In Spite of Mockery, Young People are Standing for Traditional Marriage

“The media claims we don't exist.  Freedom Indiana [opponents] claims there are none of us left.  But as young Hoosiers, we are here today.”

 

Those were the words of Shane Weist, 33, who along with a group of more than 100 other young adults, held a press conference (11 Feb) in which they sought to prove that—despite media reports to the contrary—not every young person in America backs legally-sanctioned same-sex “marriage.”  Weist and his companions make up Young Hoosiers for Marriage, an Indiana-based group fighting for passage of House Joint Resolution-3 (HJR-3) – an amendment to the state constitution defining marriage as a union between one man and one woman.  [A survey by Wilson Perkins Allen Opinion Research showed 54% of Hoosiers 18- to 34-year-olds support the amendment.]

 

Weist told reporters that Young Hoosiers for Marriage support the HJR-3 amendment.  “We are committed to rebuilding culture to ensure that children are not intentionally deprived of a mother and a father,” he added.

 

The Young Hoosiers’ public debut was met with mockery and derision by homosexual activists, who quickly launched a competing Facebook page called ‘Young Hoosiers 4 Marriage’ serving up personal attacks on Weist and his allies.

 

Since the press conference, the two state houses could not come to an agreement; therefore, the amendment will not appear on the general election ballot in November for approval by the voting citizens of Indiana.

 

While the Young Hoosiers for Marriage focused on getting the marriage amendment passed, they believe that is just the first battle in a larger war for the future of the culture.  They plan to expand their activism from the State House to Indiana's college campuses and church youth groups, giving talks on the importance of traditional marriage and participating in debates with supporters of same-sex “marriage.”

 

Since the press conference, Isaac Cramer, 24, of Young Hoosiers for Marriage told LifeSiteNews that, their group—which includes the 100+ young people at the press conference, plus “around another 100 who couldn't make it because they worked or had class”—has received many more requests from other young people in Indiana wanting to join.  Most of them are in their early 20s – juniors and seniors in college.

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

 

‘Right to Die’ Law – Granting Children the Choice of Euthanasia

Pro-life groups are calling Belgium’s recent passage of a “right to die” law … that allows terminally ill children the permission to end their own lives… “abhorrent and inhumane.”  They are questioning how a civilized society would sanction such an option.

 

“No civilized society allows children to kill themselves.  Far from a compassionate law, this law hands the equivalent of a loaded gun to a child with the astonishing belief that the child should be free to pull the trigger if he or she so chooses.  Belgium’s decision to allow this is grotesquely abhorrent and inhumane,” said Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) Senior Legal Counsel Roger Kiska in a statement.  The Belgian Chamber of Deputies recently voted 86-44 in favor of the controversial law.  ADF added that it had sent the Belgian Parliament a legal analysis that said the proposed law operated under the premise that life is not worth living and children are somehow mature enough to make such a decision on their own.  ADF added that the newly passed law “exploits vulnerable children by handing to them a ‘freedom’ that they are completely ill-equipped to bear.”

 

Under the ‘right to die’ legislation, all age restrictions will be removed from the European nation’s existing euthanasia law.

 

Belgium, where close to 75% of the population is said to be Roman Catholic, becomes the first country in the world with such a law.  Children who wish to end their own lives must be tested by psychologists and must be “capable of discernment” when making such a decision.

 

Supporters of the law played down the controversy, arguing that it will only be used in rare cases.  “This is not about lethal injections for children, this is about terminally ill children, whose death is imminent and who suffer greatly,” said Carina Van Cauter, from the Flemish Liberal Democrats who back the law.  “There are clear checks and balances in the law to prevent abuse,” she added.

 

Carine Brochier from the European Institute of Bioethics said, however, that the law is dangerous and questioned whether it really would apply only to a small number of cases.  “You don’t make a law for three people a year, that’s really crazy,” Brochier said.  “People are getting used to this idea of euthanasia in order to say okay, well if I don’t want to live anymore then I will ask for euthanasia.  If I suffer, the answer is euthanasia,” she continued.  “If you offer euthanasia then some parents might be tempted to act and to ask for euthanasia.”

 

The Joni and Friends International Disability Center (IDC), which serves as the administrative center for ministries which provide outreach to thousands of families affected by disability around the world, also criticized the law, reminding readers that the U.N. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) specifically states that “every human being has the inherent right to life and shall take all necessary measures to ensure its effective enjoyment by persons with disabilities on an equal basis with others.”  “I don’t understand how the Belgian legislators can ratify the CRPD yet at the same time, offer a so-called right-to-die not only to adults, but – heart-breakingly – to children who may feel distraught by their incurable conditions (which could include disabilities),” wrote Joni Eareckson Tada, founder and CEO of IDC.  “It is abhorrent that we should burden a child with such an unthinkable responsibility in deciding when his or her life should end.  Society’s unwritten moral law has always led us to save our children, not destroy them – and certainly not to allow them to destroy themselves.”

 

The head of the Catholic Church in Belgium, Brussels’ Archbishop Andre-Joseph Leonard, led a prayer vigil last week against the law, and asked why minors would be granted such responsibility when they had to wait until 18-years of age to receive other legal rights.  “The law says adolescents cannot make important decisions on economic or emotional issues, but suddenly they’ve become able to decide that someone should make them die,” Archbishop Leonard said.

 

Other European nations where euthanasia is legal, but not for children, include the Netherlands and Luxembourg … while Switzerland permits assisted suicide.

 

Listen: The heart of God cries out for His people to choose life: “Today I have given you the choice between life and death, between blessings and curses.  Now I call on heaven and earth to witness the choice you make.  Oh, that you would choose life, so that you and your descendants might live!  You can make this choice by loving the Lord your God, obeying Him, and committing yourself firmly to Him.  This is the key to your life …” (Deuteronomy 30:9-20)

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

Priority Must Be Given to the Religiously Persecuted

The persecution of Christians overseas is one of the most pressing and overlooked issues in America today.  There is something terribly wrong when a homosexual football player gets vastly more attention than an American pastor falsely jailed in Iran.

 

American Pastor Saeed Abedini is in the brutal Rajai Shahr Prison.  He remains in the violent criminal ward—Ward 3—sharing a 3 meter by 3 meter cell with other prisoners.  This particular ward of the deadly prison holds some of the worst criminals in Iran—murderers and rapists. International human rights organizations have reported that prisoner on prisoner violence, including murder, is routine at Rajai Shahr Prison. Pastor Saeed's situation remains dire.

 

Elliott Abrams, who sits on the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, blasted the Obama Administration during congressional testimony last week for its inattention to the plight of persecuted believers around the world.

 

Referring to Obama's refusal to name an ambassador-at-large for international religious freedom for well over a year, Abrams said, “If there is a long vacancy, it weakens the attention of the executive branch … and it sends a message to countries around the world of inattention and a lack of concern.”

 

Abrams added that the Obama Administration is not taking full advantage of the authority it has to fight religious persecution under the International Religious Freedom Act, which authorizes the administration to impose tough sanctions on the worst offenders.  Failing to use that leverage, Abrams warned, “… sends a message to other governments that we don't care.”

 

As our nation was founded on the principle of religious liberty, Americans should care tremendously about religious persecution … regardless of faith group.  Let’s pray that our government … that stands for religious liberty will proclaim it to the entire world … as molded into our nation’s Liberty Bell – “Proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof.” (Leviticus 25:10)

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

POTUS – Do As I Say, Not As I Do!

The 62nd Annual National Prayer Breakfast was held last week in Washington, D.C. According to the testimony of some who were in attendance, there were several inspirational speakers, scripture readings and stirring performances.

 

Regardless of your political affiliation, it has got to be a highlight of the event to hear remarks from the President of the United States.  But according to Gary Bauer, President of American Values, who was there with hundreds of other attendees, Bauer was stunned by Obama’s hypocrisy.

 

Here are a few examples according to Bauer:

 

On Life

 

President Obama talked about how “we affirm the freedoms endowed by our Creator” … an obvious reference to the Declaration of Independence.  The rest of the line says that we are endowed “with certain unalienable Rights” … first among them being the ‘right to life.’  Obama left that out.  He quoted from Psalm 139, saying we were “wonderfully made in the image of God” … yet he avoided the previous verse, “You wove me in my mother's womb.”  The president talked about the “inherent dignity of every human being – dignity that no earthly power can take away.”  Obama said a lot about religious freedom … yet his namesake ‘Obamacare’ is forcing religious business owners and institutions to subsidize abortion, sterilization and other procedures they find morally objectionable.

 

On Religious Persecution

 

The main thrust of President Obama's speech was religious persecution around the globe. [According to a recent Pew Research Center study, Christianity is the most persecuted faith.]  Obama told the audience that he looked forward to appointing a new ambassador-at-large for international religious freedom … yet the position was vacant for more than 2-years during Obama's first term, and has been vacant for the past 3-months. Clearly it is not a high priority. He has minimized the importance of religious freedom in his foreign policy and focused instead on promoting homosexuality. Obama has aggressively criticized Russia's treatment of homosexuals, while saying relatively little about churches bombed and torched throughout the Middle East and Africa. This orating president has seldom emphasized the subject of Christian persecution in his speeches. When he raises the subject of religious freedom, it is often in defense of Islam, such as supporting a mosque at Ground Zero or telling a Cairo audience that one of his responsibilities as president is “to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam.”  Some in the audience were happy that Obama specifically named Pastor Saeed Abedini, who was unjustly imprisoned in Iran. But unlike Presidents Reagan and Bush, who would bring up religious persecution during important negotiations with foreign leaders, Obama signed a horrible deal with Iran, while the fate of Pastor Abedini didn't even seem to be an afterthought.

 

On Marriage

 

Even while addressing the National Prayer Breakfast, President Obama could not resist the opportunity to promote same-sex marriage.  He did it subtly … lamenting how faith (in his view) is twisted to “justify hatred and persecution against other people just because of who they are, or how they pray or who they love.”  Healthy societies reject such sentimentality, and try through law and custom to discourage certain types of ‘love.’ [An adult who is sexually attracted to a child and who acts on that attraction is and should be discriminated against and jailed.  A man or woman who breaks their marriage vows because he or she now ‘loves’ someone else is condemned by all faiths.]  In fact, Gallup's polling recently find that adultery is considered the most morally offensive behavior, more so than cloning, suicide or abortion.  Every civilization prohibits legal recognition of incest … because that particular form of ‘love’ is fraught with obvious dangers.  Likewise, until the last 15-years or so, virtually every society and every major faith discouraged same-sex relationships and never considered extending it to marriage. Bauer says, “I suppose it is possible that throughout all of recorded history every society was wrong and that we have experienced true enlightenment only in the last decade.  I don't buy it.  I do not believe we are becoming more enlightened.  Instead, America is being ripped away from its Judeo-Christian worldview.  Same-sex marriage is already being followed by demands for legal polygamy.  The legitimization of incest won't be far behind.”

 

I must say, I agree with Bauer’s conclusion in reference to Obama’s hypocrisy.*  Just because someone attends a prayer breakfast doesn’t make them a conclusive believer in God … any more than standing in a garage makes one an automobile.

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

 

* Def. hy·poc·ri·sy – noun: the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform.

Abortion is Now “Protecting Children” and “Providing End-of-Life Care”

This blog posting is dedicated to my ‘Christian’ critics who say – “The Church should not be preaching politics from the pulpit.”  To them I say … it in the strongest ‘other than English’ terms … “Bulls-Geschichte!”

 

Where are my critics when the pro-life opponents ‘preach’ their ‘other than Biblical’ propaganda to all who will listen?  Get real!  Get engaged in the affairs of the culture!  Get your head out from where the sun doesn’t shine!  Where else are you going to get empowered and equipped with an understanding of the Biblical worldview … if it isn’t in the Church?

 

On the World Stage –

 

The U.N. Committee on the Rights of the Child released a new report slamming the Roman Catholic Church and suggesting that it alter its belief system to permit abortion in order to “protect children.”  The committee also urged the Vatican to amend its Canon Law to identify circumstances where access to abortion can be permitted (i.e., saving the life of a young mother).  It urged the Vatican website (The Holy See) to ensure that sex education … including access to information about contraception and preventing HIV … be mandatory in Catholic schools. It called for The Holy See to use its moral authority to condemn discrimination against homosexual children or children raised by same-sex couples.

 

Naturally, Vatican officials are not overly pleased with the suggestion to change a significant pillar of the Church's teachings in order to appease the United Nations.  The Holy See does, however, regret to see in some points of the ‘Concluding Observations’ an attempt to interfere with Catholic Church teaching on the dignity of the human person and in the exercise of religious freedom.

 

The Holy See reiterates its commitment to defending and protecting the rights of the child, in line with the principles promoted by the U.N.’s Convention on the Rights of the Child and according to the moral and religious values offered by Catholic doctrine.  But, it’s nothing short of foolish to suggest murdering unborn-children is the best way to protect them.

 

On The U.S. Stage –

 

The progressive ‘left’ of the United States is now seeking to redefine abortion as “end-of-life care.”  A proponent of this is a medical student and mother who, with her husband, chose to have an abortion saying it was a “parenting decision” — not one of when life begins, but a decision of “how and when life should end.”

 

The rhetoric surrounding most abortion arguments focus primarily on the question of when life begins — is the fetus a baby at 6-weeks?  12-weeks?  20-weeks? — And whether women have the right to make choices about their pregnant bodies.  In this case, however, abortion was a “parenting decision” … which they believed was the most important decision they had to make.

 

In the words of this mother, “This might not be comfortable or convenient for the pro-choice narrative, but it’s the truth.  Some aspects of abortion might rightfully be best considered in the context of when life begins; but in situations like ours, the most salient fact was how and when life should end.”

 

During a second trimester ultrasound … when the baby was 19-weeks … some potentially extensive medical complications were found.  With her medical knowledge, the mother knew the news was not good: She asked, “What kind of suffering is this baby experiencing?  What kind of quality of life will he or she have?”  She went on to say, “What we don’t talk about much in medical school, or anywhere else for that matter, is the idea of end-of-life care before independent life has even begun. Because of my familiarity with what many of the different therapeutic and palliative care options entailed — medically, ethically, personally — it was clear to me that what we were dealing with was choosing an end-of-life care plan for our son.  And because my husband and I believe more in evidence than in miracles, we knew that the appropriate time to implement that plan was now.”

 

Not wanting to risk the unknown of delivering a baby who might experience suffering, they chose to abort — what they called “a peaceful death.”  “[W]e chose to give our baby what we felt was the most humane, comfortable, and loving end-of-life experience we felt we could facilitate. Aborting my son was not about when life begins, but how to end it humanely.”

 

As the left so often does, they demonstrate their propensity to corrupt language, and blur the lines of right and wrong.

 

How can the Church – the proclaimer of Absolute Truth – not speak to what God (the Creator of life) has said about life within the womb?  That’s the problem.  The Church has become (or is being asked to become) speechless; to be muzzled on political issues; to compromise God’s Word.

 

Let me be clear: I WILL NOT cease to preach against this blight upon this nation.  Shame on those in pulpits and pews who foolishly think the Church should be silent on these moral issues of our day!

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

 

P.S. — Don’t bother writing to me about my choice of language at the outset of this blog posting.  It is mild compared to what you hear on TV, in movies, at work, or at your sporting events.  Here again, you just wrongly think preachers ought not speak of the moral issues of our day.  You probably would have said the same of the Old Testament prophets.

 

Remember Godly George on this President’s Day

Today is Presidents Day – a day to honor and remember our former presidents.  I’ve become increasingly disturbed at the lies being promoted in the educational realm and media – saying that George Washington was a deist … which means a person who believes in God only through man’s natural reasoning and does not believe in Divine Revelation or the Divine authority of the Bible.  A deist believes that God is not involved in the world today; He may have created it, but that is it. There is no divine guidance or involvement in our lives.  He is a god who is absent from this earth and unconcerned about the fate of humankind.  Well, nothing could be further from the truth.  George Washington was a man of God; he was a devoutly dedicated Christian – a disciple (follower) of Christ Jesus.

 

George Washington took the oath of office as our first president on April 30, 1789, on the balcony of Federal Hall, in New York City; with his hand upon an open Bible.  In his inaugural address to the Congress he said: “… it would be particularly improper to omit, in this first official act, my fervent supplication to that Almighty Being who rules over the universe, who presides in the councils of nations and whose providential aids can supply every human defect, that His benediction may consecrate to the liberties and happiness of the people of the United States a Government instituted by themselves for these essential purposes; and may enable every instrument employed in its administration to execute with success, the functions allotted to his charge.  In tendering this homage to the Great Author of every public and private good, I assure myself that it expresses your sentiments not less than my own; nor those of my fellow-citizens at large, less than either.  No people can be bound to acknowledge and adore the Invisible Hand which conducts the affairs of men more than the people of the United States …”

 

In President Washington’s ‘Farewell Address’ … which is found in history text books up until the late 30’s … we have what was considered the most significant political speech ever delivered by an American President.  In his speech he had twelve warnings to this nation … of which 4 of them where religious.  These 4 very religious warnings to this nation promoted keys that would keep this nation strong.  Do you know what they were?  Here they are:

 

1. There are only two foundations for political prosperity in America – religion and morality.  They are “the pillars to societies survival” he later said in a letter to a Christian group.
2. He also warned that no man could be called an American Patriot who tried to separate religion and morality from politics.  He said that Americans should continue to reject any tenet which asserted that one could be moral without religion.  [This is what liberal education teaches and promotes when it pushes separation of church and state.]
3. Washington warned that if we lost our religious values we would not have value for others property, life or freedom.
4. Washington warned that if America lost its religious principles, then it would lose its sense of morality … and this would tear the nation down and lead to its collapse.

 

I don’t know about you, but I honestly believe that if this nation does not reverse course it will collapse from within.

 

My friends: Just as God honored and used Washington, He will do the same for us today … if we imitate this type of faith.  God has not changed His mind on what brings blessings and what brings curses to a person’s life and a nation.  Jesus laid out the way we are to live and act; and it’s imperative that we adhere to His way.

 

Let me ask you: Do you desire to bring this nation … (once again) under God?  Are you willing (as it says in 2 Chronicle 7:14) – to humble yourself, and pray and seek God’s face, and turn from your wicked ways?  For only then, will God forgive our sins and heal our land.

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

 

P.S. – If you would like to know more of George Washington’s Christian faith, view and listen to my sermon of yesterday (16 Feb) at the Fort Snelling Memorial Chapel at this link - https://new.livestream.com/accounts/3709164

Former Funeral Home Pranks Have Now Become Cold-Blooded Scams

In his line of work, funeral home director Brian Bass has come to expect the occasional juvenile phone prank.  But the hoax recently perpetrated on the small-town Eubank Funeral Home where Bass works is bigger than any adolescent antics.  Cybercriminals hijacked the funeral home’s identity as part of a worldwide email phishing scam.

 

For the past month, inboxes across the United States and beyond have been getting funeral notices that appear to be from Eubank Funeral Home in Canton, Texas (60 miles east of Dallas).  Without saying who has died, the fake emails invite the recipient to an upcoming “celebration of your friend’s life service” and instruct the recipient to click a link for “more detailed information about the farewell ceremony.”

 

“It reaches to people's curiosity and their natural instinct to find out who passed away,” Bass told Yahoo News.

 

But instead of going to Eubank’s website, the Better Business Bureau says, the link in the email takes readers to a foreign domain where malicious software is downloaded onto the user’s computer allowing criminals access to passwords, financial records, and other personal information stored on the computer.

 

“This scam email, disguised as a funeral notification, reaches a new low,” the Better Business Bureau said in a nationwide warning last week.  “Scammers are always on the hunt for new ways to evade the delete button.”

 

It’s unknown how many people have fallen victim to the hoax, but Bass said Eubank Funeral Home has received 50 to 100 complaints a day since mid-January.  Calls and emails have come from as far away as Finland and South Korea.  “We filed a police report and our security people are in touch with the government, but nobody can stop it yet,” Bass said.

 

The ordeal forced the funeral home, which has been in business for 88-years, to remove its phone number from its website and post disclaimers and warnings about the scam.  “It's not really the way your company wants to be known,” Bass said.  “It has taken away time we need to help families.”

 

The fraud comes at a time when many funeral homes are trying to meet a growing demand to deliver information via social media and digital channels.  Eubank sends death notices only to email subscribers and always includes the name of the deceased.  “A lot of our subscribers are retirees …  they kind of want to see if people they grew up with have passed away,” Bass said.

 

Last year the Anti-Phishing Working Group, a coalition of cybercrime watchdogs, noted that a record-high 441 business brands were hijacked in April 2013 and that “the landscape continues to evolve as fraudsters seek new victims in untapped markets by targeting more brands.”  In its warning, the Better Business Bureau urged consumers to remain vigilant because the hackers will likely clone another funeral home’s identity before long.

 

“These kinds of things piss me off,” said Bill Harasym, a Wyoming man who got one of the emails on Jan. 15, just six weeks after he buried his mother.  Some web investigating verified Harasym’s suspicions that the email was a fake.  He then alerted Eubank Funeral Home and wrote about his experience on his personal blog to warn others about the cons.  “They're just dirtbags,” he told Yahoo News.  “There's a special place in hell for them.”

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

The Power-Grabbing President of Pen & Phone

I got it: Obama was able to convince a majority of Americans he was a better candidate than Mitt Romney.  Clearly, Obama is our President, with three years left in his presidency.  But let me be equally clear: Obama is not our king! … and America is not his kingdom!

 

Obama has a ‘king complex’ … thus he has vowed to use “a pen and a phone” to advance his agenda – which translates into more executive orders as a means of bypassing the people’s elected representatives in Congress.  It’s self-evident that Obama does not respect the Constitution’s intent for separation of powers.  No president in recent history has done more to expand the power of the executive branch of the federal government than has Obama.  Whatever your political persuasion, this is not good for our constitutional republic.

 

It’s interesting that this unconstitutional power-grab by the president is being pointed out by people, to their credit, who are identified with the political left.  In early December, noted law professor Jonathan Turley, who teaches at Georgetown University, appeared before Congress and was questioned about Obama changing laws without going through Congress.  (BTW: Turley, a liberal, is known to have voted for President Obama.)  Here was an exchange between Turley and Congressman Bob Goodlatte:

 

REP. BOB GOODLATTE (R-VA): Professor Turley, the Constitution, the system of separated powers is not simply about stopping one branch of government from usurping another.  It’s about protecting the liberty of Americans from the dangers of concentrated government power.  How does the president’s unilateral modification of acts of Congress affect both the balance of power between the political branches and the liberty interests of the American people?

 

JONATHAN TURLEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  The danger is quite severe. The problem with what the president is doing is that he’s not simply posing a danger to the constitutional system.  He’s becoming the very danger the Constitution was designed to avoid.  That is the concentration of power in every single branch.

 

What Obama has been doing with Obamacare is taking White House ink and changing dates of implementation … as set-forth in the Affordable Health Care Act. [27 changes as of the date of this posting … and counting.]  The problem is he does not have the authority to do that.  If he wants the dates changed he is supposed to go to Congress and appeal to them to change the law … which he can then sign.

 

In addition to Turley’s warnings that Obama is moving toward lawlessness, we have this from Editorial Editor of the New York Times, Jill Abramson: “I spent 22-years of my career in Washington and covered presidents from President Reagan on up through now, and I was Washington Bureau Chief of the Times during George W. Bush’s first term.  I dealt directly with the Bush White House when they had concerns that stories we were about to run put the national security under threat.  But, you know, they were not pursuing criminal leak investigations.  The Obama Administration has had seven criminal leak investigations.  That is more than twice the number of any previous administration in our history.  It’s on a scale never seen before.  This is the most secretive White House that, at least as a journalist, I have ever dealt with.”

 

We will now see if either of the other branches of government (legislative or judicial) will stop Obama from expanding his kingdom with his pen and his phone.  Maybe the administration’s series of self-inflicted damage – such as lies like “If you like your insurance and doctor you can keep your insurance and doctor … period” will put an end to this tyrannical administration.

 

Once before America declared its independence from tyranny – that of King George III.  At that time, the spiritual emphasis manifested so often by the Americans during the Revolution caused one Crown-appointed British governor to write to Great Britain complaining that: “If you ask an American who is his master, he’ll tell you he has none, nor any governor but Jesus Christ.”  In the minds of our former patriots was their motto: “No King but King Jesus!”

 

What’s the motivation of today’s patriots?  If it’s just politics, then only the political personalities and party platforms will change for an election cycle.  That won’t do anything to save America from the absolute power of those who rule in tyranny.  No, only a God-inspired spiritual revival across this nation will save it!  That’s what served to arouse the patriots of our founding era.  Our forefathers understood that true liberty is only found in King Jesus who has set us free from that which entangles us with a yoke of bondage.  Freedom was understood as a gift of Jesus.  Any different understanding by today’s patriots will never result in true liberty and justice for all.     

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

 

P.S. – Happy Birthday to our 16th President – Abraham Lincoln – born 12 February 1809 in Hodgenville, KY

A Call to Prayer

Obamacare’s mandate requiring employers to fund abortion-inducing drugs, sterilization, and contraception is on trial at the U.S. Supreme Court on March 25, 2014.  Two family-owned companies, Hobby Lobby Stories and Conestoga Wood Specialties, are challenging the ‘abortion pill’ mandate that would force them to pay for life-ending drugs … or face crippling fines.  I’ve written rather extensively about this situation in several previous blogs (read 5 Feb 14, 2 Dec 13, 13 Nov 13, 6 Nov 13, 25 Sep 13, 5 Aug 13, 2 Aug 13).

 

The outcome will have a dramatic impact on your religious freedom in America.

 

With so much at stake, the Alliance Defending Freedom has called for daily prayer leading up to the court date.  I invite you to join them each day – lifting up the people and issues related to the trial.

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

We the People Are Speaking … but Will Our Government Listen?

Question: Are government policies hurting the people they are intended to help?  Get the facts before you answer.

 

According to a recent Rasmussen Report, the majority of Americans believe that the fastest way to close the income gap is to take the government out of the equation.  The national telephone survey found that 69% of U.S. residents believe the salary gap is an issue that deserves attention; but 59% think that it can best be solved without the government intervening in the economy.

 

Responses to this question varied depending on party affiliation.  53% of Democrats say that more government involvement will narrow the income gap; while 87% of Republicans believe the poor can best be served without government interference in the economy.  59% of unaffiliated voters say less government involvement is the better course.

 

But more than any demographic, it is those who are involved with the government who believe the government should take an active goal in reducing income inequality.  61% of the ‘political class’ think more government activism will best address the issue.  (That might have something to do with their ‘job security.’)  However, 70% of mainstream voters see less government involvement as a better way to close the income gap.

 

And when researchers asked respondents the broader question of whether or not they thought increased federal or state involvement would make society “more fair, less fair or remain about the same,” a plurality, 48%, said that society would be less fair.  If the economy treats any group unfairly, it is the middle class, say the study’s respondents. Most voters believe the U.S. economy is fair to women, blacks and Hispanics, but more than ever — 66% — view it as unfair to the middle class.

 

President Obama focused on the middle class and income inequality in his State of the Union address.  Though Obama keeps insisting that income inequality is the “defining challenge of our time,” most Americans beg to differ.

 

A recent Gallup nation-wide survey asked – “What do you think is the most important problem facing this country today?”  Dissatisfaction with the federal government — its incompetence, abuse, dysfunction, venality — topped the list … with 21% of respondents saying it was their key concern.  The overall state of the economy was second, at 18%. Unemployment and health care were tied for third, with each cited by 16% as the nation's most pressing problem.

 

When asked how many shared Obama's view that the gap between rich and poor is the issue that should concern us most? … there was just 4%.

 

Yet this president has been banging this drum since his 2008 candidacy.  (Remember: He told ‘Joe the Plumber’ that it was good for everybody when the government acts to “spread the wealth around.”)  He told the Center for American Progress last December that “increased inequality and decreasing mobility pose a fundamental threat to the American Dream,” and warned that America's basic bargain — ‘If you work hard, you have a chance to get ahead’ — is disintegrating.

 

Class-war rhetoric excites the Democratic base.  There have always been some voters for whom nothing is more repellent than a growing gap between the rich and the non-rich, or a stronger justification for more government regulation.  But most Americans don't react that way.  “When is the last time you heard a shoeshine person or a taxicab driver complain about inequality?” asks economist John C. Goodman.  “For most people, having a lot of rich people around is good for business.”

 

Obsessing over other people's riches isn't healthy.  In a relatively free society, wealth is typically earned.  Of course, there are exceptions.  Some people cheat their way to a fortune; some are just lucky; some pull political favors.  But on the whole, Americans with a lot of money have usually produced more, worked harder, or aimed higher than the rest of us.  Inequality is built into the human condition, and the world is generally better off when people of uncommon talent and industry are free to climb as high as their abilities will take them.

 

According to a 2010 Congressional Budget Office report, income inequality stands only slightly higher now than the average of the past 30-years.

 

To be sure, it has grown harder under this administration to climb up from the lowest quintile.  But that has little to do with the ‘millionaires and billionaires’ … whom the left so often vilifies.  It has much more to do with government policies that have undermined work incentives, increased dependency, and priced the low-skilled unemployed out of the labor market.

 

Mr. President: The “defining challenge of our time” isn't to end inequality or redistribute the income of the wealthy.  Far more important is to GET THE GOVERNMENT OUT OF THE WAY, and enable more of the poor to climb their way to success.

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

Your Choice … Choose Wisely!

Things are ‘heating-up’ for the U.S. Supreme Court hearing of Hobby Lobby Stories and Conestoga Wood Specialties opposition to Obamacare’s mandate requiring employers to fund abortion-inducing drugs, sterilization, and contraception.  I’ve written rather extensively in several previous blogs (2 Dec 13,   13 Nov 13, 6 Nov 13, 25 Sep 13, 5 Aug 13, 2 Aug 13) explaining what has led to this ‘show-down’ regarding the 1st Amendment’s guaranteed freedom to exercise religion based on conscience.

 

Two scholars from the Institute for Faith, Work & Economics (IFWE) have teamed-up with Rick Warren, Wayne Grudem, Bishop Harry Jackson, Ravi Zacharias … and more than 30 leading Christian theologians and pastors … to file an amicus brief to the Supreme Court in support of Hobby Lobby Stores and Conestoga Wood Specialties.  The brief states that the HHS mandate violates the 1st Amendment rights of Christians whose doctrine teaches that all work is sacred.

 

The Executive Director of IFWE, Hugh Whelchel, and Vice President of Theological Initiatives, Rev. Dr. Art Lindsley, are co-signers to the brief.  “This case throws into sharp relief the problems that can arise when the Christian doctrine of work is not properly understood,” said Whelchel.  “We as Christians cannot compartmentalize our faith from the work we do every day; whether we're a pastor, a plumber, or business leader.  The Bible teaches that all of life is integrated and matters to God.  This fundamental doctrine needs to be preached more often in our churches as well as understood in our courts.”

 

The brief contains four main points:

 

1. Christian doctrine requires that faith govern every aspect of a Christian's life.

2. Christian doctrine teaches that an individual’s vocation is ordained by God as a spiritual enterprise in which Christians must serve in accordance with their spiritual callings.

3. Christian doctrine states it is a sin for a Christian to enable or aid another in doing what the Christian believes to be sin.

4. Requiring a Christian to choose between violating the government’s regulations or violating his sincerely held religious beliefs substantially burdens his exercise of religion.

 

For the true believer in Christ, such a Christian is not confronted with Jesus’ words of render to Caesar or to God what belongs respectively to them; but challenged with His words that state – “No one can serve two masters.  Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other.  You cannot serve both God and manna.” (Matthew 6:24) … meaning our sinful impulses at the same time, because they're utterly opposed to each other.  Service to one means complete opposition to the other.

 

So, if you are genuinely a Christian – make your choice.  As Joshua asked the children of Israel – “If serving the Lord seems undesirable to you, then choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your ancestors served … in whose land you are living.” (Joshua 24:15)

 

Like Joshua, the owners of Hobby Lobby Stories and Conestoga Wood Specialties have made their choice, saying – “But as for me and my household [my business], we will serve the Lord.”

 

How about you?  Given the choice – Which master will you serve? 

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel