A Christian homeschool girl in New Hampshire has been ordered into government-run public school for having "sincerely held" religious beliefs.
An attorney working with the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) has filed motions with a New Hampshire court, asking it to reconsider its order to send the 10-year-old homeschooled girl into public school. According to ADF allied attorney John Anthony Simmons, the court acknowledges that the girl in question is doing well socially and academically, but he adds that the court went too far when they determined that the girl's Christian faith was a "bit too sincerely held and must be sifted, tested by, and mixed among other worldviews."
Simmons contends that parents have a "fundamental right to make educational choices for their children." However, the girl's parents divorced in 1999, and she is now living with her mother who has been homeschooling the child since first grade. As part of the schooling, the young girl has been attending supplemental public school classes. As part of parental custody hearings, a court-appointed guardian stated that the child reflected her mother's "rigidity" on questions of faith and added that girl's best interest would be served by exposure to a public school setting. According to the New Hampshire Supreme Court, home-based education is an enduring American tradition and right. ADF concludes, based on that statement, that there is no legitimate legal basis for this latest court ruling.
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Education/Default.aspx?id=659638
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Monday, August 24, 2009
Thursday, August 20, 2009
A Warning Against "OBAMACARE"
An article I picked up on today....Why is this so hard to understand?????
Lincoln's Gettysburg Address comes to mind. In the art of persuasion, it's often most effective to paint in brief, colorful strokes. A savvy reader with the handle "Jerseyvet" made an incisive observation after perusing my latest column concerning Obamacare: "Start out with the premise that the demand for healthcare is infinite, but the supply is finite," he wrote. "So healthcare has to be rationed. I trust the market, unfettered by governmental restrictions, more than the government. The Canadian and British systems of healthcare reinforce my belief." Jerseyvet – clearly one of those acerbate, "un-American" town hall "astroturfers" – has slung an arrow precisely through the heart of the matter.
Even Obama famously gaffed upon this weighty truth with his ill-advised postal services analogy on the free market vs. government care: "UPS and FedEx are doing just fine," he noted, "It's the post office that's always having problems." (Isn't that precious? Seriously – did Joe Biden write that line?) The president could have saved us all the trouble and just admitted: "Blue Cross and Blue Shield are doing just fine (with room for true free-market reform). It's government healthcare that's always having problems." Fittingly, it was British statesman Edmund Burke who observed: "Those who don't know history are destined to repeat it." Regrettably, unless "we the people" defeat liberals' radical experiment in British-style healthcare, we're destined to repeat the very dark history under which they (the Brits) presently live and needlessly die. President Obama is on record: "I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer universal healthcare plan," he assured the AFL-CIO in 2003. But Daniel Hannan – a popular British member of the European Parliament – recently warned us of what to expect should Obama's vision come to fruition: "If you want to see what a government-run healthcare system looks like, you need not look any further than the countries like Canada or Great Britain. They already have in place so-called universal healthcare, and the results, well, they're not pretty." And, as you're about to see, with the words "not pretty" Mr. Hannan has secured his spot in the "morose understatement hall of fame." The following headlines from Britain's three leading newspapers -- the Times, the Daily Mail and the Telegraph -- bear out Mr. Hannan's ominous warning. Most of these stories are from 2009 and address the U.K.'s version of Obamacare (Britain's "National Health Service," or "NHS".) For a sobering exercise in reality, simply replace "NHS" with "Obamacare" everywhere it appears:
• "Cancer doctors do not tell patients about drugs which could prolong lives" (link)
• "Patients forced to live in agony after NHS refuses to pay for painkilling injections" (link)
• "A million failed asylum seekers [illegal immigrants] will get free NHS care in human rights U-turn" (link)
• "Ruling 'denies treatment to 100,000 Alzheimer's patients'" (link)
• "Transsexuals win right to sex swap on NHS" (link)
• "Patients risk going blind as NHS refuses treatment" (link)
• "NHS targets 'may have lead to 1,200 deaths' in Mid-Staffordshire" (link)
• "Patients with suspected cancer forced to wait so NHS targets can be hit" (link)
• "Hospital chairman quits over dangerous targets" (link)
• "Patients forced to wait hours in ambulances parked outside A&E departments" (link)
• "NICE could deny drugs to stomach patients" (link)
• "NHS staff face the sack if they discuss religion with patients" (link)
• "11 serious errors a day in NHS surgery" (link)
• "War hero refused treatment by NHS" (link)
• "Cancer patient Linda O'Boyle dies after NHS ends free care over 'top up'" (link)
• "Drug addicts get priority access to swine flu vaccine" (link)
• "Row as terminally ill woman given bed in hospital bathroom" (link)
• "NHS staff 'no longer asked if they would be treated in own hospital'" (link)
• "Beat the NHS queue with a medical trip to Malaysia" (link)
These headlines are the tip of the iceberg. There are hundreds more just like them with very real people and very real lives behind each. Make no mistake: If we don't sink this Obamacare Titanic before it sets sail, we become the headline. We needn't speculate.
History is our crystal ball.
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Perspectives/Default.aspx?id=651582
Lincoln's Gettysburg Address comes to mind. In the art of persuasion, it's often most effective to paint in brief, colorful strokes. A savvy reader with the handle "Jerseyvet" made an incisive observation after perusing my latest column concerning Obamacare: "Start out with the premise that the demand for healthcare is infinite, but the supply is finite," he wrote. "So healthcare has to be rationed. I trust the market, unfettered by governmental restrictions, more than the government. The Canadian and British systems of healthcare reinforce my belief." Jerseyvet – clearly one of those acerbate, "un-American" town hall "astroturfers" – has slung an arrow precisely through the heart of the matter.
Even Obama famously gaffed upon this weighty truth with his ill-advised postal services analogy on the free market vs. government care: "UPS and FedEx are doing just fine," he noted, "It's the post office that's always having problems." (Isn't that precious? Seriously – did Joe Biden write that line?) The president could have saved us all the trouble and just admitted: "Blue Cross and Blue Shield are doing just fine (with room for true free-market reform). It's government healthcare that's always having problems." Fittingly, it was British statesman Edmund Burke who observed: "Those who don't know history are destined to repeat it." Regrettably, unless "we the people" defeat liberals' radical experiment in British-style healthcare, we're destined to repeat the very dark history under which they (the Brits) presently live and needlessly die. President Obama is on record: "I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer universal healthcare plan," he assured the AFL-CIO in 2003. But Daniel Hannan – a popular British member of the European Parliament – recently warned us of what to expect should Obama's vision come to fruition: "If you want to see what a government-run healthcare system looks like, you need not look any further than the countries like Canada or Great Britain. They already have in place so-called universal healthcare, and the results, well, they're not pretty." And, as you're about to see, with the words "not pretty" Mr. Hannan has secured his spot in the "morose understatement hall of fame." The following headlines from Britain's three leading newspapers -- the Times, the Daily Mail and the Telegraph -- bear out Mr. Hannan's ominous warning. Most of these stories are from 2009 and address the U.K.'s version of Obamacare (Britain's "National Health Service," or "NHS".) For a sobering exercise in reality, simply replace "NHS" with "Obamacare" everywhere it appears:
• "Cancer doctors do not tell patients about drugs which could prolong lives" (link)
• "Patients forced to live in agony after NHS refuses to pay for painkilling injections" (link)
• "A million failed asylum seekers [illegal immigrants] will get free NHS care in human rights U-turn" (link)
• "Ruling 'denies treatment to 100,000 Alzheimer's patients'" (link)
• "Transsexuals win right to sex swap on NHS" (link)
• "Patients risk going blind as NHS refuses treatment" (link)
• "NHS targets 'may have lead to 1,200 deaths' in Mid-Staffordshire" (link)
• "Patients with suspected cancer forced to wait so NHS targets can be hit" (link)
• "Hospital chairman quits over dangerous targets" (link)
• "Patients forced to wait hours in ambulances parked outside A&E departments" (link)
• "NICE could deny drugs to stomach patients" (link)
• "NHS staff face the sack if they discuss religion with patients" (link)
• "11 serious errors a day in NHS surgery" (link)
• "War hero refused treatment by NHS" (link)
• "Cancer patient Linda O'Boyle dies after NHS ends free care over 'top up'" (link)
• "Drug addicts get priority access to swine flu vaccine" (link)
• "Row as terminally ill woman given bed in hospital bathroom" (link)
• "NHS staff 'no longer asked if they would be treated in own hospital'" (link)
• "Beat the NHS queue with a medical trip to Malaysia" (link)
These headlines are the tip of the iceberg. There are hundreds more just like them with very real people and very real lives behind each. Make no mistake: If we don't sink this Obamacare Titanic before it sets sail, we become the headline. We needn't speculate.
History is our crystal ball.
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Perspectives/Default.aspx?id=651582
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Don't Be Lazy - Biblical Manhood Part 2
Part two of eight.
Dr. Baucham starts into the meat of his discussion about biblical manhood. A biblical man is committed to "God honoring labor".
Biblical Manhood Part 1
This video series is a recording of Voddie Baucham discussing biblical manhood. It is actually one long sermon but has been broken down into 8 parts for the sake of bandwidth and time. This is video 1 of 8 and serves more as an introduction about what he's going to get into later. I will post each of the eight videos in succession starting today. Each video is about 10 minutes long.
Monday, August 17, 2009
How To Make Good Roman Soldiers....
Bro. Rodney spoke a little about this last night.....
Who's raising YOUR children?
Who's raising YOUR children?
Friday, August 14, 2009
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Who Am I?
Do you ever stop what you are doing at work, at home, at church even and ask yourself "what am I doing"? Have you ever seen something go wrong at work, perhaps a co-worker was unfairly dismissed or perhaps someone very undeserving got a raise and you didn't? HOW DARE THEY DO THAT TO ME!.....as you shake your fists in anger. Is there someone in your life that is just plain HARD TO DEAL WITH?
Is there an answer for all of this? How am I supposed to handle it? What I am I supposed to do? Why does this happen? How can I make it stop?
This video is about 10 minutes long but it's worth your time......
Is there an answer for all of this? How am I supposed to handle it? What I am I supposed to do? Why does this happen? How can I make it stop?
This video is about 10 minutes long but it's worth your time......
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Another Letter To My Congressmen
I sent yet another letter to our congressmen. this time it was much more simple and like last time only Mike Rogers responded.
Here's the question I asked:
Dear Congressman Rogers,
Will you vote to require members of Congress to be included on any bill dealing with health care? Please give me a yes or no answer.
I request the courtesy of a reply.
Sincerely,
Matt Fuller
Here's the answer he gave:
Dear Mr. Fuller:
Thank you for contacting me with regard to the healthcare reform debate that is currently ongoing in Congress. It is good to hear from you.
Like you, I am concerned about many of the healthcare reform proposals that have been discussed in Congress. What is important in this debate is that Americans have access to quality and affordable healthcare coverage. Though I have not yet seen the finalized proposal, and the specifics of the government-run or "public option" plan are beginning to surface, I would strongly oppose any proposal that would hurt or even destroy the availability of private insurance in favor of a single government-run plan over the long run. It is important to note that I am a cosponsor of H.Res.615, which was introduced by Representative John Fleming (LA), that would express the sense of the House of Representatives that Members who vote in favor of the establishment of a public, federal government run health insurance option are urged to forgo their right to participate in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) and agree to enroll under that public option.
It is my understanding that debate on this issue is expected to continue for the next several weeks. I plan to continue following it closely.
Again, thank you for contacting me. Should you need to find more information on issues of importance to you, please log onto my website at http://www.house.gov/mike-rogers. I look forward to hearing from you again.
Here's the question I asked:
Dear Congressman Rogers,
Will you vote to require members of Congress to be included on any bill dealing with health care? Please give me a yes or no answer.
I request the courtesy of a reply.
Sincerely,
Matt Fuller
Here's the answer he gave:
Dear Mr. Fuller:
Thank you for contacting me with regard to the healthcare reform debate that is currently ongoing in Congress. It is good to hear from you.
Like you, I am concerned about many of the healthcare reform proposals that have been discussed in Congress. What is important in this debate is that Americans have access to quality and affordable healthcare coverage. Though I have not yet seen the finalized proposal, and the specifics of the government-run or "public option" plan are beginning to surface, I would strongly oppose any proposal that would hurt or even destroy the availability of private insurance in favor of a single government-run plan over the long run. It is important to note that I am a cosponsor of H.Res.615, which was introduced by Representative John Fleming (LA), that would express the sense of the House of Representatives that Members who vote in favor of the establishment of a public, federal government run health insurance option are urged to forgo their right to participate in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) and agree to enroll under that public option.
It is my understanding that debate on this issue is expected to continue for the next several weeks. I plan to continue following it closely.
Again, thank you for contacting me. Should you need to find more information on issues of importance to you, please log onto my website at http://www.house.gov/mike-rogers. I look forward to hearing from you again.
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
Democracy
I am a democrat (one that believes in and supports democracy) because I believe in the Fall of Man. I think most people are democrats for the opposite reason. A great deal of democratic enthusiasm descends from the ideas of people like Rousseau, who believed in democracy because they thought mankind so wise and good that everyone deserved a share in the government. The danger of defending democracy on those grounds is that they are not true. And when ever their weakness is exposed, the people who prefer tyranny make capital out of the exposure. I find that they're not true without looking further than myself. I don't deserve a share in governing a hen roost, much less a nation. Nor do most people - all the people who believe advertisements, and think in catchwords and spread rumours. The real reason for democracy is just the reverse. Mankind is so fallen that no man can be trusted with unchecked power over his fellows....
This introduces a view of equality rather different from that in which we have been trained. I do not think that equality is one of those things (like wisdom or happiness) which are good simply in themselves and for their own sakes. I think it is in the same class as medicine, which is good because we are ill, or clothes, which are good because we are no longer innocent...When equality is treated not as a medicine or a safety-gadget but as an ideal, we begin to breed that stunted and envious sort of mind which hates all superiority.
C.S. Lewis
The Business of Heaven, p.411
This introduces a view of equality rather different from that in which we have been trained. I do not think that equality is one of those things (like wisdom or happiness) which are good simply in themselves and for their own sakes. I think it is in the same class as medicine, which is good because we are ill, or clothes, which are good because we are no longer innocent...When equality is treated not as a medicine or a safety-gadget but as an ideal, we begin to breed that stunted and envious sort of mind which hates all superiority.
C.S. Lewis
The Business of Heaven, p.411
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Contact Your Congressman.....
Yesterday I wrote our US Representative and the two US Senators from Alabama and asked them the following questions about the preposed healthcare policy that the president is trying to push.
1) Will you oppose any healthcare reform bill that uses my tax dollars to pay for abortions?
2) Will you oppose any healthcare reform bill that in any way promotes euthanasia?
3) Why is Congress and the president pushing through a healthcare bill that would cost another trillion dollars over the next ten years? Shouldn't we concentrate on getting the debt under control first?
4) How can government promise to do more with less? Will you oppose any healthcare reform bill that in any way limits my access to healthcare or medicines recommended by my doctor?
5) Why are you imposing additional mandates and taxes on small businesses, which create the overwhelming majority of new jobs, in the middle of a severe recession?
6) Why are you trying to force us in the direction of more government involvement in healthcare when everywhere government-run healthcare has been tried, quality declines and care is rationed?
7) Why are you and the White House rushing this bill through Congress and ignoring the concerns of the American people?
8) Why do you believe bureaucrats can make better decisions than me about what kind of health insurance I should have? And will you guarantee that any healthcare reform bill passed by Congress will always allow me to choose my own doctor?
9) Why are you throwing affirmative action/racial set asides into a healthcare reform bill?
10) Isn't it clear that this provision would drive up the cost of health insurance for everyone?
I sent these questions to Mike Rogers, Jeff Sessons and Richard Shelby. So far only Rep. Rogers has responded back to me. I will post his response below and the other responses on this website as they come in. This is the healthcare system of our country's future so please your comments are welcome on these responses. Better yet contact these guys yourself and ask them some of these questions. Let them know if you are not happy with what is going on.
Here is the response from Rep. Rogers:
Dear Mr. Fuller:
Thank you for contacting me with regard to the healthcare reform debate that is currently ongoing in Congress. It is good to hear from you.
As you know, for many Americans, healthcare continues to be a top concern. The number of uninsured Americans is estimated to be more than 45 million. Even those that have health insurance worry about catastrophic events that could leave them destitute. Healthcare coverage costs too much, and with the trajectory of the amount that Americans spend on healthcare expected to rise, doing nothing is not an option. While I do not sit on the Congressional committees that have jurisdiction over healthcare reform in the House, I think we can all agree parts of our healthcare system are broken and should be fixed, and I am supportive of Congress fixing the current system in a responsible way, with realistic solutions and practical price tags that does not result in a government takeover of healthcare.
Plans that would help groups of people purchase health insurance at an affordable price, relative to the plan chosen and other factors would be an important aspect to consider in the healthcare reform package. Group purchasing would allow those who have a difficult time purchasing coverage on their own to have more negotiating power, and would allow groups such as trade or professional organizations that have membership, or small businesses to be able to join together to purchase health coverage for their employees. I support expanding opportunities for small business to purchase health benefits. I support Americans being able to choose their own doctors, hospitals and healthcare providers and of reforming the medical malpractice system and allowing doctors to practice affordable medicine. Americans want choice, affordability, and access to healthcare, and above all they want to their families and doctors in charge of their healthcare.
Many of the proposals that have been discussed recently in Congress are disconcerting. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) provided a cost estimate that reported the cost of the Democratic comprehensive healthcare reform proposal at over $1 trillion. On top of the $800 billion Economic Stimulus bill and the $3.2 trillion Democratic budget, both pieces of legislation I voted against, I am strongly concerned this type of massive proposal is not just an expensive measure that would not cover all of the uninsured, but the CBO estimated that the House bill would increase the Federal deficit by $239 billion over 10 years. There have been discussion that taxes will be increased to pay for the healthcare reform proposals. It is important to note that I am not supportive of Congress paying for this reform on the backs of hardworking Americans, small businesses, and doctors by taxing sugary drinks, taxing employer-sponsored health plans or by reducing the reimbursements that will be paid to healthcare providers.
In this debate it is important that Americans have access to quality healthcare and affordable coverage. Though the House bill is being reviewed, and the specifics of the government-run or "public option" plan are surfacing, I would oppose proposals that would hurt the availability of private insurance in favor of a single government-run plan over the long run. It is my understanding that debate on this issue is expected to continue for the next several weeks. I plan to continue following it closely.
Again, thank you for contacting me. Should you need to find more information on issues of importance to you, please log onto my website at http://www.house.gov/mike-rogers. I look forward to hearing from you again.
Sincerely,
Mike Rogers
Member of Congress
1) Will you oppose any healthcare reform bill that uses my tax dollars to pay for abortions?
2) Will you oppose any healthcare reform bill that in any way promotes euthanasia?
3) Why is Congress and the president pushing through a healthcare bill that would cost another trillion dollars over the next ten years? Shouldn't we concentrate on getting the debt under control first?
4) How can government promise to do more with less? Will you oppose any healthcare reform bill that in any way limits my access to healthcare or medicines recommended by my doctor?
5) Why are you imposing additional mandates and taxes on small businesses, which create the overwhelming majority of new jobs, in the middle of a severe recession?
6) Why are you trying to force us in the direction of more government involvement in healthcare when everywhere government-run healthcare has been tried, quality declines and care is rationed?
7) Why are you and the White House rushing this bill through Congress and ignoring the concerns of the American people?
8) Why do you believe bureaucrats can make better decisions than me about what kind of health insurance I should have? And will you guarantee that any healthcare reform bill passed by Congress will always allow me to choose my own doctor?
9) Why are you throwing affirmative action/racial set asides into a healthcare reform bill?
10) Isn't it clear that this provision would drive up the cost of health insurance for everyone?
I sent these questions to Mike Rogers, Jeff Sessons and Richard Shelby. So far only Rep. Rogers has responded back to me. I will post his response below and the other responses on this website as they come in. This is the healthcare system of our country's future so please your comments are welcome on these responses. Better yet contact these guys yourself and ask them some of these questions. Let them know if you are not happy with what is going on.
Here is the response from Rep. Rogers:
Dear Mr. Fuller:
Thank you for contacting me with regard to the healthcare reform debate that is currently ongoing in Congress. It is good to hear from you.
As you know, for many Americans, healthcare continues to be a top concern. The number of uninsured Americans is estimated to be more than 45 million. Even those that have health insurance worry about catastrophic events that could leave them destitute. Healthcare coverage costs too much, and with the trajectory of the amount that Americans spend on healthcare expected to rise, doing nothing is not an option. While I do not sit on the Congressional committees that have jurisdiction over healthcare reform in the House, I think we can all agree parts of our healthcare system are broken and should be fixed, and I am supportive of Congress fixing the current system in a responsible way, with realistic solutions and practical price tags that does not result in a government takeover of healthcare.
Plans that would help groups of people purchase health insurance at an affordable price, relative to the plan chosen and other factors would be an important aspect to consider in the healthcare reform package. Group purchasing would allow those who have a difficult time purchasing coverage on their own to have more negotiating power, and would allow groups such as trade or professional organizations that have membership, or small businesses to be able to join together to purchase health coverage for their employees. I support expanding opportunities for small business to purchase health benefits. I support Americans being able to choose their own doctors, hospitals and healthcare providers and of reforming the medical malpractice system and allowing doctors to practice affordable medicine. Americans want choice, affordability, and access to healthcare, and above all they want to their families and doctors in charge of their healthcare.
Many of the proposals that have been discussed recently in Congress are disconcerting. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) provided a cost estimate that reported the cost of the Democratic comprehensive healthcare reform proposal at over $1 trillion. On top of the $800 billion Economic Stimulus bill and the $3.2 trillion Democratic budget, both pieces of legislation I voted against, I am strongly concerned this type of massive proposal is not just an expensive measure that would not cover all of the uninsured, but the CBO estimated that the House bill would increase the Federal deficit by $239 billion over 10 years. There have been discussion that taxes will be increased to pay for the healthcare reform proposals. It is important to note that I am not supportive of Congress paying for this reform on the backs of hardworking Americans, small businesses, and doctors by taxing sugary drinks, taxing employer-sponsored health plans or by reducing the reimbursements that will be paid to healthcare providers.
In this debate it is important that Americans have access to quality healthcare and affordable coverage. Though the House bill is being reviewed, and the specifics of the government-run or "public option" plan are surfacing, I would oppose proposals that would hurt the availability of private insurance in favor of a single government-run plan over the long run. It is my understanding that debate on this issue is expected to continue for the next several weeks. I plan to continue following it closely.
Again, thank you for contacting me. Should you need to find more information on issues of importance to you, please log onto my website at http://www.house.gov/mike-rogers. I look forward to hearing from you again.
Sincerely,
Mike Rogers
Member of Congress
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)