Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17

Thread: From the White House

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    483

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ractivist View Post
    The fifth column is real, as real as the devil himself.
    "The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world that he doesn't exist."

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    486

    Default

    You nailed it, Pastor Guest. The symptoms you described in your opening are an indication that we, as a nation, are of the world. Generations past knew that we should live in ​the world, but be focused on the Father and his Son.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    NEMS
    Posts
    6,020

    Default

    Just for informational purposes: Mrs. O'Hair was mentioned in a post, and the younger crowd may not know who that is:

    Madalyn Murray O'Hair (née Mays; April 13, 1919 – September 29, 1995),[1] was an American activist, founder of American Atheists, and the organization's president from 1963 to 1986. She created the first issues of American Atheist Magazine. O'Hair is best known for the Murray v. Curlett lawsuit, which led to a landmark Supreme Court ruling ending official Bible-reading in American public schools in 1963. That case came just one year after the Supreme Court prohibited officially sponsored prayer in schools in Engel v. Vitale.


    In 1995, O'Hair, her son Jon, and her granddaughter Robin disappeared from Austin, Texas. They were later found to have been kidnapped, murdered and mutilated by David Roland Waters, a convicted felon on parole, and fellow career criminal Gary Karr, and a third man, Danny Fry.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madalyn_Murray_O'Hair

    It should also be noted that O'Hair had another son, I think it was William, who became a Christian, and followed her to speaking engagements, and preached outside.

    It should also be noted that their bodies weren't discovered until 2001, so there was a big mystery, conspiracy theories, etc. surrounding them.
    Wise Men Still Seek Him

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    4,921

    Default

    The "world" is not a Sunday School defined quagmire of mere immorality.

    It is a system.....a system designed to entice people into a shorthand version of everything Satan promised Messiah on the mountaintop, overlooking the kingdoms of the earth.

    It is a system where Father is unnecessary....faith an outdated notion.
    The prophets and priests of Baal stand ready to give you, immediately and for a very steep compromise in godly principles, all the privileges and comforts you may desire.....you know, the ones that Father may not want you to have, or may want you to wait for, or may want you to work for, learning appreciation in the process.

    Want a nice home or new auto ? Father won't get on it and answer that prayer to your satisfaction ?
    Just go see the high priest down at the bank.
    That old thorn in your flesh that Father wants you to carry, for humbling sake....for long suffering sake ?
    Just go down to the sorcerers and physicians of the A.M.A. and they'll remove it immediately.
    Don't want the hassle of raising your own God-given offspring, and the responsibility of teaching them the precepts of life on earth, under God ? Just take them down and register them with the priests of Baal in his public education halls and let Satan instruct them well......
    Don't trust Father to provide you relief and deliverance in the event that He allows you to experience unspeakable calamity ?
    The money changers down at the local insurance office will wipe your tears away......
    Don't care to honor your father and mother in their old age, and care for them in your last days ?
    Corban has it covered. See Mark 7:11.
    Then look up "world" in your Strong's Concordance.
    Oh, faithless generation....thou art OF the world, indeed.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    NEMS
    Posts
    6,020

    Default

    An update to original OP:

    Justice Scalia on the Second Amendment: “Constitutional rights are enshrined with the scope they were understood to have when the people adopted them…”—District of Columbia v. Heller (200
    The National Rifle Association is right to support President Trump’s call for state-level Emergency Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs) – under which a court can take guns in rare situations for just a few days when there is evidence that a person may be on the verge of extreme violence – because, if written properly, such temporary measures are consistent with the original meaning of the Constitution’s Second Amendment and Due Process Clause.


    President Trump supports states’ passing laws to allow for ERPOs. Details are still being developed and so reports may be updated as legislative debate begins. But the basic concept is that if a family member informs law enforcement that their loved one is spiraling out of control into violence, and swears an affidavit giving the details – under penalty of perjury, so the informant can go to prison if they are lying – then a judge could issue an ERPO to temporarily confiscate weapons in that person’s possession.


    Within a very short period, perhaps just three days, the person whose weapons were seized could demand a court to review the ERPO. The burden would be on the government to show, perhaps by “clear and convincing evidence” (a very difficult standard to meet) – that the person truly is at least temporarily a danger to himself or to others. If so, then the police can continue to hold the weapons while further proceedings take place.

    If the government cannot produce that much evidence, then the weapons must be immediately returned to the owner.


    This is very different from a regime like California’s law. In California, an ERPO (called a “gun violence restraining order” in that state) requires only “substantial evidence” – meaning you have to show something significant, but far less than a 51 percent likelihood – that a person is dangerous. If that minimal evidentiary standard is met, then police can take away all weapons from that person for 21 days. After those 21 days, then it can be extended for a full year if the petitioner presents “clear and convincing evidence” that a person is dangerous, and possibly extended even further.


    The NRA strongly opposed as unconstitutional California’s ERPOs, but support states adopting ERPO laws as outlined by President Trump. (These laws are properly left to the states under the Constitution’s Tenth Amendment as part of a state’s core police powers over public safety and public health. The Constitution gives no such powers to the federal government.)


    How does President Trump’s recommendation square with the Constitution, which the NRA has fought to protect since 1871?


    The Second Amendment includes, “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” The First Amendment has similar language in its Free Speech Clause, which provides, “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech.”


    Both the First and Second Amendments were written by the First Congress in 1789 and ratified by the states in 1791 as parts of the original Bill of Rights to the U.S. Constitution. Neither of them was an absolute right. For any principled constitutional originalist, the question would be what it meant in 1791 to “abridge” the “freedom of speech” or “infringe” upon the “right to keep and bear arms.”


    The Supreme Court over the decades has looked at various kinds of speech that were not protected as part of the “freedom of speech” in 1791, so restricting or banning such speech is not “abridging” First Amendment rights. The kinds of speech that are not protected by free speech rights include: perjury, defamation (slander and libel), advocating lawlessness, obscenity, false statements to law enforcement, “fighting words,” child pornography, fraud, threats, and imminent threats to public order.


    So too with the Second Amendment. The right applies only to law-abiding and peaceable adult American citizens. As Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in his historic Supreme Court opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller (200, “Constitutional rights are enshrined with the scope they were understood to have when the people adopted them, whether or not future legislatures or (yes) even future judges think that scope is too broad.”


    The Second Amendment did not to apply to foreigners, children, dangerous criminals, or dangerous, mentally defective people. It also applies only to “arms,” not to any sort of explosive device (called “ordnance” in 1791), devices that an average adult could not carry (“bear”) over significant distances, or to certain types of bizarre weapons that inspired fear in average people (called “affrighting” in the eighteenth century).


    Scalia noted in Heller that there were “longstanding prohibitions” on gun ownership that were consistent with the Second Amendment, adding that “there will be time enough to expound upon the historical justifications for the exceptions we have mentioned if and when those exceptions come before us.”


    The challenge is determining what sort of people are not “peaceable.” It is easy to determine if a person is a citizen or an adult. It is slightly more difficult to define “law-abiding,” a term that should definitely exclude violent felons but include people who in modern terms write a bad check or get a speeding ticket. But many people agree on certain standards for lawful conduct, which point to the constitutional line separating law-abiding people from dangerous criminals who have forfeited their gun rights.


    ERPOs are based on determining that a person might not be “peaceable.” However, the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment commands, “No State shall … deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”


    In other words, a person can be deprived of their rights and their property, but only after “due process of law” that satisfies the U.S. Constitution. It is a very demanding standard to meet.


    The task is identifying people who are truly dangerous but have never been convicted of a disqualifying crime. Truly dangerous people have no Second Amendment rights, but a person who is merely depressed because of a serious illness or the death of a loved one and is seeking help from a counselor is not constitutionally disqualified as a menace. The Second Amendment continues to apply to people going through a tough time, but who still understand and embrace the difference between right and wrong.


    As Judge Alice Batchelder of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit wrote in her concurring opinion in the Second Amendment case Tyler v. Hillsdale County Sheriff’s Department (2016), “By examining the Founding generation’s conception of ‘right,’ as well as the principles of Founding-era mental-health law, we can come to a quite definite conclusion in this case.”


    Batchelder explained that in 1791, “according to Founding-era legal definitions, an insane person was someone who had lost his reason.” She continued, “An insane person was similar to a minor who had not yet attained the age of reason – both were unable, by definition, to exercise their rights because rights could, in the central case, be exercised only by those possessing reason.”


    “This understanding was well reflected in Founding-era legal doctrine,” Batchelder added, then explained the various laws and procedures by which a person’s rights could be restricted in 1791 because that person was experiencing serious mental or emotional illness.


    “Significantly, such deprivations were not once-for-all,” she noted, then described the process whereby people with mental illnesses could be restored to all their rights as American citizens.


    “It might be argued that guns should be subject to different rules because they are so dangerous,” wrote Batchelder. “But while the dangerousness of guns may be relevant when considering what sort of showing someone must make to get his gun rights back, that fact cannot justify treating gun rights as fundamentally different from other rights.”

    She quotes Justice Samuel Alito, who wrote in the only other historic Supreme Court case to date on the Second Amendment, McDonald v. Chicago (2010), that the Second Amendment is not “a second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than other Bill of Rights guarantees.”


    “Less obvious to the contemporary judicial mind are the Founding-era fears of tyranny and defenselessness that provided the impetus behind the Second Amendment,” Batchelder opines on how to consider gun rights in light of mental illness. “What is not debatable is that we … are not philosopher kings empowered to ‘fix’ things according to the dictates of what we fancy is our superior insight, nor rubber stamps, approving whatever laws the legislatures of this country happen to pass.”


    While the details of these ERPO laws must be examined carefully, President Trump’s proposal and the NRA’s support for it may very well result in state laws that are completely consistent with the Constitution’s rights to bear arms and due process, and America’s almost 100 million gun owners should be satisfied that their rights are fully protected by a president and a flagship organization determined to uphold those rights.
    http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...ection-orders/

    No one is saying "No" (...shall not infringe...) all they are doing is saying how much. Or what can we do.
    Wise Men Still Seek Him

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    DFW, Texas
    Posts
    2,215

    Default

    And while we are at it, if there was ever a mental issue in someone's history let's make sure they can not get their hands on a nail gun, knives, cars, rocks, drum sticks, knitting needles and a whole host of other assault weapons
    "You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for,
    another person must work for without receiving."Adrian Rogers, 1931

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    The Sanctuary
    Posts
    11,507

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dstraito View Post
    And while we are at it, if there was ever a mental issue in someone's history let's make sure they can not get their hands on a nail gun, knives, cars, rocks, drum sticks, knitting needles and a whole host of other assault weapons
    There was once a time when those who were adjudicated a danger to others were placed in institutions.
    Pastor Guest

    Free E- Book!

    "Steps Toward the Mark of the Beast"
    The Christian's Guide to the How and Why of
    the Coming Cashless/RFID Economic System


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •