Volume 3, Issue 10 - May 1, 2007~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Campus Intolerance Leads to the Arrest of Christians and to University Police Officer being Suspended
By Dennis Green
April 18, 2007
This morning, Kutztown University (Pennsylvania), exhibited intolerance and hostility towards the gospel. Shortly after we began ministering at Kutztown University a crowd of approximately 400 to 500 students surrounded the team of Gospel preachers.
Even though this is a state university and a classic free speech venue, the university police force ordered the Christians to leave the campus immediately. The police then, at the urging of a hostile crowd, arrested two preachers from the ministry team. As the remainder of the team left with police escort, they were followed by several hundred angry and profane lovers of tolerance. The ministry team is a unified outreach of several gospel ministries from across the nation. The two team members who were arrested were charged with disorderly conduct. One university police officer was relieved of his immediate duties and then suspended when he questioned the Constitutionality of participating in the obvious discrimination of the Christian group. He is now awaiting further disciplinary actions.
"OFFICER UPDATE" On April 26, Officer Steve Armbruster was called upon to appear for a disciplinary meeting. He was given 5 days with no pay. He has served with the Kutztown University police for 15 years.
Hear a report on "One News Now": Christian street preachers booted from Penn. school
Hear two interviews with Dennis Green on "The Heart of the Matter".
Interview #1 with Ralph Ovadal
Interview #2 with Ralph Ovadal
View a terribly biased and misleading news report from WFMZ TV. Violence is mentioned twice even though there was none.
Kutztown newscast.
Click HERE for photos!
Approximately 30 Christians participated in the tour. Here is a recap of the stops made.
Please read more here.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Pro-lifer's litigation appeals 2003 arrest for public speech
By Ed Thomas
OneNewsNow.com
April 25, 2007
A pro-life demonstrator who was threatened with arrest on a public right-of-way will appeal his case to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in North Carolina. Dennis Green's lawsuit tests whether it was legal to threaten his arrest for not obtaining a permit before proceeding with his activity.
Hear This Report
Green and several friends and family members were speaking about pro-life issues in a public area in 2003; Green was carrying a sign and distributing literature about abortion. Attorneys from Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) say he was approached by police officers and threatened with "citation" for picketing without a permit, unless he left the area.
The suit alleges that Green's activities do not meet the city's definition of "picketing" -- and that the right of First Amendment speech (in public) does not require submission to a permit process.
"The Constitution does not require individuals to obtain governmental permission in order to exercise their First Amendment rights,” says ADF senior counsel Nate Kellum in a press release. "Such laws are unconstitutional and serve only to stifle the speaker."
The case is Green v. City of Raleigh.
All Original Content Copyright 2006-2007 American Family News Network - All Rights Reserved
URL: http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/04/pro-lifers_litigation_appeals_.php
---------------------------------------------------------
Policy Council Files Suit Against South Florida Police for Violation of First Amendment Rights
ORLANDO, Florida, April 26 /Christian Newswire/ -- The Florida Family Policy Council has filed a lawsuit in Federal District Court to seek a judgment against Broward County and the Sunrise Police Officer who violated the civil rights of volunteers for the Florida4Marriage.org amendment last summer.
In June of 2006, Florida Family Policy Council staff members and volunteers were collecting petitions for the Florida Marriage Protection Amendment as a paid exhibitor under a tent with several other ministries at a Promise Keepers Conference in Sunrise, Florida.
What began as a productive day of distributing information and collecting petitions turned into a constitutional showdown when several officers from the Sunrise Police Department showed up and shut down the gathering of petitions.
The officer in charge, Sergeant Stephen Allen, took it upon himself to lecture the petition collectors on Jesus' view of homosexuality and the Bible's instruction to obey authorities, all the while refusing to produce the legal basis for denying the volunteers' right to collect petitions for Florida4Marriage.org.
To add insult, after removing the Florida4Marriage.org petitions from the exhibit table, Sgt. Allen mockingly kissed another male officer.
"We have the highest regard for law enforcement officers in this state who lay down their lives to protect us everyday. But we are simply not going to be discriminated against because certain bad cops do not like our message. This was a blatant violation of the first amendment," said FFPC president John Stemberger, who was personally threatened with arrest by Sgt. Allen if the petitions remained on the exhibit table.
"We had paid a fee to be an exhibitor and had full rights to distribute literature and collect petitions," said Stemberger. "The officer in charge appeared to have a personal agenda and displayed a lack of professionalism as well as an utter disregard for our constitutional rights."
Despite these types of intimidation tactics and threats, the Florida4Marriage.org effort continues to move forward. Approximately 21,000 more petitions are needed to reach the required 611,009 petitions to place the amendment on the 2008 ballot.
Current information about the citizens initiative can been found online at www.Florida4Marriage.org .
A Complete Copy of the Complaint in this case can be found in the "lawsuit" hyperlink link above or on our website Newsroom tab at www.FLfamily.org .
For More Info Contact 407-251-1957 or send a e-mail to Media@FLfamily.org
News Source: Christian Newswire
-----------------------------------------------------------------
License to Seize Our Children
By Berit Kjos - (1994)
See Child "Protection" Services? and
When the state becomes parent: Child protection services agencies accused of abuse.
Can social workers remove children from parents without proof of abuse, without a court order, without explanation, and without liability?
Yes, they can. On April 25, the U.S. Supreme Court let stand a U.S. Courts of Appeals ruling that social workers are entitled to "absolute immunity from liability" which "ensures that they [social workers] are not deterred from vigorously performing their jobs as they might if they feared personal liability."[i] The high court rejected an appeal from Ian Hoffman, a father who was arrested and stripped of his right to see his daughter resulting from false allegations of child abuse. The two social workers who brought the allegations neither questioned the child nor allowed the father a chance to respond.
That Hoffman was later cleared by a jury and awarded permanent custody of his child doesn't change the effects of the high court's 7-to-2 vote. Given vast discretionary power to punish families believed to violate their standards, today's social workers may confiscate children and divide families without accountability to the public that they supposedly serve. Apparently parents have little or no recourse.
Which parents are at risk?
Please read more here.
News Source: Protect Our Children from CPS
------------------------------------------------------------
Politically Active Women of the Bible
By Ellen Sheets
In today’s world, many women are becoming increasingly politically active. Women hold numerous appointed and elected positions, including positions in the federal senate, congress and judiciary. Many of these women are Godly women who love the Lord and attend church regularly. No doubt the example of Deborah in Judges 4-5 has inspired many a woman to “engage the culture” and run for political office.
The Bible also gives an illustration of a woman of tremendous political influence. This was a woman who was inspired with a master plan that united the efforts of church and the state, and she personally coordinated this plan that accomplished a significant goal that completely fulfilled her husband’s wishes.
Her name was Jezebel.
She usurped the rightful authority of her husband, the king, wrongfully enacted wicked legislation that was enacted by the church, was responsible for the false accusation and murder of a God-fearing, law-abiding man (1 – the Law says not to sell your property but to keep it), and personally brought the wrath of God down on her family, and God held her husband personally accountable for her actions.
The Bible gives some very specific commands about the role of women in the family and church. However, the main focus of this article is not to illustrate (or defend) these admonitions, but rather to briefly summarize.
Please read more here.
News Source: Institute for Principled Policy, www.principledpolicy.com
---------------------------------------------------------------
News Stories from ChristianLibertyParty.com:
HOW SHOULD WE THEN LIVE?
Written by Rev. Rusty Lee Thomas
Saturday, 28 April 2007
Recently I ministered at an event in Lexington, MA. called “Someone Stole My Nation, and I want Her Back.” The following is the message I delivered there on April 20th, 2007. This is the day after the anniversary of the famous "shot heard around the world."
“For the transgression of a land many are the princes thereof: but by a man of understanding and knowledge the state thereof shall be prolonged.” (Proverbs 28:2)
This was the question asked by Francis Schaeffer, as he pondered the decline of our Christian, Western thought and culture. It became the basis of his best-selling book and video series. His analysis was thorough and his warnings should be heeded today.
For the last several decades, we have witnessed a systematic assault against America’s godly heritage, the Christian faith, and the Biblical principles that has created the most freest and blessed nation in the bloody history of mankind. In the name of law, however, the Supreme Court, has unleashed upon our nation a spirit of lawlessness. Under the color of law they have been destroying the substance of our freedoms.
At the same time, the citizens of America, in the name of freedom, have turned our liberty into licentiousness. Our Founding Fathers knew that these two enemies posed the greatest threat against America’s experiment with liberty. They understood that only a virtuous people who self-govern themselves under God can remain a free people. Only a citizenry that placed inward restraints upon mankind’s inherent lusts can enjoy the true blessings of freedom.
Read more...
------------------------------------------------------
Meeting in Boise
Written by Keith Humphrey
Friday, 27 April 2007
We arrived near the end of the Constitution Party National Committee meeting in Boise, Idaho, on 4-21-2007. We could tell that we were expected; inasmuch as the hosts, Paul and Sue Venable, had hired a security guard to watch the door for certain unnamed troublemakers that might try to disrupt the meeting. Upon seeing us standing at the door, Sue Venable gave immediate warning to her superiors. This is what she had been afraid of, and now it was coming to pass- just as she had foreseen...
Not quite as she had foreseen. Thom Holmes, who recognized us from previous National Committee Meetings, knew we would do nothing to disrupt the meeting, ignored her warnings, and graciously received us like a statesman. He escorted us in to take video of the final speech by Will Grigg. It was a fine speech, but his appeals to place principle above all, didn’t seem to find the mark. It was as if those in attendance felt that they had already done that, else they wouldn’t have made it this far, would they? We had hoped for more of a “blast the compromisers” speech, but perhaps it didn’t matter by now anyway.
Afterwards, Scott Watson confronted Mary Starrett in the lobby, and appealed to her to consider the evidence, and come back to the virtue of the one who called us to stand up for principle, Michael Peroutka. She said she didn’t know anything about these issues in the Constitution Party that transpired before she became involved. Surely, we thought, this could not have been unintentional. Perhaps she doesn’t want to know, lest she have to face the same crossroads that we all did, one year earlier in Tampa.
Afterwards, we went to a Christian Liberty Society meeting. Leaders we had invited from the Constitution Party of Oregon, and the Constitution Party of Montana, declined to attend due to time constraints, but they sent written statements. There were several former members of the Constitution Party of Idaho in attendance, as well as a few visitors from out of state. What really mattered most though, was that it seemed that Christ was present among us.
Read more...
---------------------------------------------------------
PORK and PRISONS....n/t/q
Written by Gene Malone
Thursday, 26 April 2007
Post
April 25, 2007
PORK and PRISONS....
~ FIRST, PORK- U S. Senator Feingold (D-Wisc) has joined with the Rino U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) sponsoring a bill, not an amendment, to give the President a partial-veto in lining out "unwanted pork/earmarks" in Congressional legislation. The US Supreme Court found this idea unconstitutional (a rare use of the word by the SC) with the morphing of executive/legislative powers. Correct. So the new attempt calls for vetoed financial/state items in the national budget to return to the Congress to be acted upon (with specifications not usually given in the media) or not giving the appearance of Congressional sovereignty.
Well, remember the McCain-Feingold campaign reform folly?
A problem, the US Constitution is quite clear in changing its intent of legislation and the executive duties. Article V of the main body of the US Constitution explains how an amendment is made. The Feingold/Ryan attempt to limit needless spending is presented as a bill in violation of Article V which calls for an amendment in such a drastic lawmaking change.
More obvious is that Congress can refrain from wasteful spending by its own fiscal restraints and the federal government could revert back to Constitutional principles letting only Congress appropriate money for items under Art. 1,Sec. 8 and quit strewing money for state/city: roads, bridges, buses, pet state corporate projects, harbors, malls, and every peculiar possibility of spending the national treasury into national bankruptcy.
Read more...
----------------------------------------------------------
Name Your Mayor in Your Prayer
Written by Reed R. Heustis, Jr.
Thursday, 26 April 2007
Christian Constitutionalist
April 25, AD 2007
One of the most important responsibilities of Christian citizens in America is to pray for all those who are in authority. From various pulpits across America, prayers for the President of the United States can be heard every Lord's Day. Most of these prayers specifically refer to the President by name. Although the names of Presidents change from one election cycle to another, it is a certainty that when most Christians pray for their leaders, they will specifically pray for the President by name.
Unfortunately however, Christian citizens rarely pray for those authority figures who are closest to them: their State and local leaders. In fact, most citizens - Christian or otherwise - don't even know who their closest leaders are.
While almost everybody knows who the President is, fewer people know who their two U.S. Senators are; and even fewer still cannot even name their respective U.S. Representative. At the Federal level, congressional power is supposed to be closest to the people, which is why the United States Constitution vested Congress with more power than it granted the executive and judiciary branches. Do people realize that without the Congress, the President cannot sign bills into law?
Read more...
-----------------------------------------------------
LARRY and BILL...n/t/q
Written by Gene Malone
Thursday, 26 April 2007
Post
April 23, 2007
LARRY and BILL~Larry King gave the impeached President Bill Clinton a love-in interview to bolster Hillary's chances to win in 2008. The ex-President looked wonderful with a super hair-do and at ease with the liberal host. Clinton said he wanted to help Hillary's campaign and stay in the background himself. The love-in continued to the end with Larry leaning close to Bill with a near-kiss following Larry's last words to BC, "You really love Hillary don't you? " as BC cooed, " I really do." Interview ended.
In the meantime HC said she might appoint BC to be a global ambassador or was it an ambassador for the entire universe as BC has promised to do what HC says. The Clinton's are back. Is the US ready for a socialist President (either B. Hussein Obama or HC?
Still, HC, is campaigning for the black-vote going back to her southern accent and pandering speech style.
Oh, is she insincere but haughty.
Read more...
----------------------------------------------------
Is It “Enough” To Be A Christian Legislator?
Written by Buddy Hanson
Thursday, 26 April 2007
Electing Christians to public office, as important as that is, will only help solve our cultural challenges if they govern according to a Christian worldview. Otherwise the legislator or judge will be a well-intentioned “conservative” who supports the 2nd Table of the Law (commandments 5-10), but who hesitates to proclaim the authority behind his ethics (the 1st Table, commandments 1-4). This denial of God means all political debates come down to conservative man’s word against liberal man’s word. We cannot expect to improve our culture based upon, “He said, she said” reasoning. Make no mistake, we must do what we can to elect Christians to public office, but we must also be aware that only one in twenty adult Christians has a developed Christian worldview. This means we have a big time discipleship job to do to help our brothers understand how to connect their Spiritual Dots from their head to their feet and incorporate biblical truths into their legislative decisions.
The pages of the Old Testament show that no form of civil government has ever succeeded unless it has based its governance upon biblical principles.
As the prophet Isaiah exclaims:
To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.
Isaiah 8.20
Christian Policy Network & Christian Worldview Resources Center
Buddy Hanson
bhanson@graceandlaw.com
www.graceandlaw.com
Taken from the April 23, 2007 "TGIM" Volume 7, Number 17.
---------------------------------------------------------------
My thoughts on the upholding of the "Partial Birth Abortion Ban"
Written by James Niemela
Thursday, 26 April 2007
Dear prolife friends nationwide,
Undoubtedly most of you have heard that the Supreme Court of the US recently upheld the "Partial Birth Abortion Ban". I have grave concerns about this ruling. Putting aside for a minute the fact that the Supreme Court is not a legislative body and does not make laws, this ruling is totally worthless in that it will not save the life of one baby. Further, it is evil in that it specifically states other ways abortionists may kill babies without violating the ban. If you would like to read the opinion, please click on this link. (Note: when they refer to a "D&E procedure", they are referring to abortions in which the babies are torn out in pieces; an "intact D&E" is a partial birth abortion.)
This ruling upholds a law which purportedly bans the procedure commonly called "partial birth abortion", by which a preborn baby is delivered, usually feetfirst, until only the top of it's head remains in the mother's body. The murderer then stabs a scissors in the back of the baby's head, and sucks it's brains out with a strong vacuum machine. However, this ruling in no way infringes on other methods used to kill babies. For instance, on page 17 of the opinion, the court found that "First, the person performing the abortion must "vaginally delive[r] a living fetus." 1531(b)(1)(A). The Act does not restrict an abortion procedure involving the delivery of an expired fetus. The Act, furthermore, is inapplicable to abortions that do not involve vaginal delivery (for instance, hysterotomy or hysterectomy)." Further, on page 34, the court found that "If the intact D&E procedure is truly necessary in some circumstances, it appears likely an injection that kills the fetus is an alternative under the Act that allows the doctor to perform the procedure." In other words, the ban only is applicable to the partial delivery of a live baby; if it is killed first (by injection or otherwise) the ban does not apply.
Read more...
-----------------------------------------------------------
Supreme Court turns down Michael New
Written by Daniel New
Monday, 23 April 2007
Former Army Specialist Michael New's petition to the US Supreme Court, asking them to review his case, and the lack of due process and the sudden change in the legal "standard of review" applied to it, has been denied. Thus ends a legal battle that began in August of 1995.
What does this ruling mean to Americans? If you are in the military, it means that you and your attorneys have no right to present evidence in your defense in courts-martial, for evidence has suddenly become "discretionary element" of the prosecution. This means that, if the judge and the prosecutor want the jury to see your evidence, they will allow it, and if they don't, they will deny it. And the bottom line on this issue is that no member of the Armed Forces can mount an effective legal defense. They will be denied due process, and the "standard of review" that has been recognized by all Appellate Courts for over 40 years has just been shredded. Lawyers will understand the legal chaos and confusion that has just been upheld.
If you are in the military, or considering enlisting, it also means that the Executive Branch now will feel completely at liberty to ignore the US Constitution, and place you in a United Nations uniform, under the command authority of a foreign officer, to pursue a military policy that is distinct from the legal and official policies of the United States of America. In effect, you may be turned into a mercenary at the discretion of the President. You are for sale, rent, hire, or loan, as determined by the political party of the moment, and you, or your children, may be ordered to fight, bleed and possibly die for the United Nations, without due process.
Read more...
-----------------------------------------------------------
Uncomfortable being a Christian?
Written by Wayne Harris
Monday, 23 April 2007
What is your response when your Father tells you what needs to be done? Do you reply, “Yes, Lord,” and then not do it? Do you reply, “No!” and then do it? Perhaps you are a child who says, “Yes, Lord” and does it. Our Father in heaven has given us plenty of guidance. The question is, “What are we doing with it?”
Are you still waiting for a sign from heaven? Look toward the vineyard. While you are waiting for a sign, the grapes on the vine are rotting. Will you work today? Can your Father’s desire be any clearer?
“I might as well take it easy,” someone says. “We are being massacred. Many in the media are murdering Christianity. Comedians mock God. Lewis Black called the God of the Old Testament a “p_ _ _ k” recently and thousands laughed. They make chocolate Jesus and people think it is great. We cannot win. Why try?”
Do you follow Jesus Christ because you love Him? Or, do you follow Jesus only when it is popular to do so? Do you live for God because living for God is cool? Or, do you abandon living for God when others mock Him?
Read more...
------------------------------------------------------------
The “Opiate of the People”
Written by Buddy Hanson
Saturday, 21 April 2007
The socialist philosopher Karl Marx once remarked that “religion” is the “opiate” of the people” The point he was emphasizing is that the state should be careful to always keep certain religious views available to the citizens because they must have somewhere to go to comfort themselves from the heavy hand of the tyrannical socialist state. To Marx’s way of thinking any religion would suffice, as long as it didn’t hold its adherents accountable to live-out their religious beliefs. “Just keep your beliefs inside your homes and churches and you will be allowed to continue to worship,” was Marx’s (and the KGB’s) point (and is the prevailing thought of many of today’s American legislators and judges, sadly including many who profess to be Christians).
Marx knew that absolute Christian principles of civil government would prove harmless to a non-Christian state’s agenda. Unfortunately during the past 150 years, Christianity has become the “opiate” of the vast majority of our brothers and sisters. As a result, it has become culturally irrelevant. It is not uncommon for pastors to teach their congregations that their beliefs are irrelevant to current social and cultural issues. I’m certain you’ve heard the statements:
*“Religion and politics don’t mix,” and
*“Politicians are dishonest and can’t be trusted.”
Such statements beg the question: “If Christians have nothing to do with the public square, who’s left but people who are dishonest and untrustworthy!” Was Marx correct, then, when he claimed that the chief value of religion was to placate citizens? The answer is both “No and yes.” As a non-Christian he was wrong in lumping all religions together as though there is no appreciable difference. Except for Christianity, he would be correct, but Christianity is the one true religion. Indeed, without the absolute truths of Scripture, no one would be able to definitively define “good and evil behavior.”
Christian Policy Network &
Christian Worldview Resources Center
bhanson@graceandlaw.com
www.graceandlaw.com
--------------------------------------------------------
In Defense of the Innocent
Written by Angela Wittman
Saturday, 21 April 2007
“The answer to ending legalized child-murder-by-abortion has been staring the pro-life movement in the face for over 34 years. The answer is right in the text of the Roe decision itself. Legal 'personhood' at fertilization, WITH NO EXCEPTIONS, is the "sword" which slices through the "Gordian knot" of the three decades long, and 50 MILLION deaths, of America's abortion holocaust.”
(Steve Lefemine, pro-life missionary and lobbyist for the Right to Life Act of South Carolina, February 16, 2007)
This editorial is written in defense of the innocent preborn children who have become the most persecuted human beings in America. It has been said that the most dangerous place to be in America today is a mother’s womb. It is estimated that 24% of all pregnancies end in abortion, including spontaneous miscarriages; and from 1973 through 2002 more than 42 million legal surgical abortions have occurred.(1)
This year there have been 8 states to propose banning abortions: Alabama (SB 59), Colorado (SB 143), Georgia (HB 1), Montana (HB 403), North Dakota (HB 1466 and 1489), South Carolina (H 3284 and S. 313), Texas (HB 175 and SB 186) and Virginia (HB 2797). (2)
Read more...
------------------------------------------------------
Two Tragic Hours at Virginia Tech
Written by Teno Groppi
Friday, 20 April 2007
I'm not talking about the two hours between the recent tragic shootings. I'm referring to the two hours between Blacksburg (Tech's town) and Grundy, Virginia, home of the Appalachian Law School.
In 2002 a man who had flunked out of law school opened fire at Appalachian, killing three. He could've killed dozens like Cho Seung-Hui at Virginia Tech, but two students were able to obtain their guns and stop the assailant.
VA Tech, being a public school, was bound by the "gun free zone" statue upheld by Virginia's Attorney General just last year. That means only criminals can have guns on the Hokie campus, unlike at the private institute in Grundy.
We saw the same situations at other "gun free zones" (all schools). Two young maniacs in 1999 at Columbine killed a dozen, and wounded two dozen, and in 1998 two younger maniacs in Jonesboro, Ark killed five and maimed 15.
Read more...
-----------------------------------------------------------
GOD, GUNS AND VIRGINIA TECH
Written by Doug Newman
Friday, 20 April 2007
So much has been said about Monday’s orgy of lead and blood on the campus at Virginia Tech that I could go on for hours addressing all the different issues. Neither you nor I have time for this, so I will keep things brief.
Whenever there is a show stopping event like all the usual people come forth with all the predictable responses. The responses we hear almost always revolve around laws, regulations, programs and policies.
You cannot go five minutes without hearing someone ask: “What can we, as a society, do…?”
America already has more laws, regulations, programs and policies than any other society on earth. None of them prevented Monday’s carnage. The answer is not in politics.
We need to mourn the dead, and to pray for the injured and their loved ones. Indeed, we need to pray for the entire Hokie community that they may have courage and strength in the days ahead. (1)
Read more...
-------------------------------------------------------------
SAF Observes 232nd Anniversary of Lexington, Concord Battles
Written by PRNewswire-USNewswire
Thursday, 19 April 2007
BELLEVUE, Wash., April 18 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Thursday, April 19 marks the 232nd anniversary of the battles of Lexington and Concord that started the American Revolution with the "Shot Heard Round the World," and the Second Amendment Foundation notes that the aftermath of this week's events in Virginia clearly show that European animosity toward our right to keep and bear arms still exists.
In the wake of the horrible tragedy at Virginia Tech, noted SAF founder Alan M. Gottlieb, European media -- and particularly the BBC -- has bared its visceral disdain toward America's Second Amendment and the traditions of liberty and independence it represents and protects.
"Clearly," Gottlieb said following three days of combative day and night interviews and debates primarily conducted by BBC reporters and commentators, "there remains to this day a horrible, condescending attitude toward armed American citizens. Haven't the British yet gotten over the fact that a ragtag, often disorganized force of American colonials, wielding their own arms, was able to defeat what at the time was the most powerful armed force in the world?
Read more...
Please read more at: www.ChristianLibertyParty.com
-----------------------------------------------------
For His Glory,
Angela Wittman
(Publisher/Editor of Christian Heritage News)
For subscription or unsubscription services, please contact the editor.
NOTE: Even though all effort is made to only publish and share solid Christian news, commentary and information, Christian Heritage News does not necessarily endorse all that you may read in the articles appearing above, or at the sites of the news providers to which you will be linked. Please use Biblical discernment. Thank you, ed.
