasy and reality confused and blurred, some American youths have been sent the unmistakable message that it is entertaining to kill. The two teenage gunmen who killed and maimed 35 students and teachers at Colorado’s Columbine High School on April 20, 1999, were reported to have laughed at times as they roamed the classrooms and halls gunning down their victims.

Some have clearly begun to think that killing real people is no big deal. They have learned, after all, that the goal of life is self-amusement anyway.

Yet, strangely, many violent teens are possessed of a sense of invincibility. Not only do they have no fear of God, they have little fear or understanding that they could be killed as easily as the fictional characters on a video-game screen. Sadly, many will be.

Epidemic of violence

After a 15-year-old confessed to the May 1998 school shooting of 22 students and his parents in Springfield, Oregon, commentators pointed out that explosive violence had crept from the poor, inner-city communities in the 1980s and early ’90s onto the manicured lawns of suburbia and the rural settings idealized in the American dream. Not only is homicide now one of the greatest risks to our youngsters, says the U.S. Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta, it has progressively permeated the national landscape. The epidemic of gun violence began to peak among youth in the late 1980s, decimating a predominately poor minority generation of inner city residents, according to James Garbarino, director of the Family Life Development Center at Cornell University.

National Council on Crime and Delinquency President Barry Krisberg notes a difference in today’s profile of youth violence. Recent mass murder attempts and episodes “had nothing to do with drugs or guns,” he said. “Some were from affluent communities and intact families.”

In the last six years, 11 of 12 mass shootings with multiple victims happened in cities with populations under 80,000. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report nine of these were cities with less than a population of 52,000.

Initial studies indicate a shift in violent youth behavior from the low socioeconomic stereotype. Harvard School of Public Health professor Deborah Prothrow-Stith characterizes the movement of youth violence from poor urban communities to the rest of the population and regions as an effect similar to any other epidemic. “It’s the second wave,” she said. “First [it strikes] the most vulnerable community, and then it spreads.” There is also an explosion of copycat acts. In one study, 25 percent of young violent felons said they got the specific idea for their violent activity directly from television. “I can do that” is the remark attributed to the 15-year-old Oregon shooter in a conversation two months earlier to his school bus driver when he heard about the school massacre by two youths in Paducah, Kentucky.

Murders committed by teens age 14 to 17 tripled between 1976 and 1993 and then dropped somewhat, according to University of Oregon sociology department chairman Robert O’Brien. However, observers point out that upward trends in youth violence may be masked somewhat by imprisonment, aggressive policing and a dynamic national economy.

A childhood jungle

Youth violence is, at its core, an outgrowth of an American crisis of values. Successful parenting requires values flowing from a firm commitment to children—a commitment that requires time, attention and resources. In their absence, children grow up in a hostile jungle.

It doesn’t have to be so.

Consistent, nurturing guidance of children works. Demonstrating love works. These parental commitments help stop violence through prevention. They require a child-centered approach that touches the spirit of the child rather than a manipulation of material circumstances masquerading as attention. A central message of Jesus Christ regarding children is that they are to be loved because “of such is the kingdom of God” (Luke 18:16). He showed that true love works. The explosion of youth violence is a clear warning that time is running out to begin practicing Christ’s approach.

Most youth violence comes from environments where violent adult behavior is modeled and acted out in what Barry Krisberg calls a widespread “nihilistic culture that does not promote community and social values.”

Not only are right values ignored, but wrong values are often celebrated. “Go to the movies and listen to the music,” says Krisberg. “It’s violent, it has misogynist content. There’s gross materialism and no ennobling values celebrated.”

A new battleground

The war of youth violence continues in many communities around the country. At Bill Roberts’ Portland school ground, a battle almost erupted because a 12-year-old student had grabbed a basketball away from a gang member.

A few days later, school was just letting out when the gang arrived with revolvers under coats and dozens of umbrellas tipped with blades. They were ready for the boy.

What surprised Roberts and led him to instinctively sense he might witness a murder was the bizarre readiness of this 12-year-old with no violent history to take on the gang single-handedly.

As the boy raced out the front door toward the gang, Roberts grabbed him, handing him to two assistants who restrained the youth in the principal’s office while Bill confronted the gang.

In schools across the nation, principals experience such potentially deadly conflicts daily. Although this situation passed without harm, Roberts is sure he will see similar problems again. And he fears America becoming another Vietnam.

The tentacles of youth violence have also traveled across the Atlantic and the Pacific into most other parts of the Western world. Take the United Kingdom as a case in point. In some British schools youth violence and disrespect for authority have clearly gotten out of control. One East Anglican instructor wrote an article entitled “How We Teachers Have Lost Control of the Classroom” (Sunday Telegraph). He said that there is only one target that matters: “reducing violence in schools.”

Need for spiritually motivated love Secretary of State Colin Powell, whose leadership helped the American military and its allies emerge victorious in 1991’s Operation Desert Storm, has said the problem of troubled youth is the greatest threat to the future of the United States.

Today’s youth violence has roots in a parental culture that has spiritually abandoned them. More money, expensive schools and government programs run by well-meaning bureaucrats cannot substitute for parental love. Western nations so often look to institutional programs for salvation from social crises, but this is one money can’t buy.

The 15 million children living in poverty are not alone in a landscape of emotional, interpersonal and spiritual impoverishment. Many children in the world’s more prosperous nations are growing up without enriching values conveyed by the intimacy of sacrificial parental love.

Many of them have no concept of the sanctity of life—even their own. “This is the way we want to go out,” read the suicide note from Columbine High School gunmen Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, who killed 13 others in a rampage of bullets and homemade bombs before they turned their guns on themselves.

Having had materialism substituted for love, many of today’s children possess no comprehension of an overriding purpose to life, no sense that life is about much more than today’s wants and needs. They have scarce knowledge of an Almighty God with endless love who holds out a special purpose and destiny for each person—man, woman and child alike. Regrettably, these devastating social trends affect almost all segments of society. Even professing Christians aren’t immune, with divorce and abuse characteristics often equal to the secular population. Too many political and religious leaders alike have largely abandoned belief in absolute standards such as those that flow from the immutable law of God that equally condemn abusive male authority and the sexual promiscuity that almost inevitably leads to single parenthood.

As a result, America’s children drink deeply of a chaotic jumble of relative values which mingles pleasure-seeking materialism with self-destructive and aggressive behavior.

Serious consequences

The Creator of all humankind said He would abandon the nation whose parents refuse to retain the spiritual knowledge flowing from the law of God and His authority to define right and wrong.

“My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge. Because you have rejected knowledge, I also will reject you… Because you have forgotten the law of our God, I also will forget your children” (Hosea 4:6, emphasis added).

Youth violence is not a mystery. It is a mistake, a sin and a tragedy for all concerned. But the good news is that the spiritual principles that have always worked still continue to work. Families, communities, societies and nations don’t have to be destroyed if they will only seek the spiritual knowledge that shows us how to truly express love.

Societies and national cultures can change. In the case of America’s crisis of youth violence, the problem begins in the home. It is here that parents must first learn about and then begin to nurture a family culture based on biblical values. Love, if it’s genuine, always works.

The Spirit of Violence

To many of today’s secular prophets, the frightening trends of youth violence are a harbinger of a coming social crisis of biblical proportions if not reversed.

A spirit of violence and death pervades American media and entertainment. Dysfunctional, violent and aggressive lifestyles increasingly bring to mind the decay of earlier civilizations and societies and the warnings of the biblical prophets.

While our youth may experience violence of epic proportions as the next century unfolds, this is no new story. The Bible describes periods of pervasive violence. Ezekiel prophesied to a generation in Jerusalem that was later wiped out in one of the most violent periods of Old Testament history: “Violence has risen up into a rod of wickedness… The land is filled with crimes of blood, and the city is full of violence” (Ezekiel 7:11, 23-24).

The social crises underlying the violence then and now are the same. The American problem can be traced in large part to a breakdown of family structure and cohesion. The Bible pinpoints this breakdown as a fundamental cause of violence: “…The LORD was a witness between you and the wife of your youth, to whom you have been faithless, though she is your companion and your wife by covenant. Did not one God make her? …And what does the one God desire? Godly offspring. So look to yourselves, and do not let anyone be faithless to the wife of his youth. For I hate divorce, says the LORD, the God of Israel, and covering one’s garment with violence, says the LORD of hosts. So take heed to yourselves and do not be faithless” (Malachi 2:14-16, New Revised Standard Version).

A Generation of Abandonment

Some have described American children as “a generation of rage.” Surrounded with materialism, the typical child may look healthy materially—but so many are emotionally abandoned to somehow find meaning in things which destroy the mind, heart and spirit.

Parallel with children finding meaning in violent entertainment is a meltdown in fatherhood.

While the average American child watches 220 minutes of television each day, he spends only three to eight minutes interacting face-to-face with his father—if he lives with one. Some have made the point that in the absence of a father’s presence television is actually parenting many of our children.

Approximately one in four children grow up with a single mother; another quarter with a stepfather. But even those with natural fathers in the home are often profoundly alienated. Struggling with ignorance of child development and nurturing skills, many fathers are unknowingly laying the groundwork for a future national mental health crisis. Most people are unaware of the connection between deteriorating psychological health, the absence of strong nurturing fathers and youth violence.

An epidemic of childhood mental health problems leaves increasing numbers of children, especially boys, prone to violent behavior.

Kip Kinkle, the 15-year-old who admitted to gunning down 22 students in Oregon, was diagnosed with attention deficit and hyperactive disorder (ADHD) and learning disability (LD) when he was 11. New York developmental psychologist Myriam Miedzian noted Kinkle was “given easy access to guns but not to effective treatment.”

“ADHD is six to nine times as prevalent among boys as among girls, mental retardation nearly twice as prevalent, and autism three times and conduct disorder four to 12 times as prevalent,” says Miedzian. “As a result, boys are at greater risk for violent behavior.”

From 1975 to 1990, the percentage of youths in the United States in need of professional mental health services nearly doubled, from 10 percent to 18 percent, said James Garbarino, Family Life Development Center director at Cornell University.

Some psychologists estimate 40 percent of the jail population and 30 percent of delinquent boys suffer from learning disabilities. “Not only do most high-risk children go untreated, they see more than 10,000 TV murders by the age 18,” says Miedzian.

Not all of these trends in deteriorating youth mental health are attributed to genetic factors. Many now believe that young children, when lied to and disappointed enough by caregivers, exhibit a kind of schizophrenia. In a process called “crazymaking,” children who are told they are loved by abusive or negligent parents learn to disassociate themselves from primary relationships. This can happen to children of wealth as well as children of poverty. Some experts see those youth obsessed with television exhibiting characteristics of attachment disorder, with “the tube” becoming their main reference in life.

The Islamic Genocide of Christians: Past and Present

A very interesting post from www.jihadwatch.org about Islam's attack on Christianity. This follows this post about America's balance of power in the Middle East. This follows this article about American energy independence and preventing money from going to hostile countries. For more, you can read two very interesting books HERE.
Please follow me here.

Raymond Ibrahim: The Islamic Genocide of Christians: Past and Present

By Raymond Ibrahim 9 Comments

Last Friday, April 24, we remembered how exactly 100 years ago the last historic Muslim caliphate, the Ottoman Empire, tried to cleanse its empire of Christian minorities — Armenians, Assyrians, and Greeks — even as we stand by watching as the new caliphate, the Islamic State, resumes the genocide.
And in both cases, the atrocities were and are being committed in the name of Islam.
In November, 1914, during WWI, the Ottoman caliphate issued a fatwa, or Islamic decree, proclaiming it a “sacred duty” for all Muslims to “massacre” infidels — specifically naming the “Christian men” of the Triple Entente, “the enemies of Islam” — with promises of great rewards in the afterlife.
The same Koran verses that the Islamic State and other jihadi outfits regularly quote permeated the Ottoman fatwa, including: “Slay the idolaters wherever you find them — seize them, besiege them, and be ready to ambush them” (9:5) and “O you who have believed! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are but friends of each other; and whoever among you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them” (5:51) — and several other verses that form the Islamic doctrine of Loyalty and Enmity.
Many Muslims still invoke this doctrine; it commands Muslims to befriend and aid fellow Muslims, while having enmity for all non-Muslims (one Islamic cleric even teaches that Muslim husbands must hate their non-Muslim wives, while enjoying them sexually).
As happens to this very day, the Muslims of the Ottoman caliphate, not able to reach or defeat the stronger infidel — the “Christian men” of Britain, France, and Russia — satiated their bloodlust on their Christian subjects. And they justified the genocide by projecting the Islamic doctrine of Loyalty and Enmity onto Christians — saying that, because Armenians, Assyrians, and Greeks were Christian, they were naturally aiding the other “Christian men” of the West.
As happens to this day under the new caliphate — the Islamic State — the Ottoman caliphate crucified, beheaded, tortured, mutilated, raped, enslaved, and otherwise massacred countless “infidel” Christians. The official number of Armenians killed in the genocide is 1.5 million; hundreds of thousands of Greeks and Assyrians each were also systematically slaughtered (see this document for statistics).
(Although people often speak of the “Armenian Genocide,” often forgotten is that Assyrians and Greeks were also targeted for cleansing by the Ottoman caliphate. The only thing that distinguished Armenian, Assyrian, and Greek subjects of the caliphate from Turkish subjects was that the three former were Christian. As one Armenian studies professor asks, “If it [the Armenian Genocide] was a feud between Turks and Armenians, what explains the genocide carried out by Turkey against the Christian Assyrians at the same time?”)
Henry Morgenthau, the U.S. ambassador to the Ottoman Empire and personal witness of the atrocities, attested that “I am confident that the whole history of the human race contains no such horrible episode as this.” He added that what the Turks were doing was “a carefully planned scheme to thoroughly extinguish the Armenian race.” In 1918, Morgenthau wrote in Red Cross Magazine:

Will the outrageous terrorizing, the cruel torturing, the driving of women into the harems, the debauchery of innocent girls, the sale of many of them at eighty cents each [today the Islamic State sells enslaved Christians and Yazidis for as little as $43], the murdering of hundreds of thousands and the deportation to, and starvation in, the deserts of other hundreds of thousands, the destruction of hundreds of villages and cities, will the willful execution of this whole devilish scheme to annihilate the Armenian, Greek and Syrian [or Assyrian] Christians of Turkey – will all this go unpunished?

Because this genocide of Christians is usually articulated through a singularly secular paradigm — one that recognizes only those factors deemed intelligible from a modern Western point of view, one that never uses the words “Christian” and “Muslim” but rather “Armenian” and “Turk” — few are able to connect these events from a century ago to today… Keep reading

Tuesday, April 28, 2015

Rampaging girl gangs

An interesting article from http://www.ucg.org/ about female gangs. This follows this post about a gay high school. For a free magazine subscription or to get the books recommended for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886- 8632.
Please follow me here for continued posts.

World News and Trends

Rampaging girl gangs

Posted by John Ross Schroeder, Scott Ashley 0 comments Estimated reading time: 1 minute

Add to my study list

Nick Peters reported from Washington, D.C., for The Sunday Times (of London) that “gun-toting girl gangs stake claim to America's streets.” Significantly, he notes, “the arrest rate for teenage girls is now twice that of teenage boys. In some areas of the country, girls account for nearly 25 percent of violent juvenile crime, including murder, robbery with violence—even rape.”
This article unwittingly revealed that the cause of much of this macabre behavior is the breaking of God's law in the home: “At the core of the crisis are home lives where violence, sexual abuse and drug taking are commonplace.” (Source: The Sunday Times .)

Amnesty Harms Black Americans More Than Bad Cops or Profiling

An interesting article from www.vdare.com about amnesty and Black Americans. This follows this post about the TPP. This follows this post on HOW amnesty is funded in ways other than the DHS. Remember, “Amnesty” means ANY non-enforcement of existing immigration laws! This follows this comment and this post about how to Report Illegal Immigrants! Also, you can read two very interesting books HERE.
Please follow me here.

Amnesty Harms Black Americans More Than Bad Cops or Profiling

By Brenda Walker

Monday’s Washington Times had a front-page article titled, “Illegals taking jobs from blacks, driving down domestic wages,” which provides an overview of how low-skilled citizens are being displaced and disadvantaged by the open-border policies of the black President.
Amnesty is tremendously cruel to Obama’s most loyal boosters, who are proud of seeing a black man in the White House. Blacks’ hyper-loyalty to Obama makes them an easy doormat, while the President provides his illegal alien recruits with work permits so they can displace American workers, many of whom are black. Obama’s reckless amnesty occurs in an economy where the real unemployment rate, the U-6, is over 11 percent.

A few decades ago, a young person could go from high school graduation straight to a job in a local factory with decent wages that would support a family. That America was destroyed by outsourcing of whole industries to cheap labor countries in Asia and south of the border. The jobs that couldn’t be exported, like meatpacking, were filled by foreign workers of various legality, who were happy to be exploited in the US because they were better off than at home.
Many young blacks are angry at what America is offering them, but wrongly focus on immediate problems like alleged police misconduct — a meme that has been promoted by billionaire leftwinger George Soros who spent $33 million to stir up trouble in Ferguson. Nobody has told them that decades of economic globalization — outsourcing, mass immigration and now automation — have gutted jobs for blue-collar Americans of all races.
Too bad black Americans’ hero in the White House is one of the worst problems they have.
Interestingly, the online headline was rather different from the print one noted above. Perhaps the online is meant to be more timely and reflect the situation of violence in Baltimore.

Obama amnesty greater threat to blacks than police brutality, experts say, By Kellan Howell, Washington Times, April 26, 2015
Illegal immigrants flood low-skilled labor markets once dominated by blacks, depress wages
Economic and civil rights experts say increased immigration spurred by President Obama’s executive orders poses a bigger threat to the black community than police brutality or racial profiling, which have sparked protests in black communities across the country.
“It’s a bigger threat to black livelihood,” Peter Kirsanow, a member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, said, adding that illegal immigration “dwarfs” the more inflammatory issues of police brutality, saying, “When you look at the hundreds of thousands of blacks thrown out of work over the years as a result of the competitive pressure the downstream effects are profound.”
The number of unemployed black workers in the U.S. is soaring, according to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Over 12.2 million black people of working age were not in the labor force in March, meaning they had neither been employed nor actively sought a job for at least four weeks.
The labor force participation rate for black men ages 20 and older is more than 5 percentage points lower than it is for white men, and for those in the labor force, the black unemployment rate is more than double the white unemployment rate, at 10.1 percent versus 4.7 percent.
Loosened immigration policy will only compound the problem.
As more illegal immigrants enter the U.S., encouraged by the president’s sweeping executive actions, they flood low-skilled labor markets once dominated by blacks, which ultimately decreases wages and increases job competition for low-skilled black workers, said Mr. Kirsanow.
“The long-term, large-scale flow of immigration into the United States has worked to erode both the wages and employment prospects of African-American workers,” said Sen. Jeff Sessions, Alabama Republican and chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interests, in a statement to The Times.
“Yet the Senate’s ‘Gang of Eight’ plan would have doubled future immigration from its existing record levels. As a nation, our first duty is always to our own citizens, especially those who have sacrificed so much for this country. Any responsible immigration plan must promote higher wages, rising employment and improved working conditions for people already living here,” he said.
Increasing unemployment rates in the black community can lead to numerous other negative social consequences, Mr. Kirsanow said.
“When unemployment rates increase, black institutionalization rates also increase. Individuals who don’t have jobs are less likely to be married or to get married, which means you are more likely to have kids out of wedlock. It’s a self-perpetuating negative cycle,” Mr. Kirsanow said. “These are the things that the Congressional Black Caucus and the president have refused to address and are things that are tremendously harmful to the prospects of black Americans economically, socially and culturally.”
A spokeswoman for the Congressional Black Caucus did not reply to a request by The Times for comment.
While Mr. Kirsanow opposed the president’s immigration policies, his colleagues on the Civil Rights Commission came out in support of President Obama’s executive orders issued in November, jumping on the political bandwagon at the time.
However, a 2008 briefing report to the Civil Rights Commission on the effects of immigration on wages and employment opportunities for black workers clearly stated that more illegal immigration hurts low-skilled black workers.
“About six in 10 adult black males have a high school diploma or less, and black men are disproportionately employed in the low-skilled labor market, where they are more likely to be in labor competition with immigrants,” the report reads. “Illegal immigration to the United States in recent decades has tended to depress both wages and employment rates for low-skilled American citizens, a disproportionate number of whom are black men.”
Commission Chair Martin Castro, who was not a member of the commission when the 2008 study was conducted, has said that the report was missing key data that contradicted the overall findings and plans to call for a review of the study.
Some economists say that increased immigration doesn’t hurt low-skilled American workers because the two groups don’t typically do the same jobs.
Low-skilled Americans, nearly all of whom speak English, tend to work in jobs that require communication skills, while low-skilled immigrants, who mostly don’t, tend to do jobs that require manual labor, Alex Nowrasteh, immigration policy analyst at the Cato Institute, explained.
He cited research from economists Gianmarco Ottaviano and Giovanni Peri, who found in their studies in 2008 and 2010 that more immigration tends to raise overall wages for U.S.-born workers.
But while economists agree that immigration improves living standards and wages on average, studies are divided on whether immigration reduces wages for certain groups of workers. Some studies suggest that immigration has reduced wages for low-skilled workers without a high school diploma and college graduates.
A 2007 study by economists George Borjas and Lawrence Katz found that increases in immigrant workers from 1990 to 2006 reduced the wages of low-skilled workers by 4.7 percent and college graduates by 1.7 percent.
In 2009 Mr. Borjas, a Harvard professor, specifically studied the effects of immigration on the economic status of black men and found that a 10 percent immigrant-induced increase in the supply of a particular skill group reduced black wages by 2.5 percent, lowered the employment rate of black men by 5.9 percentage points and increased the incarceration rate of blacks by 1.3 percentage points.
“It is evident that there is a negative correlation between changes in employment propensities and the immigrant share, and that the correlation is stronger for black men,” Mr. Borjas wrote.
But Mr. Nowrasteh explained that more people coming in to the country is good for the U.S. economy, and said that the bigger threat to wages for low-skilled workers is technological change.
“Studies on skilled-bias technological change find a lot of the new machines, computers [and] ways to automate manufacturing increase the wages of high-skilled people a lot more and potentially decrease the wages of lower-skilled people,” Mr. Nowrasteh said, adding that the same economic effects have been observed in countries that don’t accept many immigrants.
Multiple polls show that Americans across the board, regardless of race or political alignment, want less immigration.
In a nationwide survey conducted between August and October of 2014, The Polling Company, Inc. asked over 1,000 adults: “If U.S. businesses have trouble finding workers, what should happen?”
In total, 75 percent said businesses should raise wages and improve working conditions to attract American workers, while only 8 percent said more immigrants workers should be allowed in to the country to fill those jobs.
Eighty-six percent of blacks surveyed said businesses should increase wages rather than hire more immigrants, and 71 percent of Hispanics said the same thing.
Seventy-four percent of Republican responders and 79 percent of Democratic responders also said businesses should increase wages to attract American employees.
In a January 2015 Gallup poll, 39 percent of Americans said they were dissatisfied with current immigration levels and wanted less immigration rather than more.
Factors other than illegal immigration do contribute to black unemployment, and halting illegal immigration is not a panacea for the issues with decreased wages for low-skilled black workers, Mr. Kirsanow explained. But the effect on low-skilled minority workers must be considered by lawmakers in forming comprehensive immigration reform policies, he said, adding that it must start with following the laws already in place.
“We are not serious about securing the border; we are not serious about enforcement; we are not serious about e-verify. All of these things would be extremely helpful to low-skilled workers and, particularly, black Americans,” Mr. Kirsanow said.

Share this

Monday, April 27, 2015

Editorial: The people Have NOT voted for GAY "MARRIAGE"!!!!

Editorial

The Supreme Court is taking up the case to mandate that all states legalize same-sex "marriage." However, if you look at this issue, there have been very few times that the states themselves have voted in favor of this. In nearly ALL cases, this has been imposed upon the states by courts which have OVERTURNED the will of the people when they have voted to define marriage as between a man and a woman.

Therefore, we shall see what happens after the Supreme Court overturns the WILL OF THE PEOPLE!

http://www.ucg.org/the-good-news/the-gay-agenda-coming-to-a-school-near-you

Censored: USC Officials Take Down Banners of Unborn Babies From Students for Life Display

An interesting story from www.lifenews.com about censorship of pro-life literature. This follows this post about Hillary Clinton.For two very interesting books click HERE.
Please follow me here.

Censored: USC Officials Take Down Banners of Unborn Babies From Students for Life Display

National

Sarah Zagorski Los Angeles, CA

Total: 125
112
13

Total: 125
112
13

On April 21, the University of Southern California (USC) removed banners of 11-week old unborn babies only a few hours after Students for Life placed them on campus. The banners featured quotes from Mother Teresa like, “Life is a promise, fulfill it” and “at 8 weeks she began to hear … at 11 weeks every organ system was functioning.”

The former president of USC Students for Life group, Lisa Ebiner Gavit, was involved in the banner project and shared her disappointment with The College Fix. She said, “USC Students for Life was deeply disappointed by the actions of the USC administration … when they decided to remove our pro-life banners from campus,” she said. “Our student organization had gone through all the proper administrative channels to reserve the space and install the banners, and we were heartbroken to see that they were taken down after being up for only a few hours. They were supposed to stay up for two weeks. This shuttering of free speech is disappointing, to say the least.”
Gavit added that the banners were placed to advertise their end of the semester event, which was a baby shower for a local pregnancy resource center. She said it was aimed to “show pregnant women that abortion is not their only option.”
Jacob Ellenhorn, a student government senator and member of USC’s Republicans said he didn’t agree with the University’s decision to remove the banners. He said, “[Gavit] told me that the USC office that hung up the signs for her this morning took them down because they did not advertise a particular event or organization. This is strange because rainbow banners for gay pride were up on campus last semester and did not advertise an event or an organization. The same was true for banners hung up during black history month.”
He also expressed his outrage on Facebook saying, “It is unbelievable that USC removed all the posters that were put up around the school,” he stated. “They were put up through all the proper channels. It seems as though not even USC can stand for intellectual diversity. Why stop an authentic conversation about abortion? What is so offensive about the facts of life?”
Like this pro-life news article? Please support LifeNews during our current fundraising campaign with a donation!
On April 22^nd, Monique Allard, an assistant provost for student engagement at USC explained why the University removed the banners. In a statement she said, “Recently the USC student organization Students for Life submitted a request to mount banners on light poles along Trousdale Parkway. Trojan Events and Services, a unit of Student Affairs, approved the request in error. Banners may only be mounted along Trousdale if they identify an academic program, department, or event as specified by university policy. The banners did not identify an academic event but instead advertised the services of an external organization.”
She concluded, “Student Affairs regrets the error and will reimburse the student group for the cost of producing and installing the banners. We are working with the student group to find other means of communicating their message, as they do regularly here and at other universities. We respect students’ constitutional right to free speech and only impose reasonable time, place and manner regulations. The university is a diverse community based on the free exchange of ideas, and we encourage free inquiry and discussion.”
However, unfortunately, this isn’t the first time a pro-life group has experienced unequal treatment on a college campus. As LifeNews previously reported, in 2014, a pro-abortion feminist studies professor at University of California Santa Barbara attacked a young pro-life activist, stole and destroyed her sign, and encouraged a group of students to violence. The professor later apologized but was sentenced to three years probation and anger management.
Additionally, last year USC students vandalized a pro-life display created by their Students For Life club. The display featured white hearts and posters to remember all the babies lost since Roe vs. Wade.

Total: 125
112
13

brianlee

Thursday, April 30, 2015