“Driven from every other corner of the earth, freedom of thought and the right of private judgment in matters of conscience direct their course to this happy country as their last asylum."
— Samuel Adams , in a speech delivered in Philadelphia, Aug. 1, 1776
I just read an article about a pastor who was invited to participate in the inauguration to feature his work on ending human sex trafficking. His invitation was rescinded because someone found out he believed that marriage was between a man and a woman.
Apparently it is fine to have opinions in the U.S.A. as long as you agree with the media and those in power. Apparently working to protect women and children escape the sex trafficking is politically correct, but you can't believe in the Muslim, Jewish, and Christian definition of marriage.
If that pastor had said Mao Tze Tung was his favorite philosopher he might have stayed or at least he'd have a chance at being White House Communications Director! Or if he had performed songs about killing our troops, or policemen, or degrading women using a lot of foul language he'd have been in like flint...they certainly wouldn't be able to find anyone better than that ! according to past history of this administration anyway.
Am I to understand that you believe that this Pastor's free speech rights have been denied? I'm not sure speaking at the inauguration is a right. It seems to me that, if the administration in power disagrees with the good pastor, they did the right thing, much as I would expect the other party to do were it their inauguration.
As far as the marriage issue, I find that it is interesting that constitutionalists will defend the US Constitution against any number of alleged threats from the left, but when it comes to marriage or immigration we need a new amendment to circumvent the 14th Amendment.
Would you like to substantiate this story an any way, so we can see who decided to do what about what? A name, a place, single fact? Or are we meant to just agree with you based on faith in your insight and wisdom?
Thank you for asking. I have been waiting for someone to ask. Here is the feed from the Huffington poste:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/1 … 68824.html
Yep, it's pretty sad. Very typical of the current Administration.
Lawrence O'Donnell, Jr. an American political analyst, journalist, actor, producer, writer, and host of The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell, a weeknight MSNBC opinion and news program says the search for a new pastor will be a tricky task for the committee, re-framing it as, “In other words, we will ensure that whoever delivers the benediction rejects the same parts of the Bible that President Obama rejects and most Democrats reject, even though every word of the Bible is the word of God.”
So acccording to the MSLSD journalist the administration needs to look for a "pastor" who like President Obama and the Democrats rejects parts of the Bible. Good luck with that, a pastor who rejects parts of the Bible - oh wait, I know just who they want :
Please allow me to introduce him
He's a man of wealth and taste
He's been around for a long, long year
Stole many a mans soul and faith
And was round when Jesus Christ
Had his moment of doubt and pain
Made damn sure that pilate
Washed his hands and sealed his fate
He's pleased to meet you
Hope you guess his name
But what's puzzling you
Is the nature of his game
Well, if anyone knows where to find him it's someone in this administration.
Hi back at ya, Dont Taze Me Bro!
In Obama's Administration, the needle in the haystack would be the conservative instead of a radical Leftie. Matter of fact, I don't think there even IS a conservative in or anywhere near his group......
I'm sure they won't have any problem finding a "suitable" replacement to kiss Obama's feet at the Inauguration.
Blame the conservatives for not joining Obama's cabinet or being "a part of his administration".
The GOP has gone out of its way to rescind support for programs that they themselves once advocated for years.
You Obama haters make reasonable conservatives everywhere look bad.
You are good at making vague accusations - name some and we'll look at the facts, or are facts something you like to leave out ofyour rants?.
I could, but conservatives tend not to have a need for them.....
Good answer - I can tell you are a real intellectual! I'm not going to discuss anything with you, I'd be outgunned for sure.
Good one....did Rush Limbaugh come up with that for you?
In all seriousness though.....tell me where I'm wrong on that statement...
I'm not Bro, but I sure can tell you where you're wrong on the statement you refer to.
I'm a conservative, a Republican, and my views of Obama and etc. are indeed based on facts. We (conservatives) have need of facts. It has been liberals who seem to not need or want facts, even when those facts are readily visible. Or else they (many of them) do know the facts and just don't give a whit. Either way, they're doing America a disservice in the long run.
Hey Brenda, I got this one :-)
Cody, "In all seriousness" ?- you don't have an ounce of seriousness in you or you would have answered my simple question - "name some and we'll look at the facts, or are facts something you like to leave out of your rants?" You can't even give one example of your claim because you are all bluster, a cornucopia of talking points and misinformation and a coward to boot or you'd jump at the chance to demonstrate one example of what you claimed which is
"The GOP has gone out of its way to rescind support for programs that they themselves once advocated for years."
That's why I ask the question ...name one instance? You can't because you are simply a mouth piece for propagandists. You ask, "Tell me where I'm wrong on that statement?" You are incapable of citing one instance of where YOU think you are right so there is nothing to conclude except that you are wrong or just incapable of supporting your statements with facts - which in most forums makes you a liar or in incompetent delusional jack ass and I'm not the jack ass whisperer.
"you are simply a mouth piece for propagandists...."
"which in most forums makes you a liar or in incompetent delusional jack ass..."
Fair warning, that kind of language will get you suspended/banned from the forum if anyone reported you.
"You can't even give one example of your claim because you are all bluster..."
Maybe, but you are probably better served proving my point wrong if you're going to spend so much energy ranting.
"energy ranting?" Calling a spade a spade takes no energy - weaving a web of lies, well you know how that drains you when you can't produce anything to back up your lie, so then you have to revert to threats. Go ahead report me ifyou can't face the truth it'swhat I'd expect from you.- I certainly won't miss chatting with the likes of you and I'm past done here anyway - good ridance.
Whatever the facts of the administration I think its time for this country to PRAY! Just when I think I've heard it all I read something like this. LOVE and PEACE. What is wrong with our administration...oh I know the Democrat, Republican, Conservative, Liberal, Radical....they're all to blame. They have no conscience and no true belief in God. If they did, they wouldn't pick and choose who's right and who's wrong, morally, they would KNOW. What happened to IN GOD WE TRUST?
Okay, that's my rant.
And a good rant at that - we have to admit there is a flaw with our system of government, probably one we can never eliminate because mankind (republican, democrat, independent or any other party) is basically flawed and will never be able to completely set principle above self interest. That is just something that will never change although the USA has probably come the closest to doing it -- and still misses the mark by a long shot. Even God's chosen people failed miserably.
"Apparently it is fine to have opinions in the U.S.A. as long as you agree with the media and those in power."
And that is the very definition of 'political correctness'...agree with the left on all things, or face demonization. Up is down and down is up, and we are being heavily pressured to accept things like redefining the meaning of marriage to include the agenda of normalizing homosexuality.
Does anyone know the process to appeal an executive order? I don't. Laws can be taken to the Supreme Court but if the President makes a change or an interpretation of the Bill of Rights what is the mechanism to stop it from going into effect?
"Does anyone know the process to appeal an executive order?"
It can be set aside in court, or Congress can refuse to fund its execution. He could also be impeached for violating his oath of office, and as a last resort, the citizens can take up arms and drive the whole lot out of office.
Which is, of course, the whole point of the Second Amendment.
Any pastor that got an invite from that bunch can't be much of a Christian anyway. What business does a pastor have intermingling with Obama and his collection of godless socialists? Does the Democrat party stand against anything that is wrong? At the rate that they are descending into decadence, I wouldn't be surprised if mainstream candidates from the democrat party are openly defending pedophilia in the not so distant future.
Since Obama took Office, no, the Democrat Party doesn't stand against anything that's wrong. Even Bill Clinton had enough sense to not go too far. Back then he did anyway. Not today. Obama's audacity is the catalyst for change, alright; just not the right kind of change. It isn't even recognizeable as the Democrat Party anymore; it has been made to morph into something else entirely. Pandora's box has been opened, and the Left thinks they don't have to use their consciences anymore.
The sadest thing about it , thanks to the dumbing down of America in education and the media, standards are no longer existant, the double standard is the rule of the day and pandoring to the lowest common denominator for votes. Democrat buzz words like "fairness" and "equality" don't mean raise everyone up to a higher standard but drag those who succeed down to be equal with the masses who have their hand out to government - that's considered fair. They won't be happy until they turn prosperity of achievers into misery for all - that is their kind of equaity. They can't go too far, however or they'll killl the goose that lays the golden eggs (capitalism), but just like a parasite needs to keep it's host alive they'll suck al they can out of it forthe welfare state short of destroying it.
Do you really find it strange that invitees to the biggest political event in 4 years would place politics very high (top) of the list to invite someone or not?
A persons beliefs or character has nothing to do with attending such an event, only the political perception and interpretation that comes with an invite. It is politics, after all.
"Maybe, but you are probably better served proving my point wrong if you're going to spend so much energy ranting."
Was this your 'point'? :
"Good one....did Rush Limbaugh come up with that for you?"
I have come to realize that for the most part, the liberal notion of a reasoned, thoughtful argument is nothing more than childish snark, ridicule, personal attacks, and shouts of derision.
They are simply incapable of presenting a cogent argument.
That is because their feelings trump facts! Their definition of facts is any information that supports their point of view, whether it is true or not and if shown by you it is not true instead of showing character and admitting a mistake they choose to make you out to be a bigot or an extremist who wants children, the elderly and the handicapped to die (Obama just said as much on TV) or you worship the evil Rush Limbaugh (or other conservatives they have never listened to in their pathetic lives) anything to keep from dscussing the truth. That is the rule. There are exceptions to every rule but I have yet to meet this one...but, well, what does this have to do with guest speakers? :-) Sorry.
Is this about Louie Giglio? If so here are a few quotes from him on the issue, if anyone is wondering what he has said about it.
"due to a message of mine that has surfaced from 15 to 20 years ago, it is likely that my participation and the prayer I would offer will be dwarfed by those seeking to make their agenda the focal point of the inauguration. Clearly, speaking on this issue has not been in the range of my priorities in the past fifteen years. Instead, my aim has been to call people to ultimate significance as we make much of Jesus Christ. ”
”Neither I, nor our team, feel it best serves the core message and goals we are seeking to accomplish to be in a fight on an issue not of our choosing, thus I respectfully withdraw my acceptance of the President's invitation."
by savvydating 6 years ago
Would a Trump Presidency Be an Embarrassment for the United States and the Republican Party?Trump has been a Democrat most of his life. He brags that he can buy politicians, having given millions to Hillary's campaign and well as her Foundation. He scammed thousands of people out of millions of...
by Brenda Durham 9 years ago
Where is it?and What is it?Is it now the Activist Party?The Homosexual Party?The Vengeance Party?The Obama Worshippers Party?There seems to be little semblance left of what it used to be. Before 2008, it still held to at least SOME core moral values and SOME sense of manners. ...
by Jack Lee 5 years ago
It has been almost a year since he left office. Though he seems to stick around DC and make his comments occasionally about policies...The question I have for all is this - what is your opinion of this President in his 8 years in office...?Overall, has he been good or bad for America?Please use...
by Credence2 8 years ago
In light of the preparations for the commemoration of the 50th anniversary of the assassination of John F. Kennedy, past conversations with conservatives have come to mind.They told me that Democrats went away from them after Kennedy. Was it LBJ's Great Society, Medicare or Civil Rights...
by Brenda Durham 11 years ago
Are they still so enamored of Obama that he's the only candidate they'll consider?Is there no other Democrat who wants to run for President, and if so, why do you think that is?
by Readmikenow 2 years ago
According to Carville, both Sanders and Sens. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., were pushing "stupid" ideas about higher education. Carville added that he considered himself a "liberal" rather than a centrist -- but Democrats went too far even for him."They’ve tacked off the damn...
Copyright © 2022 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of Maven Coalition, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|