Tag Archives: Supreme Court

IS A MUSLIM BAN DISCRIMINATORY?

abe-lincoln-slaves

The fuss over the executive order relating to Muslims entering the US once again highlights just how ignorant most people are of history.   This is especially true of the left, who keep on repeating the mantra that discrimination is un-American.

Perhaps they have never heard of slavery, or maybe they just want to forget it as the Democrats were the party of slavery.

Anyway, discrimination has been common in American history, going right back to the first settlements in Jamestown and Massachusetts Bay.   Both colonies were founded by WASPs, for WASPs (White Anglo-Saxon Protestants).   The location of Jamestown was chosen to hide from Catholics intent on kidnapping Protestants.   At the time of independence from Great Britain, the thirteen colonies were 98% Protestant, 1% Catholic and 1% “Other,”  including Jews.

In 1857, the Supreme Court ruled that African-Americans could not be American citizens.   Again, remember, by this time the Republicans were campaigning for the end of slavery, while the Democrats were in support; this blatantly racist decision was made by a Court that was siding with the Democrats.   Right up until the 1964 Voting Rights Act, Democratic politicians in the South deprived blacks of the vote; while the whites voted for the Democrats as the party that supported the Old (pro-slavery) South.

In 1882, the Chinese Exclusion Act was passed by Congress.   The law was against ethnic Chinese, as even Chinese from British territories were not allowed.   The Act was renewed in 1892.

Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has self-righteously announced that Canada will take in refugees America doesn’t want. Canada is another country going soft, also wallowing in ignorance of history.   His predecessor, Stephen Harper, apologized in 2006 for the 1923 Act of the Canadian parliament that banned Chinese immigration. Australia had a “White Australia” policy before 1972. Muslim countries routinely discriminate – it’s impossible for whites to settle in their countries and become citizens.   The same is true of most African countries.

As the first mosque was opened in the US in 1929, there were clearly few if any Muslim immigrants before that date.   Non-white immigration was strictly limited before the 1965 Immigration Act, which literally changed the face of America.

It should be remembered that in 1942, a Democratic president, Franklin D. Roosevelt, issued Proclamation No. 2537 “requiring aliens from World War II-enemy countries–Italy, Germany and Japan to register with the United States Department of Justice. Registered persons were then issued a Certificate of Identification for Aliens of Enemy Nationality.   A follow-up to the Alien Registration Act of 1940, Proclamation No. 2537 facilitated the beginning of full-scale internment of Japanese Americans the following month.”  (History magazine)

More recently, President Jimmy Carter, a Democrat, banned Iranians (Muslims) from entering the US during the 1979-80 hostage crisis.

So, clearly, it is possible for the US president (and even Canadian and Australian governments) to put an end to Islamic immigration, if they want to.

And what about Europe?

A Muslim army tried to conquer Europe in the eighth century.   It was defeated in 732 at the gates of Paris, by the grandfather of the future Emperor Charlemagne.

In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, Muslim armies tried to take Vienna, at the heart of Europe.   They were defeated by Catholic armies.

There is no record of Austrians demonstrating to let them in!   That had to wait until 21st century liberalism, where half the population is besotted with ignorance of both history and comparative religion. The Catholics of 1683 knew that Islam was a pagan religion – they were terrified the Muslims might win and take over, ending their way of life.   Not so today’s churches who are more inclined to welcome immigrants and refugees.   Even the pope took in a family or two at the Vatican and has said that the building of walls is unchristian – it was walls in the Middle Ages that kept the pagans out, enabling citizens to stay safe.   It was Roman Catholics who built those walls.

In 1095, Pope Urban II called on the nations of Western Europe to launch a “Crusade” against Muslims who were killing and harassing Christians on pilgrimages to the Holy Land.   He called for Christian forces to retake the Holy Land.   Again, there were no demonstrations in the streets in support of Muslims – everybody knew the horror stories from the Middle East.   It’s true that Christians perpetrated horrendous acts against Muslims during the two centuries of the crusades, illustrating how the two religions cannot exist peacefully side by side.   This is another lesson not taught in today’s public schools!

It’s sad that the issue of immigration from Muslim lands has become a political football.   It would be a lot better if there were bipartisan agreement on the matter, but this is not going to happen. Consequently, the invasion will continue.   The Gatestone Institute revealed this week that Muslim immigrants arriving in Italy are shouting “Allahu Akbar” when they see the coast.   Why else would they be risking their lives to cross the Mediterranean Sea when they could simply walk into a neighboring Muslim country?   They see themselves as part of the Muslim army that is going to conquer Europe and the West.

Unless the Church and a political populist come together to try and save Western civilization!

Could Donald Trump lead the charge?   Or is it more likely that a European figure like Charlemagne will emerge to unite Europe and defeat the Muslims?   The biblical Book of Revelation speaks of a final revival of the Roman Empire (Revelation 17:12-14) that will deal with the Islamic threat from the “king of the south” (Daniel 11:40-43).

Footnote:    I would like to write an eye-witness report from a couple of European countries on the Muslim invasion of the continent. If you can donate frequent flyer miles (60,000) or money to cover expenses, please contact me at rhodesmf@gmail.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

BREXIT 2 AND MARTIN LUTHER

king-george-bloody-colonists

Next year marks the 500th anniversary of Martin Luther nailing his 95 theses to the door of a church in Wittenberg, Germany, an act that is considered the start of the Protestant Reformation.   Luther was particularly upset about the sale of indulgences, whereby wealthy members of the Roman Catholic Church could buy a certificate, which would reduce the time they would spend in purgatory, itself an invention of the church.

The revolution that Luther started soon spread to other countries.

Europe has seen a number of revolutions that have spread from nation to nation, leading to significant change.   1989 was one such year when communist governments in Eastern Europe were brought down by the people they claimed to represent.   1918 was another such year, as World War One ended and ancient monarchies were overthrown.   Going back further, in 1848, revolutions took place across Europe as the people demanded more democracy.

This year started another revolution that could spread.   The vote for Brexit in the United Kingdom was a vote against globalization and mutliculturalism and the elites who have forced these upon the people.   A second Brexit may follow in a few days when the US holds its presidential election.   A victory for Donald Trump will be a vote against globalization and multiculturalism; a vote for Mrs. Clinton will be a vote for continuity, for more of the same, led by the same elites that have dominated for five decades.

Like the Church 500 years ago, the Clintons have been selling indulgences.   For a gift of a few million dollars to their own private Foundation, foreign leaders were granted access to Mrs. Clinton, then Secretary of State.   “Government for sale” does not sit well with the American people – she may very well lose the election because of the ensuing scandal.

Donald Trump has his problems, too, particularly with women. He is not winning the female vote due to his reputation as what was once called a “male chauvinist pig.”  He has also made outlandish remarks in the past that have led many to conclude he is not suited to the presidency.

The following letter from our local newspaper sums up the dilemma that many voters face:

“Being a voter this year is kind of like being a condemned man the warden likes so he lets you choose the method of your death.  Donald Trump is a sexist pig, (Bill Clinton is, too) and he has the maturity of a 10 year old.  Hillary C is a pathological liar who is probably already selling ambassador jobs for a “contribution” to the Clinton Foundation.  If characters were gun powder, these two combined would not have enough to kill a fly.  Someone will smile and be declared the winner Nov 8.  We’re all losers with these two wretched candidates.”  (Lansing State Journal)

In four days it should all be over.

Mr. Trump has claimed the voting is rigged.   While there may or may not be problems in the voting booth (both before and after), voting is rigged in at least two ways.

Firstly, media bias, which manifests itself in many ways.   The mass media in the United States is overwhelmingly supportive of the Democrats.   Fox News is the only television network that is different and it’s only available on cable. One example of bias was just this morning. Fox showed footage of illegal immigrants crossing into the US across the southern border, in a last-minute attempt to get in before Trump builds his wall; such footage would sway many Americans to vote for Trump so, naturally, nothing was said or shown on the main TV networks.  If the electorate knew that 1,000 people a day are now crossing illegally into their country, they would be alarmed.

Another example of bias is from the New York Times, which did not even mention Hillary Clinton’s problems with her emails until it had to.   I’ve been reading the Sunday editions of the Times for a few weeks and it is clearly one-sided.

Secondly, there is another way in which the election is rigged.   Immigration.

It was the Democrats who brought in the 1965 Immigration Act which has flooded the country with people from developing countries, most of whom support big government programs and vote for the Democrats at every election.   Every four years when a presidential election is held, the percentage of whites is down a further 1% — it is the white population that has dominated America in the past.   They generally support traditional free enterprise and small government.

There are an estimated 11 million illegal aliens in the country. Mrs. Clinton favors a fast-track to citizenship, enabling them all to vote for her party; Mr. Trump wants them to return home and then apply for legal entry.

Elections are always difficult to predict, but I will say one thing for the benefit of those who live outside of the United States – there are more Trump signs on front lawns than there are Clinton signs.   There may be a lot of silent Trump supporters, people even who have never voted and are therefore not receiving calls from pollsters.

One final thought: whoever loses only has himself or herself to blame.   A biblical principle that keeps coming to mind is found in Numbers 32:23:   “be sure your sins will find you out.”   Whoever loses will be losing partly because of personal indiscretions.

This brings us back to the Roman Church and Martin Luther.   At the time, the corruption in the Church was pervasive – from the top down, popes, cardinals, archbishops and priests all had their fingers in the pie.   The result was rebellion on the part of the people.   The descendants of those same people today have the same attitude toward the elites that have grown fat at their expense.

This is what Brexit was all about.   It’s also the biggest issue in the US election.

But Brexit was not the end of the matter. In the United Kingdom, the elites are putting up a fight to reverse Brexit.  A decision of the High Court on Wednesday ruled that parliament must vote on the issue before the country can apply to leave the EU.  As two-thirds of the members of parliament are against Brexit, this is a definite blow to a people who want freedom from globalization and multiculturalism.   Theresa May, the UK’s prime minister, will appeal the decision to the country’s Supreme Court.   Mrs. May herself was against Brexit when the vote was taken in June, but now stresses that the will of the people must be upheld.

The globalist elites will resist change just as the kings did decades ago.   A Trump victory will be challenged in every way – if elected, he will not find it easy to “drain the swamp”!

At stake is America’s leadership of the western world.   Sixty years ago this week Britain and France invaded Egypt in an attempt to get back control of the Suez Canal, which they had built and owned.   US intervention ended the conflict.  It was, effectively, the end of the British and French Empires.   It’s a sobering reminder to Americans that just one error of judgment, particularly in the Middle East, can bring down the American Empire.   Don’t think it cannot happen to the United States.

TO HELL WE MUST GO

Hell

Williamston and Okemos are two cities that are a part of the Greater Lansing area, where we live.  Whereas we live on the west side of Lansing, they are east and south-east respectively.

I’ve just finished reading a short book on a particularly gruesome murder that took place in Williamston in 1897.   The book told the story of a man who came home for lunch (dinner as it was then), to find his mother’s head on his dinner plate.  His wife had gone crazy and killed her mother-in-law.

The murder is not as interesting as the detailed descriptions of life in Lansing at the time, almost 120 years ago.   In 1897 many people could still remember when the city of Lansing was chosen as the state capital.   The city was served by a number of railway lines, none of which exist now.

What was particularly interesting to me was the fact that the murderer was charged, tried and sentenced within six days.  Yes, six days!   What a contrast to today, where a trial may take more than a year, sentencing months and punishment is often delayed for years. Will Dzhokhar Tsarnaev ever actually be put to death?   His victims died instantly!

Reading the book, I was reminded of the scripture in Ecclesiastes 8:11 which says:  “Because the sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil.”

It’s no wonder that we are seeing more crimes of violence when our legal system is a joke.  The system has little to do with justice.

Another legal issue came up in the book.  Again, the contrast with today is quite marked.

The murderer was sentenced to life in an asylum.   She died about eighteen months later from tuberculosis.

Her husband, meanwhile, turns up again in the historical record, three years after the murder.   He was found co-habiting with a woman in Okemos, a few miles away.  They were both charged with “lewd and lascivious behavior.”  He was sentenced to ten months and she got eight.  That’s curious in itself.   I’m sure they were both equally to blame, so, therefore, why were their sentences different? But they both went to jail.

America today, with less than 5% of the world’s population, has 25% of the world’s prisoners.   Can you imagine what our prisons would be like if all those co-habiting were sentenced to a jail term?   If biblical commands were upheld in our communities, we would need a lot more jails and prisons for long-term offenders.

I was reminded of this last Friday when the Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage in all fifty states.  Can you imagine what the village elders would have done in 1900 Okemos if they had found two men co-habiting?

It shows how far we have come as a country.   And not just us, other western nations are the same.

Many Christians interpret the latest Supreme Court decision as a sign that the end of the age cannot be far off, that just as God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah when they were beyond being saved, that the US and other nations must face the same.   A number of conservatives said that the decision was a blow to marriage.

But the fact is that Friday’s decision is just the latest blow to marriage.

Marriage laws were progressively weakened throughout the twentieth century and churches said nothing.   In 1971 no-fault divorce became the law across the country, a decision that, arguably, did more harm to traditional marriage than any decision before or since.

The lives of millions of innocent children have suffered needlessly because of this change to the law, which reflected increased selfishness in our society.

Just two years later, abortion became legal.   This decision led to the murders of almost 60 million children in the United States alone.

Same-sex marriage is certainly not approved of in the scriptures. Nor are adultery and fornication, yet churches turn a blind eye to both, or punish them less severely.

The Apostle Paul treated them equally in I Corinthians 6:9.

“Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God?  Do not be deceived.  Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals,  nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.   And such were some of you.  But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.”  (verses 9-11)

Clearly, Paul here condemns fornication, adultery and sodomy equally.

If churches had done the same in recent decades, they might not be in the mess they are in now with regard to same-sex relationships.

If churches are to have any credibility at all on moral issues, they need to condemn these sexual sins EQUALLY.   That’s the only way they will be able to turn away same-sex couples who request a church wedding.   Churches need a statement of belief that upholds a biblically sanctioned marriage and only a biblically sanctioned marriage between a man and a woman who have chosen chastity until marriage and are committed to fidelity afterwards.   Divorced church members should be directed toward a civil marriage, not a church wedding.

If churches don’t do this, they are, in effect saying that one sin is worse than the other, just like the Pharisees of Jesus’ day.  In today’s western world that will open them up to charges of discrimination and intolerance.

One final thought before we leave this subject.

The book on the 1897 murder was titled:  “To hell I must go.”  The title came from the murderess herself.  She kept saying that when the police came to arrest her.

When it comes to the morals of the last fifty years, it’s more a case of “to hell we must go.”   Our society is falling apart as a result of our national sins.  Lax laws have destroyed the family.   The latest change to the law is just another nail in the coffin.  Still to come, inevitably, are polygamy, incest, pedophilia, and bestiality.   In England, they have already stopped prosecuting the latter.

It won’t end until we suffer the same fate as Sodom and Gomorrah.   We will, but it may be some time yet and more changes are still to come.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE SUPREME COURT AND IMMIGRATION-ASSISTED SUICIDE

Ambercrombie and fitch

The Supreme Court’s decision in support of a young lady who was refused employment with Abercrombie and Fitch because she was wearing a Muslim headscarf may, at first, seem like a victory for freedom of religion.  Other companies may have to think twice if they want to discriminate against people from minority religions.

However, there is an alternative way of looking at this decision from the highest court in the land.

It is yet another example of how the West is compromising itself out of existence.

It should be clear to everybody by now that Muslims who immigrate to the West do not want to become Americans, Canadians, Australians, Englishmen, Germans or French.  They certainly want to share in the wealth the West has.   But they do not want to change any aspect of their culture.   Rather, we must adapt, we must change, to accommodate whatever they want.

This can only get worse as we travel down this dangerous road.

Ann Coulter is a famous conservative who is often seen on television.   She has written a number of books, the latest one being “Adios, America!”   The sub-title sums up the book quite bluntly: “The Left’s plan to turn America into a Third World Hellhole.”   On such a sensitive subject, Ms. Coulter is not likely to be interviewed on the main networks.   Conservative writer Mark Steyn wrote about the book in The New Yorker.

“Unlike the wimps at ABC, CBS and NBC, Jorge Ramos of Fusion TV is actually willing to have Miss Coulter on his show, and she was on splendid form, starting with her advice to Americans:  “If you don’t want to get killed by ISIS, don’t go to Syria.  If you don’t want to get killed by Mexicans, I can’t help you.”  She continued:

“I think there are cultures that are obviously deficient and if they weren’t deficient you wouldn’t be sitting in America interviewing me.  I’d be sitting in Mexico.  You fled that culture because . . . there are a lot of problems with that culture.  Hopefully, it can be changed.  But we can share our culture with other nations without bringing all of their people here.  When you bring those people here you bring those cultures here. That includes honor killings, it includes uncles raping their nieces, it includes not paying your taxes, it includes paying bribes to government officials.  That isn’t our culture.  You can see the successful cultures in the world that have been studied ad infinitum.  America is about [being] the best in the world and we are about to lose it.  And, everyone who lives here is going to lose that.”

She’s right.  You’re gonna lose it.  Culture trumps economics – every time.   So, absent assimilationist incentives everyone’s too squeamish to apply, a country that grows more Latin-American demographically will trend more Latin-American culturally, too. America’s not alone, of course. The entire western world has chosen to commit immigration-assisted suicide as some kind of civilizational penance for imperialism, or racism . . .   In Europe and Canada they’re ceding their turf to Islam.  In the United States, they’ve chosen Latin America.”

“Without cultural continuity, a country is just real estate.  Just across the Iraq border, where I stood 12 years ago, is the town of Mari.  It’s in Eastern Syria now, but it was once the furthest outpost of the Kingdom of Hammurabi, the guy who cooked up the first legal code.  It’s currently being destroyed by jihadist loons.  What value do Hammurabi and his pre-Islamic laws have to ISIS?   The past has no meaning, because it’s someone else’s past.

“In a mid-21st century America that’s imported millions more low-skilled Latin-American peasants on the transformative scale Democrats and most Republicans accept, why should the Founding Fathers be any more relevant than Hammurabi is to the Islamic State?”   (“The dull thud of a New Yorker towel snap,” Mark Steyn, New Yorker, May 28th.)

Mr. Steyn and Ms. Coulter are both absolutely correct, though Ms. Coulter is wrong to blame this solely on the Left.   Both political parties are dedicated to “immigration-assisted suicide.”   So is the Supreme Court.

Adios, America!