Not All Photo IDs Are Acceptable to TSA

This past weekend, I had occasion to pass through the security of the Philadelphia Airport on route home (to MN) after a week-long visit with my dad (in PA).  Like any airport, I was required to show my boarding pass and a photo ID.  I used my government issued photo ID as a U.S. military (retired) veteran.

Current TSA standards allow airport passengers to use their Costco membership cards at security check-points; yet, concealed handgun licenses are “not acceptable forms of identification.”  Can you believe it?  A photo consumer membership card is acceptable, but a government issued permit to carry is not?  You don’t suppose there’s a ‘hidden agenda’ here do you?

Congressmen Diane Black (TN-R) and Bill Flores (TX-R) have introduced a bill – the Nondiscriminatory Transportation Screening Act – demanding the agency recognize gun licenses as a legitimate form of ID.  Additionally, the legislation would prevent the TSA from “collecting or storing information” about individuals with handgun licenses.

While alerting the public to the new legislation, Black called out TSA’s double standards.  “It is mind-boggling that the TSA has reportedly accepted Costco membership cards at airport screenings, yet its website expressly prohibits the use of handgun carry permits,” she said.  Black went on to say, “Why the double standard?  Handgun licenses are a government-issued form of identification and no one has given me a valid reason why they cannot be accepted at TSA checkpoints.  Americans who exercise their Second Amendment freedoms have bared the brunt of much hostility from this Administration over the last seven years.”

Black is not exaggerating when she says the Obama White House has been unkind to gun owners.  Throughout his tenure in office, Obama has introduced several unpopular gun control initiatives, including the expansion of background checks.  The president plans to make gun control a key issue next year.

It’s no wonder law-abiding American gun-owners walk around nowadays feeling like criminals.  The least the government can do is make their trips to the airport a little more convenient.

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

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

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

So, What Becomes of Aborted Baby Parts If Not Sold for Profit?

Do you remember a month ago when Planned Parenthood (PP) … out of the goodness of its heart … magnanimously offered to forego payment for its “donations” of baby body parts?  Well, maybe its heart is still a few sizes too small, because the abortion giant is still profiting from this arrangement.

Here’s one of the dirty little secrets of abortion dealers: When an abortion is over, the baby has not magically disappeared.  There’s still a little boy or girl lying on a tray or in a machine.  Abortion businesses know this.  They employ “products of conception” (POC) workers, who count baby body parts to make sure they’re all out of their mothers.

In the most recent video that the Center for Medical Progress has released, one PP abortionist admitted that her POC worker is “really into” fetal organs, especially hearts, because they’re “cute” and “amazing.”

So what do abortionists do with their victims’ corpses?  Like on a TV crime procedural, killers soon find out that the bodies are a real problem.  Just ask abortion industry execs like Renee Chelian, who owns the Northland Family Planning chain of abortion clinics and confessed in a recent video that disposing of the bodies is “a PR nightmare for us.  If we end up being the front page of the paper: ‘Fetuses Are Being Used for Energy.’ I mean, I think it’s a great idea ….”

Abortionists know the powder keg they’re sitting on.  After a narrow escape in Michigan, Chelian worried, “We are all one incineration company away from being closed.  Whatever your laws are in your state, if the ‘antis’ [pro-life advocates] know, this could shut us down ....  This is what can close the clinics down.”

With 2,000 babies killed each day in the United States by abortion, where are the bodies buried?

1. Many are fed down industrial garbage disposals and into our sewer system; but some babies are too big and strong for this method.

2. Many are cremated by businesses like Stericycle (which has a “don’t ask, don’t tell policy”); but clinics have to pay for this, and worse (for them), are often expected to pick up the ashes.  Chelian recounts that one crematorium wanted to know “who was going to pick up the ashes.  And I was like, ‘I dunno!  Do I have to?’ … which also made me really worried I was going to have to just open some room somewhere where I just had ... bottles of ashes.”  She considered buying her own incinerator, debating whether the size would allow for incineration of “one D&E [dilation and evacuation] or a whole jar of first-trimester patients,” before determining that it would not be feasible.

3. Some, like Kermit Gosnell’s victims, are pickled, jarred, and displayed like trophies.

4. And profit-hungry PP realizes that disposal of each aborted baby would cost $150.  That’s far more than the cost to ship aborted babies to labs for “research,” even if they no longer get to double-dip into profit by getting paid for this cost savings.  So PP boxes up babies and ships them off to become someone else’s “problem,” or to use PP’s euphemism, they “donate tissue for medical research…” out of the goodness of their hearts (of course).  Yet even this method has its limitations.  According to Chelian, “there’s not a research company who can take all our fetal tissue, because they don’t want it all.”  Maybe that’s because “the success of fetal tissue transplants has been meager at best, and ethically-derived alternatives are coming to dominate the field.”

Sadly, these may be some of their more “humane” options.  The conference room erupted in belly laughs when Chelian snickered, “We thought, we’ll give it [i.e., the aborted baby’s body] to everybody in a gift bag; they can take it home and figure out what to do with it.  It’s their pregnancy, and why is this our problem?  And I’m saying that in all seriousness.”

Another of her ideas: “I had 5-months’ worth of fetal tissue in my freezers …. I was ready to drive to upper Michigan and have a bonfire.  And I was just trying to figure out, you know, how I wouldn’t get stopped, or, you know, how far into the woods would I have to go to have this fire that nobody was going to see me.  I mean, it was the worst.”

An audience member jokes that “infant surrender” laws allow women to “leave live babies” at designated locations, “but you can’t come and leave” dead babies.  Chelian added, “I want you to laugh about this.  It’s funny.  I mean, it’s funny in a really sick way.”

I find it appalling that pro-abortionists would even consider “infant surrender” on par with aborted babies.  What are these warped people thinking?  To think that the precious hearts of these unborn are in the possession of these heartless murderers.

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

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

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

Is It Un-American to Prefer Christian Over Muslim Refugees?

Two weeks ago, Muslim terrorists murdered 129-people in Paris.  At least one of the ISIS perpetrators apparently entered Europe as a ‘refugee’ from Syria (he was found with a refugee ID).  ISIS has already claimed that they have infiltrated the Syrian refugee population … perhaps thousands of terrorists.

Last week, President Obama announced that it would be purely un-American for Westerners to ban unvetted Muslim immigrants from the Middle East while allowing Christian targets of genocide to enter the West.  He called such an idea “shameful” … while passionately calling for Americans to “open our hearts” to more refugees.  He praised bordering countries (Turkey, Jordan and Lebanon) for taking in hundreds of thousands of refugees; Obama said that showed their “belief in a common humanity.”  He added, “And so we have to, each of us, do our part.  And the United States has to step up and do its part.  And when I hear folks say that, well, maybe we should just admit the Christians but not the Muslims – that’s not American.  That’s not who we are."

The fact is, every aspect of this little speech is wrong.  Turkey, Jordan and Lebanon aren’t taking in Muslim refugees out of some great commitment to common humanity.  They’re doing so because their other choice involves setting up fences and machine guns to stop the waves of refugees crossing their frontiers.  And as we know, Muslim countries have a rotten history of absorbing fellow members of their ummah (meaning ‘nation’ or ‘community’).  For 70-years, since the creation of the State of Israel, tens of thousands of Palestinian Arabs have lived in refugee camps located in Muslim lands.  By contrast, the State of Israel has taken in every Jewish refugee seeking asylum … from Russian emigres to Moroccan immigrants; from Ethiopian refugees to Syrian expatriates.

And the West has good reason for skepticism toward Muslim refugees. While Muslim refugees who stay in the Middle East split evenly between males and females, the vast majority of refugees entering Europe are males of fighting age.  Muslim immigration has already led to massive increases in crime from France to Sweden; and cultural fragmentation from Great Britain to Austria.  Terrorism is only the latest threat … and even that threat is obviously not exaggerated.  Vetting refugees from Syria is nearly impossible given its status as a failed state.  Vetting Muslim refugees is totally impossible given the fact that radical Muslims can easily masquerade as less-radical Muslims.

So why does Obama, along with the global left, seek more Muslim immigration?  Because Obama does not believe that Islam, as a religious philosophy, presents any threat to the West.  He believes that radical Islam doesn’t exist.  It’s merely the hallmark of global poverty, probably affected negatively by climate change; if the West redistributed its wealth, ceased its ‘colonial’ attitudes toward the Middle East; all would be well.  The materialism of Marxism would win the day.

Never mind that this argument is entirely without evidence.  Never mind that Muslims from Western nations have left wealth to join the impoverished ISIS fighters.  Never mind that Osama Bin Laden (himself) was a wealthy man who lived in a cave to plan attacks against Westerners.  Ideology matters, but to the self-centered Marxists of the global left, only their ideology matters: Everyone else has merely fallen into nasty ideas … thanks to lack of resources.

And so we must give them our resources; endanger our own citizens.  To do anything else would be un-American … according to the people whose idea of Americanism involves the rejection of the very ideas upon which America was founded.

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

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

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

Three Ways to Battle ISIS According to a Former Muslim

While the politicians bloviate on what they would do to deal with the threat of ISIS, wouldn’t it make sense to listen to a woman who escaped radical Islam?  In an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, Ayaan Hirsi Ali outlined three ways in which she believes Europe and western civilization (in general) must act to defeat the terrorists:

1.    Listen to Israel

“Israel … has been dealing with Islamist terror from the day it was born and dealing with much more frequent threats to its citizens’ security. … Instead of demonizing Israel, bring their experienced, trained experts to Europe to develop a coherent counterterror strategy.”

2.    Fight for Our Beliefs

“[D]ig in for a long battle of ideas.  European leaders will have to address the infrastructure of indoctrination: mosques, Muslim schools, websites, publishing houses and proselytizing material (pamphlets, books, treatises, sermons) that serve as conveyor belts to violence.  Islamic extremists target Muslim populations through dawa (persuasion), convincing them that their ends are legitimate before turning to the question of means.”

3.    Limit Immigration

“Europeans must design a new immigration policy that admits immigrants only if they are committed to adopt European values and to reject precisely the Islamist politics that makes them vulnerable to the siren song of the caliphate.”

Hirsi Ali told Fox News’ Megyn Kelly that western civilization isn’t at war with Islam, but that radical Islamists are at war with western civilization … pointing out that Israel works with Muslim nations all the time to help curb radical Islamists.

Hirsi Ali heads a foundation which seeks to “end honor violence that shames, hurts or kills” women.

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

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

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

Parents Take Action on School Board’s Radical Agenda

Continuing where we left off on my last blog posting, a controversial gender identity policy may lead to the ousting of several school board members in Fairfax County, Virginia.

Judicial Watch, a conservative non-partisan watch group, says there’s evidence the policy was implemented before it was voted on and before parents knew about it.

While school board elections generally don’t drive voters to the polls, it did this time around.

Last May, school board members voted to include transgender lessons as part of its nondiscrimination policy … against the will of many parents in the district.

Judicial Watch found out the school district began implementing the policy changes before voting on it earlier this year.  The decision was supposedly based on accommodating transgender students.  “Oh, it’s clear even in the records we’ve gotten so far that they were off and running that this was an objective of theirs, that they were acting on and attempting to line up before any vote was ever taken.  They were going to push this through no matter what,” says Chris Farrell, with Judicial Watch, to CBN News.

Pilar Jones, a concerned parent, said, “They’re cramming an agenda, their own agenda, down parents’ throats.  We have no voice; we have a voice and they don’t want to listen to us.  They’ve ignored us.  So the time has come to change that.”

In April, Judicial Watch asked the school board to provide documentation on the controversial gender identity policy under the Freedom of Information Act.  “One of the school board members who wanted to abstain from voting objected because there wasn’t enough data, wasn’t enough information,” Farrell explained.  “It hadn’t been debated very much.  This seems to be something that was directed and propelled out of the Obama Administration’s federal Department of Education.”

The school board delayed turning over the documents and filed a lawsuit against Judicial Watch to prevent their release until after the election (November 3, 2015).  “They went into court and sued Judicial Watch because they know there is a smoking gun in those documents and they don’t want parents to know any of that information until after the election,” said Andrea Lafferty, with Traditional Values Coalition.

Parents opposed to the policy say school board officials refused to hear their concerns.  “It has no place in the school system.  We have 17 failing schools throughout this county and this is what they’re concerned with?” asked Lauren Appell, another concerned parent.  “I have girls and I am deeply concerned with the fact that they [school board members] want to share bathrooms with transgender kids.  That puts my children at risk and I’m not going to allow that.”

Fairfax County is the largest school district in Virginia and the tenth largest in the country.  Many say what happens here may have a domino effect in school districts across the country.

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

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

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

White House Threatens Schools with Pulling Federal Funds Based on Sexual Identity

The Obama Administration is continuing its push for transgender teenagers to use facilities of the opposite sex – this time by explicitly threatening to pull federal funding from an Illinois school district and backing a transgender girl’s appeal to use boys’ facilities in Virginia.

In a letter sent to Township High School District 211 school officials in Illinois, the Office for Civil Rights of the Department of Education declared that it found “by the preponderance of the evidence that the District is in violation of Title IX for excluding ‘Student A’ from participation in and denying her the benefits of its education program, providing services to her in a different manner, subjecting her to different rules of behavior, and subjecting her to different treatment on the basis of sex.”

Title IX is a 1972 law designed to prevent discrimination on the basis of sex – which an Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) attorney says has nothing to do with gender identity.  “A federal court in Pennsylvania recently rejected a similar lawsuit filed by a transgender student seeking access to restrooms at a college,” ADF attorney Jeremy Tedesco told LifeSiteNews in June, “ruling that ‘separating students by sex based on biological considerations … for restroom and locker room use simply does not violate the Equal Protection Clause.’ ”

“The court rejected the Title IX claim for the same reason.  It also highlighted that Title IX’s implementing regulations state that schools do not violate Title IX when they ‘provide separate toilet, locker room, and shower facilities on the basis of sex.’ ”  The ADF attorney said that the change to Title IX “is not legally binding” and was “politically motivated.”  “In fact, federal regulations expressly state that ‘significant guidance documents’ have no binding legal authority,” he explained.  “Further, the document does not mention access to restrooms and it does not change binding Title IX regulations authorizing schools to create ‘separate toilet, locker room, and shower facilities on the basis of sex.’ ”  Tedesco went on to say, “It would take an act of Congress to include ‘gender identity’ as a protected status under Title IX.  The school can defend itself against this lawsuit without losing its federal funding.  And it should.  Allowing students access to the opposite sex’s restrooms would violate the privacy rights of the vast majority of students and trample the rights of parents as well.”

The Illinois district had attempted to compromise with a teenage boy who identifies as female by saying the student could use a private changing area.  “At some point, we have to balance the privacy rights of 12,000 students with other particular, individual needs of another group of students,” said District 211 Superintendent Daniel Cates earlier this year. “We believe this infringes on the privacy of all the students that we serve.”  In a statement issued last week, Cates called the federal government’s decision “a serious overreach with precedent-setting implications.”  He also told The New York Times that part of the district’s compromise included a privacy curtain in the girls’ locker room.

The Obama Administration has also taken up the case for Gavin Grimm, a girl who identifies as a boy, filing a brief with the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in support of Grimm’s appeal to use boys’ facilities.  Grimm sued her school district after the school board voted 6-1 to install gender-neutral bathrooms instead of allowing transgender students to use bathrooms of the opposite sex.

After a public hearing in December 2014, where most people opposed letting females use male restrooms, the board voted to state: “It shall be the practice of the Gloucester County Public Schools [Virginia] to provide male and female restroom and locker room facilities in its schools, and the use of said facilities shall be limited to the corresponding biological genders and students with gender identity issues shall be provided an alternative appropriate private facility.”  Three unisex bathrooms were subsequently installed, but Grimm and the ACLU said this wasn’t good enough, and “subject[ed] Grimm to discrimination.”   Grimm lost her case, which led to the appeal.

Listen: Sexual preference and identity is not a civil right … at least not yet!  I don’t doubt that it is on the legacy agenda of this Administration. 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

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

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

Elections Have Consequences … and This is a Good Outcome

Elections have consequences; and this is a good outcome.  When Governor-elect Matt Bevin (Republican) is sworn in, Kentucky clerks who oppose same-sex ‘marriage’ will no longer have to violate their conscience in issuing marriage licenses.  Bevin told reporters, “One thing I will take care of right away is we will remove the names of the county clerks from the marriage form.”

Rather than go through the state legislature to accomplish this, as outgoing Democratic Governor Steve Beshear suggested, Bevin will instead issue an executive order.

It was unclear what effect his order would have on the case of Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis, who was jailed for 5-days after refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples … making Kentucky a focal point in the debate over gay ‘marriage’ in the United States.  Davis met with Bevin the day she was released from jail.

Davis took steps to remove her name and title from the forms after she was released.  She also had repeatedly urged current Gov. Beshear to remove clerk names from the form or provide another type of relief so she would not violate her Christian beliefs.

Beshear has said he had no authority to relieve county clerks of their statutory duties by executive order and the issue could be addressed by the state legislature, which reconvenes in January.

One of Davis’ attorneys welcomed the news that Bevin would be “protecting the rights of conscience.”  Matt Staver, Davis’ legal counsel said, “Governor-elect Bevin’s impending executive order is a welcome relief for Kim Davis and should be for everyone who cherishes religious freedom.”

Thank God for an elected official who respects the religious liberties of their constituents.

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

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

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

Is the European Church Committing Spiritual Suicide?

When I was a kid (decades ago), there was a movie entitled, “It’s a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World.”  It is a funny film.  But today’s world is truly mad!  I mean, really mad!  And it’s not funny!

At a time when Christians in the Middle East are being tortured, beheaded and crucified … rather than denying Jesus … there are so-called Christians in Europe who are renouncing the Great Commission and removing the cross (literally) to make peace with Muslims.  This is nothing short of madness!

Last month, the Bishop of Stockholm (Sweden) “proposed a church in her diocese remove all signs of the cross and put down markings showing the direction to Mecca for the benefit of Muslim worshippers.”  As reported on Breitbart.com, “Calling Muslim guests to the church ‘angels,’ the Bishop later took to her official blog to explain that removing Christian symbols from the church and preparing the building for Muslim prayer doesn’t make a priest any less a defender of the faith.  Rather, to do any less would make one ‘stingy towards people of other faiths.’ ”

For many, this comes as no surprise.  This so-called Christian leader, Eva Brunne, made news in 2009 when she was installed as the Church of Sweden’s first openly lesbian bishop.

With good reason, the American activist and commentator, Pamela Geller, known for her anti-Shariah writings exclaimed, “Sweden has surrendered without so much as firing a shot.  They’ve lost it.  Sweden is sacrificing its own heritage to accommodate immigrants who will not be as accommodating to native non-Muslim Swedes.  The bishop is paving the way for the Islamization of Sweden.”

But this was not an isolated incident.  In Germany , an “evangelical priest has offered his parish church up to become migrant housing, but will be stripping out most of the fittings to ensure their comfort — including all symbols of Christianity.”  Obviously, this church had already removed real Christianity from its soul, as noted on the church website, “Refugees welcome ... we are all citizens with the saints and members of the household of God.”  So Muslims chanting Allahu Akbar and militantly denying that Jesus is the Son of God belong to the same spiritual family as Christians proclaiming Jesus as Lord and celebrating His death and resurrection.

This is absolute theological nonsense that makes a complete mockery of the cross.

But it gets worse.  As reported on the Religion News Service, “One of Germany’s largest Protestant regional churches has come under fire from other Christians for speaking out against efforts to convert Muslims just as tens of thousands of refugees from the Islamic world are streaming into the country.”

Has the time come for throwing out the Great Commission?  This appears to be a carefully thought out strategy as reflected in a new position paper in which “the Evangelical Church in the Rhineland says the passage in the Gospel of Matthew known as the Great Commission — ‘Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit’ — does not mean Christians must try to convert others to their faith.”

Do these people not realize that, if Christianity is not a missionary faith, then it is no faith at all; and that just as Jesus came into the world “to seek and save the lost” so He sends us to seek and save the lost?  As Scottish medical missionary Dr. David Livingstone once said, “God had an only Son and He made Him a missionary.”

Yet this blasphemous position paper, entitled “Pilgrim Fellowship and Witness in Dialogue with Muslims,” argues that, “A strategic mission to Islam or meeting Muslims to convert them threatens social peace and contradicts the spirit and mandate of Jesus Christ and is therefore to be firmly rejected.”

This not only makes a mockery of the blood that Jesus shed on the cross, but it also makes a mockery of the blood that our brothers and sisters have shed in the Muslim world as they lay down their lives to reach them with the good news.

Canadian pastor/author/missions advocate Dr. Oswald Smith famously said that the church that does not evangelize will fossilize.  The reality is that these churches already gave up the Great Commission years ago … becoming nothing more than fossils of the faith.  Their blasphemous actions today simply reflect the previous death of their spirit.  They have no more right to be called churched than ISIS has the right to be called compassionate.

My earnest prayer is that God will raise up a powerful, witnessing church in Europe before it is too late; and that He will strengthen those who are still standing strong in the midst of the current apostasy.

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

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

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

VA Officials Plead the 5th

As the 99% of Americans enjoy this federal holiday in recognition of the 1% (those who ever put on the uniform of our U.S. Armed Forces), I would like to ask you – Don’t you think our veterans deserve better?  Read on …

Two high-ranking officials at the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) exercised their constitutional right against self-incrimination (last week), declining to answer questions about a scheme in which they allegedly duped taxpayers out of hundreds of thousands of dollars.  [This is not to be confused with the larger VA scandal that was recently distorted and minimized by presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.  That corruption entailed the deliberate, systemic cover-up of unacceptably long waiting lists for care -- in part to protect bureaucrats’ performance bonuses.]  This corruption is entirely different … though it speaks to the culture of greed and wastefulness that seems to pervade much of the federal bureaucracy.

According to the Washington Post:

“The Department of Veterans Affairs has suspended a relocation program used by two senior executives to obtain more than $400,000 in questionable moving expenses and moved to discipline the officials, a senior agency leader said Monday ... Congress is investigating the executives for allegedly abusing their positions to get plum jobs and perks, part of a pattern of unjustified moving incentives and transfers identified by VA’s watchdog.  The committee subpoenaed Pummill, the executives and the two lower-ranking regional benefits managers they forced to accept job transfers against their will, according to investigators. But the executives, Diana Rubens and Kimberly Graves, refused to testify, telling the committee they were asserting their Fifth Amendment rights under the Constitution to protect themselves against self-incrimination ... [Pummill] declined to say what action the agency is taking against Rubens and Graves, who kept their salaries of $181,497 and $173,949, respectively, even though the new positions they took had less responsibility, overseeing a fraction of the employees at lower pay levels.”

Between salary increases and relocation expenses, the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) spent $1.8 million to reassign 23-senior executives from fiscal 2013 to fiscal 2015. In all but two cases, the new jobs came with pay raises, despite a White House imposed freeze on senior executives’ pay — and a widely publicized ban on bonuses stemming from a backlog of outstanding claims for disability benefits.  Acting Inspector General Linda Halliday disclosed in September that Rubens and Graves “inappropriately used their positions of authority for personal and financial benefit” when they forced lower-ranking officials to transfer out of their positions and then filled the vacancies themselves.  In other words, these government employees – who were already earning six figures – devised a method of manipulating the system in order to enrich themselves while also shedding workload and managing to bypass moratoriums on raises and bonuses … imposed as a result of their agency’s infamous scandal.

Fox News’ Mike Emanuel filed this report earlier on The Real Story:

“One of the silver linings on this episode of malfeasance is that due to reforms implemented in the wake of the broader VA scandal, Ms. Rubens and Graves will have fewer options at their disposal as they fight accountability.  Their punishment for administrative misconduct will be one of the first cases handled under a new law that speeds up dismissals and other discipline against VA senior executives, who now have far fewer appeal rights than they once did.”

Critics of both the Obama Administration and the US government’s sprawling federal bureaucracy have grown accustomed to officials ‘pleading the fifth’ while entangled in controversy.  Former IRS supervisor Lois Lerner refused to answer Congress’ questions about the political targeting regime she helped oversee (with no legal or financial repercussions); and the government employee who set up Hillary Clinton’s improper, unsecure email server did the same.

So, on this Veterans Day: We give thanks to the 1% who protect (or defended) our freedoms … many of whom are on food stamps, some being homeless, and still others are dying while waiting for VA medical attention; but all of whom will receive no cost-of-living increase this year … while VA officials with six figure salaries pled the 5th.

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

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

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

Religious Freedom in America: Protected for Muslims, and Rejected for Christians

Dr. Michael L. Brown (President of FIRE School of Ministry) made this statement in Townhall.com – “When your religious faith comes in conflict with your job [in America], if you are a Muslim, your faith is protected and sacred; if you are a Christian, it is not.”  Do you agree?

In the past year or two, we’ve read (I’ve written in previous blog postings) what has happened to Christian bakers, florists, photographers, and county clerks who refused to participate in same-sex ‘marriages’ because of their religious faith.  They were found guilty by the courts and fined or punished … or even imprisoned.  We’ve seen it with pro-life Christian owned and operated businesses and institutions that could not participate in Obamacare because of its provisions for abortion inducing drugs (i.e., ‘morning after pill’).

But when it comes to freedom of religion for Muslims, the results in the courts are significantly different; the reaction from the Obama Administration is different; and even the response from the mainstream media is different.

Back in April 2015, some Muslim cab drivers in Cleveland, OH refused to drive taxis carrying ads for the upcoming Gay Olympic Games.  Did it receive nationwide attention and condemnation?  Where are the courts forcing the drivers to ignore their beliefs as they do with Christians?  Where is the Administration in calling out the cab companies for homophobia? Where is the media in reporting about these Muslim cabbies, for religious reasons, refusing to drive cabs with signs promoting the Gay Games on top of airport cabs?  The fact is, this case never made it to the courts.

However, another case involving the religious freedoms of Muslims did make it to the courts; and it was decided in favor of the Muslims.  As reported by Fox News, “A jury has awarded $240,000 in damages to two Muslim truck drivers who sued their former employer for religious discrimination after they were fired for refusing to make beer deliveries.”  Now brace yourself for the next line: “The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) won the case on behalf of the Obama Administration.”

Say what?!  You heard it!  The same Obama Administration that actively stood for the redefining of marriage, regardless of its effect on the religious rights of Christians, stood up for the religious rights of these Muslims.  Not only that, but after the decision, the EEOC reported on their official government website: “EEOC is proud to support the rights of workers to equal treatment in the workplace without having to sacrifice their religious beliefs or practices.”  EEOC General Counsel David Lopez said, “This is fundamental to the American principles of religious freedom and tolerance.”

One of the EEOC attorneys who tried the case, June Calhoun, said this: “This is an awesome outcome.  Star Transport [the truck company in question] failed to provide any discrimination training to its human resources personnel, which led to catastrophic results for these employees. They suffered real injustice that needed to be addressed.  By this verdict, the jury remedied the injustice by sending clear messages to Star Transport and other employers that they will be held accountable for their unlawful employment practices.  Moreover, they signaled to Mr. Mohamed and Mr. Bulshale that religious freedom is a right for all Americans.”  Said EEOC Supervisory Trial Attorney Diane Smason, “We are pleased that the jury recognized that these - and all - employees are entitled to observe and practice their faith, no matter what that might be.”

Dr. Brown responds by saying, “So, the company was guilty of failing to provide training to ensure that the Muslims were not discriminated against; but when it comes to Christians, companies must provide training to ensure that those who identify as LGBT are not discriminated against … even it means discriminating against Christians.  How bizarre can this get?”

To further highlight the inequality Christians are facing today, Brown says, “Remember that when gay couples have asked Christian bakers to bake cakes for their ceremonies the bakers who refused have been found guilty by the courts; but when a gay baker refused to bake a cake opposing same-sex ‘marriage’ for a Christian customer, the Christian was found guilty.”

While there have been some moments of sanity within the courts … when freedoms for Christians have been preserved … clearly the stance of the Obama Administration is: When it comes to the religious rights of Muslims, they should be jealously protected; when it comes to the religious rights of Christians, they should be zealously rejected since the government has zero tolerance for bigotry.

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

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

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

’Tis the Season!

The Freedom From Religion Foundation and the American Civil Liberties Union have filed a lawsuit against the Concord Community Schools.  This Indiana public high school has presented a live Nativity scene that’s been a part of its Christmas celebration for decades.

The plaintiffs claim the public school is endorsing religion by allowing that scene and is violating the ‘establishment clause’ in the U.S. Constitution.

Roger Gannam of Liberty Counsel says during the Nativity scene, one student reads from the Bible while others act out the birth of Christ.  If government bodies mix secular and religious content during the Christmas season, courts have ruled that’s “absolutely acceptable” and doesn’t violate the Constitution, Gannam insists.

A local newspaper, The Elkhart Truth, reported that Concord High holds an annual Christmas Spectacular that includes secular Christmas favorites as well as the Nativity scene.  The school’s performing arts program puts on the annual event, which is based on the Christmas show at Radio City Music Hall.

Concord Schools Superintendent John Trout has said the school district will not back down despite the lawsuit.

Gannam says Liberty Counsel has offered to represent the school district pro bono.  “Because we’re confident that this is a case that should not have been filed and should be defeated in court,” he says.

The plaintiffs, a Concord student and his father, are asking the Christmas Spectacular celebration be kept secular now and in the future.

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

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

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

Christian Baker Takes Case to Colorado High Court

According to CBS News, the Colorado Court of Appeals ruled in August that the Christian faith of Jack Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop in Lakewood, Colorado, did not exempt him from making cakes for gay weddings … as such an act constitutes discrimination.

That ruling came after a decision made in May 2014 by the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, requiring Phillips to make cakes for same-sex celebrations, to engage in “re-educating his staff” and to file reports for two years that show that he is adhering to the state’s anti-discrimination laws.

According to Phillips’ attorneys with the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), the latest move of asking Colorado’s highest court is an attempt to secure a religious-freedom exemption for the baker and other Christians like him seeking to abide by their religious beliefs.  “The freedom to live and work consistently with one’s faith is at the heart of what it means to be an American,” Jeremy Tedesco, a lawyer with ADF, said in a press release. “Jack simply exercised the long-cherished American freedom to decline to use his artistic talents to promote a message with which he disagrees.”  He added, “We are asking the Colorado Supreme Court to ensure that government understands that its duty is to protect the people’s freedom to follow their beliefs personally and professionally, not force them to violate those beliefs as the price of earning a living.”

As reported by the Gospel Herald, Phillips’ legal trouble started in 2012 after he refused to provide a wedding cake for Charlie Craig and David Mullins.  “In an exchange lasting about 30-seconds, Phillips politely declined, explaining that he would gladly make them any other type of baked item they wanted, but that he could not make a cake promoting a same-sex ceremony because of his faith,” read a press release from Phillips’ team.  However, the couple complained to the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, which in turn cited Colorado’s Anti-Discrimination Act in finding Phillips guilty of discrimination … regardless of his beliefs on homosexuality.

Earlier this year, ADF filed a brief with the Colorado Court of Appeals arguing that the baker just declined to make a cake that violates his Christian beliefs, and that he would similarly reject “cakes with offensive written messages and cakes celebrating events or ideas that violate his beliefs, including cakes celebrating Halloween, anti-American or anti-family themes, atheism, racism, or indecency.”

On his part, Phillips has stated in the past that he would rather close down his bakery than go against his Biblical views on marriage.  “I believe I make a personal contact with [customers] in trying to create what [they] want. ... So it’s more personal, it’s not just a product,” he explained.  “With the wedding, I feel like I’m involved in the wedding and this is a wedding ceremony.  As a Christian, the Bible teaches that the relationship is sinful, and it’s wrong and that we’re to avoid participating in sin.  And in my mind this would be participating in that,” he said.  “My faith in Jesus Christ comes before my need to bake cakes for a living, and if I have to close down the bakery and pursue another line of work, I would do that before I would compromise my faith.”

Because I believe the outcome of this high court appeal has the potential of affecting every Christian, have you (yet) measured the extent to which you will not compromise your convictions … or cave-in to pressure?  What will you be willing to sacrifice … remembering that our Master ‘paid it all.’

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

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

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

‘Marriage’ continues to be Redefined as we Travel the Slippery Slope (Part 2)

Following on last week’s blog about furthering of the gay activists’ redefinition of ‘marriage’ called “throuples” in Canada, I want you to see the continual slide down the ‘slippery slope’ of sexual perversion.

Historically, one of the strongest arguments against consensual adult incest is that incestuous unions could result in children with genetic defects; however, within the homosexual community that concern wouldn’t apply to same-sex couples.  Thus argues an Irish political leader who says that gay cousins should be allowed to “marry.”  

No sooner had the Irish Legislature officially announce the legalizing of same-sex “marriage” does Senator David Norris call for gay cousins to be allowed to marry.  As reported in the Irish Times, Independent Senator Norris (himself gay) said, “Gay cousins should be allowed to marry each other following the same-sex marriage referendum.”  Mr. Norris said, “What is the problem with that?’’  Mr. Norris then added, “The regulations covering cousins marrying were introduced to protect the genetic pool, but that this would remain relatively untroubled by same-sex marriage.”

Dr. Michael Brown, President of FIRE School of Ministry, says this begs the next obvious question: “Then wouldn’t the same line of reasoning apply to gay brothers or sisters who wanted to ‘marry?’  And if the taboos against homosexual ‘marriage’ are now considered outdated and intolerant, why can’t the same thing be said about the taboos against adult incest?”

From a “politically correct” Christian perspective, if Leviticus 18 does not apply to believers today (including, of course, the prohibition against homosexual practice in Leviticus 18:22), then why should the prohibitions against incest in that same chapter (found in verses 6-17) still apply?  After all, as many argue, Jesus didn’t say anything about incest, so it couldn’t be that important, right?

Haven’t we heard all these arguments before when it comes to homosexual unions?

For several years, Dr. Brown has charted the growing call to normalize consensual adult incest, most recently documented in his book – “Outlasting the Gay Revolution” – where he includes a list of TV shows and Hollywood movies in which such relationships are embraced or even celebrated.

Yet when Dr. Brown dared raise the subject on the Piers Morgan show in December 2013, his only response was that he was being “ridiculous” and “silly” to speak of such things … despite the fact that there have been court cases advocating for consensual adult incest and that some European countries have already lifted legal sanctions against incestuous relationships.

In July 2014, in Australia, Judge Garry Neilson, from the district court in the state of New South Wales, likened incest to homosexuality, which was once regarded as criminal and ‘unnatural’ but is now widely accepted.  He said, “Incest [is] now only a crime because it may lead to abnormalities in offspring but this rationale was increasingly irrelevant because of the availability of contraception and abortion.”  The article reporting this was titled, “Australian judge says incest may no longer be a taboo.”  Based on his logic, there should be no objection to gay incestuous “marriages” since gay couples can’t produce children of their own.

In September 2014, a government-backed committee in Germany recommended that the government abolish laws criminalizing incest between siblings; arguing that such bans impinge upon citizens’ rights to sexual self-determination.  According to the findings of the German Ethics Council [made up of scientists, doctors, and lawyers], the right to incent between siblings is a “fundamental” one, and carries more weight than society’s “abstract protection of the family.” 

One month later, on October 9, 2014, the Huffington Post ran an article titled, “Should Incest Between Consenting Adult Siblings Be Legalized? Experts Sound Off.”  The article was posted in the Huffpost Gay Voices section, with some opening calling for the removal of taboos against adult incest in America.

Again, this is the inevitable downward slide that results when you separate marriage from procreation and from joining children to their mother and father.

Oh, you can mock my words.  I’ve grow accustom to often being a prophetic voice crying in the wilderness.  But you can also mark my words; not because their mine, but because they are God’s Word – the Truth!

The good news is that history is still being written and, just as we are the generation that opened wide the floodgates of radical change, we can be the generation that puts the brakes on this downward spiral and returns this nation to higher ground.

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

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

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel