#Christians are unfit to hold public office

[mariacallous]

Lawmakers in the National Assembly of Republika Srpska adopted a draft in the early hours of Friday morning of a new Election Law for the entity, while calling on the state-level parliament to reject changes to the national law imposed this week by High Representative Christian Schmidt.

The draft, adopted at 2.30am, will still need to undergo a procedure of public consultations and harmonisation with other laws in Bosnia and Herzegovina before it can be adopted.

In a speech before the vote, Milorad Dodik, president of the Serb-dominated Republika Srpska entity, called the law one of “the most important” documents for the entity.

“Therefore, I ask you to focus on this document. Let’s stay united and continue to enact laws that we believe are most important for Republika Srpska,” Dodik told lawmakers.

The meeting came two days after High Representative Schmidt, the international official responsible for overseeing the continued implementation of the peace deal that ended the Bosnian war imposed a set of changes to the state-level Election Law, using his so-called ‘Bonn powers’ to force legislation through.

The changes include the implementation of modern technologies, the professionalisation of local election committees and the way they are selected, transparency in the voting process and registration of voters, and a ban on convicted war criminals taking part in elections or holding public office.

Dodik said the new Election Law of Republika Srpska will go into force on April 16 and will be used at local elections in October unless a set of conditions is met by the state-level parliament.

According to Bosnian legislation, the two entities in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Republika Srpska and Federation, can make their own laws only if they are in accordance with the state-level one.

The new draft law in Republika Srpska declares that the entity has control over elections and envisages the creation of a Republic Election Commision, which would make the current one invalid.

The Bosnian Serbs’ conditions for the state parliament and Peace Implementation Council, the international body tasked with implementing the Dayton Peace Agreement, include the annulment of all Schmidt’s decisions.

State-level institutions should be barred from implementing Schmidt’s decisions, the Office of the High Representative’s website should be declared unfit for publishing legal acts, and the state-level Official Gazette should prohibited from publishing content from “foreigners”, the Bosnian Serbs are also demanding.

They also want a new electoral law to be adopted and “enforced from the October 2024 local elections”, and for the Central Electoral Commission to be disbanded if the state-level parliament fails to accept the conditions.

They also want the US and German ambassadors to Bosnia, along with High Representative Schmidt, to labelled as “enemies of the state” and face expulsion.

The deadline for the conditions to be met is seven days, otherwise the Bosnian Serbs have threatened to paralyse decision-making processes at the state-level.

“Republika Srpska should adopt its electoral law in the form of a draft, to initiate a public dialogue on it as soon as possible. The implementation of this should start very soon. I will sign it. Give me the law, I will sign it,” Dodik said during his speech.

Dodik also threatened the potential termination of cooperation with current coalition partners and the possibility of negotiating new agreements with other political parties in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

He further threatened that Republika Srpska should proceed with implementing all previously enacted laws related to its status. This includes withdrawing from agreements concerning the Armed Forces, the High Judicial and Prosecutorial Council, indirect taxes and other agreements.

Dodik also calls for the activation of other legislation that has been annulled by the state-level Constitutional Court.

While imposing the changes to the Election Law, Schmidt provided a grace period of seven days for Bosnian politicians to reach a common solution before the legislation goes into force.

For key provisions, the grace period extends until April 19, unless the Parliamentary Assembly of Bosnia and Herzegovina adopts suitable amendments to the Election Law before that date.

[pastorbillwhatshotn]

Bernie Sanders Attacks Christianity by Attacking Trump Nominee Russell Vought's Faith

Bernie Sanders Attacks Christianity by Attacking Trump Nominee Russell Vought’s Faith

Now would  Bernie Sanders be Attacking Trump Nominee Russell Vought in Sanders rant, if Vought confessed to being Socialist, Communist, Jewish, anti-Jesus, Democrat or moslem? Or is Bernie Sanders saying that only a person practicing Socialism, Communism, Jewish, anti-Jesus, Democrat or muslim should work for the government? Or non-inclusuve, intolerant, liberal minds the only people qualified to…

[mybeautifulchristianjourney]

Means of Grace

by George W. Perkins

"Seeing you have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit." - 1 Peter 1:22

Our modern religious phraseology has coined and thrown into universal currency a term not found in the Bible. The phrase I mean is that familiar one, "means of grace." But I am forced to believe that very inadequate ideas are held of "means of grace," and that great loss and evil result from the mistake.

Public worship is a means of grace, and of the service a prominent feature is the sermon. But what is the sermon? Perhaps an able theological discussion whereby the mind has gained a firmer hold on truth. That is valuable. Perhaps it unfolds the consequences of sin and holiness in the endless future. That is valuable, revealing to the mind worthy and powerful motives. Perhaps it states the principles of right, the details of duty. That also is valuable. The hearer knows the will of God. But where is the grace, the growth in goodness, even if the sermons have been listened to with profound attention and marked effect? The improvement is not yet. The hearer is profited just as a young apprentice boy would be vastly benefited if he were to go out from a lecture on ship-building, inspired with a noble enthusiasm for the great art he was to learn, and were to go to the ship-yard under the influence of the lecture to work hard at his art. But his actual improvement in his trade does not begin till he is really trying to do what his master has told him to do. So the sermon becomes profitable and growth in grace begins when the hearer departs to put in practice right and duty - and only under that condition.

So prayer [also] is a means of grace, rightly used, but only as aiding us to right mental states and to right acts. The intensest prayer for strength to do one's duty without consequent efforts at duty, becomes no means of grace. The study of the Bible is of inestimable value as a teacher of all truth and duty, a guide and assistant in well-doing, but becomes an actual means of grace only as the stimulant and antecedent of right action.

We are thus conducted to the true and comprehensive import of the term "means of grace." Opportunities of acting rightly are means of grace. Thus one reads in the Bible an exhortation to patience: "Let patience have her perfect work." It is a duty enforced by the authority of God. He next hears a sermon on the same scriptural topic setting forth at length the nature, beauty, obligation, and rewards of this noble and Christ-like virtue, and from the sermon is roused to a strong desire for this Christian grace. He prays that it may be found in him. Now, what has been accomplished by all this? Truly a certain amount of theory, knowledge, and desire has been communicated, which are matters of essential importance to the result. But has the man made any progress in that grace? None at all. There must next be presented to that hearer an opportunity for the exercise of that virtue, and there must be the actual exercise of it. If he has the opportunity, then he has enjoyed all the means of grace; and if he has exercised patience, then he has made actual advances in grace.

We gain here some most instructive and spirit-stirring views of human life. Life in its outward aspects is chaotic, often forbidding. Very much of the work we have to do is disagreeable. The annoyances we meet in life are countless. We are tossed to and fro in this great seething ocean of change. Most of the offices and work of this world would seem to be very mean [lowly] and unfit for beings created in the image of God. But my view of human life is, that it is one vast system of means of grace; that the Bible and human life were designed to play into each other's hands, so to speak; that is, each to be the complement to the other as means of grace. There is not a moment in our lives, nor any position or circumstances in which we are or possibly can be placed, but in each there is a right feeling or state of mind to be exercised, or a right act to be done with right motives. Of course, then, there is not a moment of our lives nor any possible circumstances in which we are not enjoying means of grace. Let me illustrate the statement, purposely selecting the most ordinary scenes of life.

Immense numbers spend most of their time in manual labor -- in the kitchen, the shop, or the field; in some of the countless forms of art, trade, or work. There is generally monotony about it. Much of it is disagreeable and repulsive. It is usually done only because one is thus compelled to earn a livelihood. Men's minds do not usually become ennobled by it. It is earthly drudgery, not sanctifying power. But see how every part and moment of labor may be transformed into means of grace. We are told that whatsoever we do, we are to do to the glory of God. Now let the laborer not spend Sunday in a beer-shop nor in idleness, but in communion with God and in drinking the waters of life. And on Monday let him take his tools and go to his work with this truth distinctly in mind: "It is now the will of God that for the next six days I wield that hammer, or toil at that unwelcome drudgery. The arrangements of God's Providence have made this as clearly my duty as revelation was ever made to Isaiah or to Paul."

With that truth firmly apprehended, let the mind further reflect: "I engage in this particular work because I am employed and paid to do it, or because my domestic relations require it. But once having undertaken it, it is no longer man's work but God's which I am doing. God would have me construct that machine; God is bidding me keep those books, or do that repulsive work; God is inspecting me all the time. Here then I strike into it faithfully, honorably, cheerfully for God." Thus for every minute and act of that day's work there is the opportunity of obeying God, and thus a means of grace.

Every time a man pays a debt, he has the opportunity of doing right from right motives. It is God's money that he orders me to transfer to its rightful possessor. I do it to the very best of my power. The money so paid is a means of grace. Every bargain one makes is a means of grace, because it gives the opportunity of applying and obeying the law of God. The seller can vend his goods as under the eye of God. Every buyer who comes into one's place of business can say, "I come here with the rights of God in my person. He gives me a right to fair, honorable dealing from you, and the manner in which you deal with me will be recognized as your treatment of God." So trading [in this manner], would not one grow in grace every day, and very rapidly too?

In everyone's daily life there are many and nameless annoyances - the vexations, the carelessness, the rudeness, unpleasant manners, the mistakes, the heedlessness, the unamiableness one meets; [they] are countless. They provoke peevishness; they are the usual incentives to anger, the ordinary occasions of fretfulness and irritability. The individual matters are very insignificant, and few, I fear, dream that religion has aught to do in such petty affairs; yet they are the occasions of no little sin. They are the constantly recurring opportunities for the exercise of that noble Christian virtue self-control. At each one of the thousands of petty vexations which one meets in the course of years, we have the opportunity of reflecting, "God will be pleased if I control myself, remain quiet and calm without excitement or irritability; therefore I will do so." So doing, one has countless means of grace.

"But you forget," urges one, "there is one class of events or circumstances which must be excepted. We are surrounded by temptations. They surely are not means of grace?" But why not? For what is a temptation? [It is] a position in which there are opportunity and inducements to do wrong. That is one of the noblest opportunities for obedience. It is a higher act of honor to God to choose right when there are strong inducements to do wrong. The man in temptation can be a coward, or a weather-cock, turned whithersoever sin desires. But he has the opportunity of struggle, of victory, of high moral purpose - all which make him a better man. Yes, even temptations may be means of grace.

Let us then understand God's plan, enter into God's plan, and life will be life indeed - a new and glorious life. What we call drudgery, temptation, sorrow, misfortune, difficulties, [these] all are resplendent with this glorious end - they are to qualify us to be heirs of God and future kings in heaven.

[glittergummicandypeach]

A Hidden Amy Coney Barrett Answer on COVID That Should Scare Every American | Religion Dispatches

Amy Coney Barrett submitted written answers to the Senate last night and they make it clear that she will flip the high court on an issue that is crucial for America to fight the coronavirus, just as the pandemic is flaring up. Barrett telegraphed a willingness to overturn public health measures in the name of God.

The Barrett hearings were not devoid of religion. Barrett’s personal religion was mentioned many times, often as if it were somehow a qualification for office. The same senators praising her religion also decried any attempt to suggest that Barrett’s religion might trump her oath of judicial office. But there was no such suggestion, even though this is something that Barrett herself has admitted to repeatedly. (As I’ve written before, I think this was a dereliction of senators’ duty.)

Throughout the hearings, Barrett was willing to answer substantive and hypothetical questions from her supporters, but refused to do the same from senators on the other side. That strategy continued in the Questions for the Record, known as QFRs. Barrett’s answers, submitted last night, were in line with what we saw in the hearing. For instance, when asked a straightforward question with a simple answer from a senator likely to vote against her, Barrett stonewalled.

QUESTION: According to federal law, is it legal to vote twice in a single federal election?

RESPONSE: As a sitting judge and as a judicial nominee, it would not be appropriate for me to offer an opinion on abstract legal issues or hypotheticals. Nor would it be appropriate for me to opine on the statements of any political figure or on any subject of political controversy. 

That question was neither abstract nor hypothetical; the answer was both disingenuous and dishonest. 

But Barrett was looser with her supporters. Buried on the final page of the 184-page QFR, in the final question, one from Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-TN.), is a deeply alarming answer.

QUESTION: States have the authority and responsibility to protect the health of their citizens, but they must also uphold First Amendment protections—including the free exercise of religion. Recently, some churches across the country have asserted their rights have been infringed because of states selectively enforcing public health restrictions on places of worship. Do states infringe on the free exercise of religion when they selectively restrict a religious gathering as a matter of enforcement discretion?

RESPONSE: The Supreme Court has explained that “[o]fficial action that targets religious conduct for distinctive treatment cannot be shielded by mere compliance with the requirement of facial neutrality” and that “[t]he Free Exercise Clause protects against governmental hostility which is masked, as well as overt.” Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. City of Hialeah, 508 U.S. 520, 534 (1993). The application of these principles to public health restrictions is a matter of ongoing legal dispute. 

This should scare every American. As pandemic cases soar worldwide, with hundreds of thousands of Americans already dead from this virus, Barrett is virtually promising to allow churches to hold superspreader events every week—just like the superspreader event held at the White House to announce her nomination. This is reckless to the point of deadly and it clearly shows Barrett is unfit to be a judge on any court, let alone the highest court in the land. 

The premise of Blackburn’s question is deeply flawed. Public health measures are not being “selectively” enforced against churches. It’s just that churches have an undeserved sense of entitlement and are deliberately and publicly violating the orders and spreading the disease. The rules apply equally, but are enforced against those who break the rules, including gyms and other non-religious entities. Blackburn’s question is like asking why criminal laws are being selectively enforced against criminals. 

Barrett’s entire strategy has been to avoid answering any questions that might be in the slightest controversial. Those refusals are themselves tells. But here, she answers first, then disclaims an ability to answer. That means she doesn’t find this controversial or maybe thinks it’s an easy question. Standing alone, that might be reasonable, but not when we consider the case she cited: Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. City of Hialeah.

It is telling and deeply disturbing that Barrett cites this infamous Supreme Court case as the controlling case to answer the question about whether churches, like every other similarly-situated entity, are subject to public health measures. In Lukumi, local government officials, with unabashed bigotry, used their government powers to try and stamp out a Santeria church. The coronavirus health measures apply to all similarly-situated entities equally and are meant to save lives. The targeted bigotry and abuse in Lukumi has absolutely nothing to do with universally applicable life-saving public health laws. 

The two scenarios couldn’t be more different. The Lukumi case involved the City of Hialeah, which held an emergency session of the City Council in a “mob atmosphere” just weeks after the Santeria church tried to open. The president of the city council asked: “What can we do to prevent the Church from opening?” The city attorney said in the meeting that “This community will not tolerate religious practices which are abhorrent to its citizens,” sentiments echoed by the deputy city attorney. 

The council passed ordinances that targeted “religious practices” in one, “animal sacrifice” in a second, and “ritualistic animal sacrifice” in another. Christians in office were using government power to kick a minority religion out of town. One councilman cited biblical law to justify the bigotry: “I don’t believe that the Bible allows that.” Police actively enforced the new rules, but only against the church, setting up a perimeter around the church and stopping and searching clergy as they came and went. The government had effectively outlawed a particular religion’s holy ritual. 

That Barrett sees common-sense health measures as analogous to Lukumi is disturbing. If she didn’t agree with the fabricated premise of the question—that churches are targeted—she would have dodged the question, as she dodged so many others, including straightforward questions about voting twice. A charitable interpretation would be that Barrett is blinded by a Christian persecution complex. A more likely interpretation is that she is driven to codify Christian supremacy into the law, that she intends to use her position and power to “build the Kingdom of God.”

Barrett’s refusals were tells. Her answers leave little doubt that she will vote to overturn important civil rights precedents, whether it be Roe v. Wade or marriage equality (Obergefell v. Hodges). There is every reason to believe she is going to vote to destroy the Affordable Care Act and rip healthcare away from millions of Americans in the middle of a pandemic. That she actually accepted the premise of this question and cited Lukumi to answer it gives us another insight. 

Now we know that Barrett will work to give churches, which have already done so much to spread the deadly virus, a constitutional right to risk the lives of every citizen. This will flip the Court on this critical issue and spread a deadly virus. Confirming Amy Coney Barrett will be a disaster for America. 

This content was originally published here.

[princelysome]

Republicans, and particularly Trump supporters, continue to ignore the fact that the Emperor isn’t wearing any clothes.

The Emperor's New Clothes

A translation of Hans Christian Andersen's "Keiserens nye Klaeder" by Jean Hersholt. (http://andersen.sdu.dk/vaerk/hersholt/TheEmperorsNewClothes_e.html)

Many years ago there was an Emperor so exceedingly fond of new clothes that he spent all his money on being well dressed. He cared nothing about reviewing his soldiers, going to the theatre, or going for a ride in his carriage, except to show off his new clothes. He had a coat for every hour of the day, and instead of saying, as one might, about any other ruler, "The King's in council," here they always said. "The Emperor's in his dressing room."

In the great city where he lived, life was always gay. Every day many strangers came to town, and among them one day came two swindlers. They let it be known they were weavers, and they said they could weave the most magnificent fabrics imaginable. Not only were their colors and patterns uncommonly fine, but clothes made of this cloth had a wonderful way of becoming invisible to anyone who was unfit for his office, or who was unusually stupid.

"Those would be just the clothes for me," thought the Emperor. "If I wore them I would be able to discover which men in my empire are unfit for their posts. And I could tell the wise men from the fools. Yes, I certainly must get some of the stuff woven for me right away." He paid the two swindlers a large sum of money to start work at once.

They set up two looms and pretended to weave, though there was nothing on the looms. All the finest silk and the purest old thread which they demanded went into their traveling bags, while they worked the empty looms far into the night.

"I'd like to know how those weavers are getting on with the cloth," the Emperor thought, but he felt slightly uncomfortable when he remembered that those who were unfit for their position would not be able to see the fabric. It couldn't have been that he doubted himself, yet he thought he'd rather send someone else to see how things were going. The whole town knew about the cloth's peculiar power, and all were impatient to find out how stupid their neighbors were.

"I'll send my honest old minister to the weavers," the Emperor decided. "He'll be the best one to tell me how the material looks, for he's a sensible man and no one does his duty better."

So the honest old minister went to the room where the two swindlers sat working away at their empty looms.

"Heaven help me," he thought as his eyes flew wide open, "I can't see anything at all". But he did not say so.

Both the swindlers begged him to be so kind as to come near to approve the excellent pattern, the beautiful colors. They pointed to the empty looms, and the poor old minister stared as hard as he dared. He couldn't see anything, because there was nothing to see. "Heaven have mercy," he thought. "Can it be that I'm a fool? I'd have never guessed it, and not a soul must know. Am I unfit to be the minister? It would never do to let on that I can't see the cloth."

"Don't hesitate to tell us what you think of it," said one of the weavers.

"Oh, it's beautiful -it's enchanting." The old minister peered through his spectacles. "Such a pattern, what colors!" I'll be sure to tell the Emperor how delighted I am with it."

"We're pleased to hear that," the swindlers said. They proceeded to name all the colors and to explain the intricate pattern. The old minister paid the closest attention, so that he could tell it all to the Emperor. And so he did.

The swindlers at once asked for more money, more silk and gold thread, to get on with the weaving. But it all went into their pockets. Not a thread went into the looms, though they worked at their weaving as hard as ever.

The Emperor presently sent another trustworthy official to see how the work progressed and how soon it would be ready. The same thing happened to him that had happened to the minister. He looked and he looked, but as there was nothing to see in the looms he couldn't see anything.

"Isn't it a beautiful piece of goods?" the swindlers asked him, as they displayed and described their imaginary pattern.

"I know I'm not stupid," the man thought, "so it must be that I'm unworthy of my good office. That's strange. I mustn't let anyone find it out, though." So he praised the material he did not see. He declared he was delighted with the beautiful colors and the exquisite pattern. To the Emperor he said, "It held me spellbound."

All the town was talking of this splendid cloth, and the Emperor wanted to see it for himself while it was still in the looms. Attended by a band of chosen men, among whom were his two old trusted officials-the ones who had been to the weavers-he set out to see the two swindlers. He found them weaving with might and main, but without a thread in their looms.

"Magnificent," said the two officials already duped. "Just look, Your Majesty, what colors! What a design!" They pointed to the empty looms, each supposing that the others could see the stuff.

"What's this?" thought the Emperor. "I can't see anything. This is terrible!

Am I a fool? Am I unfit to be the Emperor? What a thing to happen to me of all people! - Oh! It's very pretty," he said. "It has my highest approval." And he nodded approbation at the empty loom. Nothing could make him say that he couldn't see anything.

His whole retinue stared and stared. One saw no more than another, but they all joined the Emperor in exclaiming, "Oh! It's very pretty," and they advised him to wear clothes made of this wonderful cloth especially for the great procession he was soon to lead. "Magnificent! Excellent!  Unsurpassed!" were bandied from mouth to mouth, and everyone did his best to seem well pleased. The Emperor gave each of the swindlers a cross to wear in his buttonhole, and the title of "Sir Weaver."

Before the procession the swindlers sat up all night and burned more than six candles, to show how busy they were finishing the Emperor's new clothes. They pretended to take the cloth off the loom. They made cuts in the air with huge scissors. And at last they said, "Now the Emperor's new clothes are ready for him."

Then the Emperor himself came with his noblest noblemen, and the swindlers each raised an arm as if they were holding something. They said, "These are the trousers, here's the coat, and this is the mantle," naming each garment. "All of them are as light as a spider web. One would almost think he had nothing on, but that's what makes them so fine."

"Exactly," all the noblemen agreed, though they could see nothing, for there was nothing to see.

"If Your Imperial Majesty will condescend to take your clothes off," said the swindlers, "we will help you on with your new ones here in front of the long mirror."

The Emperor undressed, and the swindlers pretended to put his new clothes on him, one garment after another. They took him around the waist and seemed to be fastening something - that was his train-as the Emperor turned round and round before the looking glass.

"How well Your Majesty's new clothes look. Aren't they becoming!" He heard on all sides, "That pattern, so perfect! Those colors, so suitable! It is a magnificent outfit."

Then the minister of public processions announced: "Your Majesty's canopy is waiting outside."

"Well, I'm supposed to be ready," the Emperor said, and turned again for one last look in the mirror. "It is a remarkable fit, isn't it?" He seemed to regard his costume with the greatest interest.

The noblemen who were to carry his train stooped low and reached for the floor as if they were picking up his mantle. Then they pretended to lift and hold it high. They didn't dare admit they had nothing to hold.

So off went the Emperor in procession under his splendid canopy. Everyone in the streets and the windows said, "Oh, how fine are the Emperor's new clothes! Don't they fit him to perfection? And see his long train!" Nobody would confess that he couldn't see anything, for that would prove him either unfit for his position, or a fool. No costume the Emperor had worn before was ever such a complete success.

"But he hasn't got anything on," a little child said.

"Did you ever hear such innocent prattle?" said its father. And one person whispered to another what the child had said, "He hasn't anything on. A child says he hasn't anything on."

"But he hasn't got anything on!" the whole town cried out at last.

The Emperor shivered, for he suspected they were right. But he thought, "This procession has got to go on." So he walked more proudly than ever, as his noblemen held high the train that wasn't there at all.

[reading-writing-revolution]

#fragilemen #malefragility

"If you are a man running for (or holding) public office, and your policy is that you cannot be alone in a space with a female professional who is just trying to do her job, you are unfit for office and should resign. There is no valid reason for this behavior that does not immediately disqualify you.

Allow me to clarify:

If you believe women generally are going to tempt you into illicit behavior simply by being in your presence, you believe women are inherently evil and/or subversive. You will legislate with this bias. You are unfit. Resign.

If you believe women generally will falsely accuse you of sexual misconduct, you believe women are inherently dishonest. You will legislate with this bias. You are unfit. Resign.

If you believe the mere presence of a woman (without a chaperone) will inevitably lead you to be unable to control your carnal desires, you are a predator. You will legislate as a predator. You are unfit. Resign.

If you think this policy of never being alone in the presence of a woman is, somehow, a sign of respect to your wife, you could not be more wrong. Demeaning, degrading and generally mistrusting women based purely on their gender is an insult to her at her core. You are unfit. Resign. (And maybe seek counseling.)

If you think your Christian religion somehow bids you do this, you'll probably have a *teensy* problem actualizing that whole separation of church and state thing we based our entire country on. You also have remarkably poor reading comprehension skills. Because if you revisit that Bible, you'll discover that Jesus literally told you to pluck your own eyes out rather than pull this kind of misogynist shit.

But honestly, there's no need for eye-plucking. So messy.

Lots of blood.

Yuck.

Might I suggest an alternative:

#RESIGN."

Simple question: Is there any reason for him to kiss her?

So, did he kiss the men? Is greeting a woman you aren't intimately familiar with a kissing moment in American culture? Nope. It is not. That kind of behavior would mark you as a creep anywhere in the country.

Now, in some cultures abroad and brought here to America, kissing another man would be acceptable. But kissing a woman? Not a chance.

I wouldn't dare kiss my sister-in-law on the cheek. Maybe, maybe my mother-in-law. But probably not. Not a female friend unless we'd been really good friends for a long time. Certainly not an acquaintance or essentially a stranger, as this woman is to Trump.

No, what he did just reinforces his reputation as being sexually aggressive and feeling entitled to unwanted or unsolicited intimacy with the opposite sex. Basic societal rules clearly say this action is not appropriate. The "well, it's not like he raped her" defense ain't gonna cut it. Yep, he didn't grab her by the p*say or slip her the tongue, but in a professional setting, even a social one, this is totally inappropriate. This is how you get reported to HR. This is how you get to be know as a creep.

[autodidact-adventures]

World War I (Part 45): German Antisemitism during the Great War

At the beginning of the 20th century, every European country was antisemitic.  The worst was not Germany, but Russia – Russia prevented most Jews from citizenship, regarded them as a threat to security, and continued to persecute them on a terrible level after the war began.  During the Great War, there were outbreaks of violence against the Jewish populations of every country involved in it.

Back in 1812, during the Napoléonic Wars, the Kingdom of Prussia had issued an Emancipation Edict, granting citizenship to its Jewish population. This was progressive to some degree, but certainly didn't address most of the problems.  Jews were still not allowed to serve as military officers (only the Junkers could do that), or in the government bureaucracy (including the judicial system) – this latter was because it was believed that the Christians of a Christian nation shouldn't have to take orders from Jews.

In 1869, Germany was in the middle of its wars of unification.  A law was passed guaranteeing that government appointments would be made without any regard to religion.  Officially, all careers (including in the army) were now open to everyone.  Of course, it wasn't put into practice. Whenever a Jewish person applied for a position as an army officer, reasons were found for choosing someone else.

The Junkers of Prussia believed that anyone who wasn't a Junker was an outside, and this included the Jews.  During the last decades of the 1800's, Berlin (the Prussian capital since 1701) launched campaigns of persecution against the Catholics (1/3 of the Reich's population), the Social Democrats, ethnic Poles, and the Jews.  All of these groups were systematically excluded – just having a Social Democrat relative could be held against you.

In the fields they were allowed to enter, Jewish people were doing extremely well – the professions, industry, banking, jounalism, science, the arts.  In Prussia, over 5% of Jewish boys became university students, compared to 0.58% of Protestants and 0.33% of Catholics.  But when things went badly for Berlin internationally, or when the economy declined, Germany's Jewish population was often blamed.

From 1885-1914, no Jews were given commissions in the Prussian army.  (Catholic Bavaria had a separate army, and they did have Jewish officers.)  The arms race before WW1 meant that the military establishment had to expand, and there weren't enough Junker sons to fill the officer corps.  The Junkers reluctantly allowed men from the new urban middle class to become officers, but only ones with respectable Lutheran families. Jews were still not allowed.  Those who were more than qualified enough were still turned away for made-up reasons.

This became a major symbolic issue for Germany's Jews, and they turned to the reserves (i.e. instead of the regular army) to try and win military commissions there.  In Prussia, reserve commissions had very high prestige, giving access to high society, and were often essential for advancement in civilian careers.  Succeeding here would represent inclusion within German society.

So Jewish leaders campaigned and petitioned, and used their influence to try and change things.  Liberal non-Jewish groups supported them, and the issue was repeatedly debated in the Reichstag.  But no War Minister even acknowledged that the issue was real.  Whenever a certain case was given as proof of discrimination, the current War Minister would order an investigation – which usually meant just asking local military officials if they'd broken the law.  And the minister would then report that the candidate had been proven to be unfit for the position.

But when WW1 broke out, it seemed as if things might change.  Kaiser Wilhelm had previously called the Jews “the curse of my country”, but now he proclaimed the dawn of Burgfrieden – a new era in which all Germans were fully accepted, and would join together to save their country from their enemies.

In August 1914, about 1% of Germany's population was Jewish (about 600,000 people). They supported the war eagerly for the most part, with no important exceptions.  Even the small Zionist majority did, as they believed it would liberate Poland's Jews, and teach the Russians a lesson. Jewish leaders declared that it was the hour they had been waiting for.  And Jewish people were finally allowed to be officers, although they couldn't be promoted beyond Captain.

Conservatives weren't happy about Burgfrieden, because they wanted to achieve national unity through excluding anyone not regarded as a real German.  They warned that the changes caused by the war would mean that Germany would eventually no longer be a real German state. However, early in the war, these people were prevented from publishing or speaking in public – this was the first time antisemitic propaganda had been suppressed in German history.  This also gave hope to the Jews, but it was short-lived.

As the war continued and didn't go well for the Germans, they began to look for scapegoats.  And of course, the Jews were chosen for that.  Some declared that capitalists were to blame, and the capitalists were Jews.  Others declared that socialism was to blame, and the socialists were Jews.  Jewish profiteers were draining the nation's lifeblood.  Jewish liberals were contaminating the youth with their democratic ideas.  Jews who cared more about their fellow Jews than about Germany, were trying to turn the country into a refuge for undesirables from Poland.  Etc, etc.

Things had seemed so promising at the start of the war, and German Jews had believed that by sharing in the national sacrifice, they would be rewarded with inclusion into German society, and the barriers would fall.  But when they went to war, they usually found a massive cultural barrier between them and the Gentile soldiers, and were seldom accepted as German troops.

And then, in October 1916, the Prussian War Minister Adolf Wild von Hohenborn ordered a census to be held.  This Judenzählung singled out only the Jews – it was to determine how many were in each army unit, how many hadn't been called up yet, and how many had either been released from service or found to be unfit.  The census was supposed to be secret, but the public soon learned of it.

The Jewish community was shocked and angry.  Jewish volunteers had rallied to the cause at the beginning of the war; they were buying war bonds worth millions of marks; Jewish industrialists and scientists were making very important contributions to the war effort.  It made no sense, and dashed the high hopes held at the start of the war.

Hohenborn's reasons for holding the census may not have been based on his own prejudice.  Complaints that the Jews were shirking their share were rising, and instead of joining in and agreeing with them (as the kaiser and many other officials were doing) he decided to find out what the facts actually were.  However, the decision to hold the census made the situation worse.  Some officers responded by sending all their Jewish soldiers immediately to the front.

The census showed that contrary to prejudice, the Jewish community was doing more than its share.  But by the time these findings were disclosed, Hohenborn was no longer War Minister (he left his post on October 29th).  His successor Hermann von Stein tried to calm things down, and stated (rather confusingly) that, “the behaviour of Jewish soldiers and fellow citizens during the war gave no cause for the order by my predecessor, and thus cannot be connected with it.”

There was no apology for the census, and no-one in a position of authority said anything about the Jews who were fighting and dying for their country.  The (further) damage had been done.  Over 100,000 German Jews would fight during the Great War, and 12,000 would die in the line of duty.  But instead of the hopes of 1914, Germany's Jewish community was now afraid of what would happen once the war was over.

The Central Association of German Citizens of Jewish Faith's newspaper said, “A war after the war stands before us.  When the weapons are laid to rest, the war's storm will not have ended for us.”  These words would be prophetic.

This leaflet was published by German Jewish veterans in 1920, in response to accusations of unpatriotism.  It says: "12,000 Jewish soldiers died on the field of honour for the fatherland."

[thedogoodpress]

Pro-Choice Versus Pro-Life

By Erin Armstead

You’ve heard others talk about it. You’ve seen at least a dozen people share articles and post opinions about it on social media. You’ve seen the protests on the news, showing people shouting about fetuses being cut up and sold for body parts. How much of it is true?

What started all of this? The debate is pro-choice versus pro-life, the two sides of the abortion debate. This conversation entered public space in the time of Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court case that made access to abortion legal across the U.S. in 1973. It has been a hot topic in political conversation ever since. More often than not, if a candidate runs for office on the platform of “family values,” they mean to advertise that they are pro-life.

Many people who identify themselves as pro-life are also fundamentalist Christians, who also often believe that birth control is frowned upon by their God. The pro-life platform has come to a consensus that life begins at the moment of conception, and the people who feel this way have fiercely defended their beliefs, even going out of their way to show up at various locations of Planned Parenthood, a nonprofit organization that provides affordable reproductive healthcare, picketing and shouting at clients that they are “going to hell” and “murdering babies.” This activity is vicious enough to draw the attention that this platform craves. Like any group of people holding a strong belief, they desire to be heard and to share their message with many. To this group of people, shouting directly at vulnerable people, usually already shy enough about showing up to a center for sexual health, is the most efficient method of spreading their message.

Their passion for protecting unborn children is understandable, however, particularly in the light of the 2015 hoax that circulated through social media based on heavily edited “sting” videos released by a pro-life organization called Center for Medical Progress (1). These videos suggested that tissue and organs were being harvested from late-term abortions at Planned Parenthood for trafficking, to the extent that a late-term aborted fetus was kept alive so that its brain could be harvested. However, these purported claims were heavily investigated, and it was revealed that the videos had been significantly edited, and that the aforementioned late-term fetus harvested for its brain had had its heart momentarily restarted by tapping on it, but that the fetus was, in fact, irreversibly deceased at the time of the brain’s harvesting. If these claims had been true, of course, the pro-life outrage would have been warranted; however, fetal tissue donation at Planned Parenthood is not for profit, and the only location of Planned Parenthood that receives any kind of compensation for its tissue donations is strictly regulated by the law and is limited to a total of $60 reimbursement for such things as storage and transportation of the critical fetal tissue (2).

In that light, what does it mean to be pro-choice? Does that mean pro-abortion? The short answer is no. Pro-choice is exactly what it sounds like: to be in favor of whatever choice the person affected prefers to make, because it is, after all, their own body and pregnancy.

Overall, people in the pro-choice camp believe in the right to bodily autonomy, or the right to decide for yourself what you want to do with your own body. There are many reasons a person might want to have an abortion. In the world, there are people who want to have children, but it is physically unsafe for them to do so and might risk their own life or the child’s or both; people who are unfit to be a parent and know it; people who want to have a child, but who may feel as though the child’s life might be at risk or too low-quality if born into their current circumstances; and people who may have conceived under undesirable conditions--such as sexual assault--and cannot bear the thought of looking into their abuser’s eyes for another second, much less, potentially, the rest of their lives in their child. The point is that no one can assume that every child in the world is conceived in favorable conditions, and, especially if the circumstances are undesirable, it is not our place to become involved in the matter unless requested, nor is it the job of the pregnant person to justify their actions. They themselves will live with the knowledge of the loss for the rest of their lives, and, should one desire to punish for ending a potential life, as many people holding pro-life beliefs seem to, it is quite possible that that history, a possible source of grief and regret, would be enough.

The pro-life camp is known for suggesting that the “unwanted children” should simply be given up for adoption, because there are plenty of people desperate to have children who are unable to conceive. Currently, there are more than 100,000 children in the U.S. waiting to be adopted, and it should be acknowledged that if there is indeed such a demand for adopted children, that number should hold at a steady zero instead. In addition to those statistics, there is the fact that more than 200,000 babies have been born as a result of In Vitro Fertilization (IVF), which was introduced in 1981, and other similar methods (3.) These numbers suggest that, when possible, future parents truly desperate for a child would rather choose IVF or similar and have their own child rather than adopt someone else’s biological child. This makes adoption a rather less practical solution for the matter at hand.

At least a portion of the group of pro-choice people view the baby’s first breath as the moment when life begins, or, alternatively, at the fetus’s first heartbeat. There is some debate on the matter, but it is agreed that the moment of conception is not when life begins; this thinking would also cast some condemnation on every person who has ever had a miscarriage, which is an unfortunately common natural occurrence outside of the pregnant person’s control.

Some abortions are done out of medical necessity. There are many reasons why a pregnancy would not be a good idea for the mother or child and require ending the developing life before birth. An ectopic pregnancy is when an egg is fertilized and implants outside of the uterine cavity, where life is meant to be created; the fetus cannot develop outside of the uterus, and not only cannot survive, but may threaten the life of the mother if left as is. It is also worth noting that, despite suggestions currently circling on social media to the contrary, ectopic pregnancies cannot be reimplanted in the uterus to produce a surviving embryo (4.) A mother who has diabetes or high blood pressure issues prior to conception, among other common medical issues, may also be regarded as a high-risk pregnancy. In these cases, abortion would not be required, but the pregnancy would need to be closely monitored to be sure that all develops as it should and that there are no complications that would threaten the life of the fetus or mother, which might require an abortion (5.)

You don’t have to be pro-life to be anti-death. Statistics show that in countries across the globe where abortions are illegal, 8 to 11 percent of all maternal deaths, estimated to total about 30,000 women each year, are a result of unsafe, unregulated abortions. 6 Many of these deaths result from self-induced abortions, such as the practice of inserting a bent wire hanger into one’s body to remove the fetus, or inserting herbs into the vagina as a way to induce a miscarriage, which is known to result in septic shock, from which a woman can also die. Part of the focus of the pro-choice platform is to provide safe, medically-regulated abortions for those who desire them. A popular statement in pro-choice conversations is, “Making abortions illegal won’t stop them from taking place. It will only stop the safe ones.” Statistics show that this is true.

In the end, it comes down to whether you will choose to be an idealist who blindly believes that the world is and will be kind to everyone or a realist who sees the world for what it is and knows that there are people who have known pain beyond what we can imagine without having experienced those moments ourselves. Sometimes the most difficult and painful choice, ending a potential life, is the best choice available. That choice should be safely available to all.

[mistereblue]

warrnambool car thief who fled custody

warrnambool car thief who fled custody jailed for 140 days The groups exchanged questions before the video chat and elected representatives from each class as speakers. He also told the officer that his father would blindfold him while this was happening.. The young man, now 25, testified Tuesday that Sandusky pinned him down while they were alone in the basement of the coach's home. Another Weston three pointer after the break cut the gap before Ash Bithel bagged another try for the visitors. Limit one entry per person or email address for the entire Contest Period. Karen Wilson said the scene was "very chaotic. They also lost to Ohio 34 13. The document calls for the Community Environmental Advisory Commission(CEAC) and the Zero Waste Commission to perform research and outreach to these ends.. Tampa's top cornerback at this point is past his prime 33 year old Brent Grimes, while first round draft pick Vernon Hargreaves learns the ropes. The Alaska Endurance Trail Run is a six mile loop through my backyard, the North Campus of the University of Alaska Fairbanks. Clair Regional Cancer Program, hold a cheque for $1 million at the Windsor Regional Hospital Cancer Centre on Thursday.. Bowen smartone618 says: I ate at one of these in DC last year. And Ashdown, M. While the confidence around Ballybofey might be the highest it has been in recent memory, there still remains some concerns over the Harps creativity in the final third. Read more. In the name coach outlet online of all Montrealers, I wish him a speedy recovery. Market fragmentation in the business can work to your advantage, accepting you can discover the specialty identified with what you're attempting to sell, since it abstains from squandering cash coming to those probably not going to be in the market for what you are putting forth. If such changes occur, they will be posted on the Sponsor's contest website.. And this issue, American political life, is also related to the discussion this afternoon, at least in part. Herms seems to be moving away from its tried and tested formula of frustrating demand for its iconic products. Most of the bag limit section of the handbook deals with these sorts of distinctions, but the second to last paragraph also adds this:. For example, 83 percent of respondents said they would support rewarding urban property owners with incentives like utility bill credits to prevent runoff from their lawns and 71 percent would back tax credits for farmers to reduce runoff from their land. 7. Well, campaigns are seven years long for a reason and one reason why is to weather economic cycles. Once potatoes are safe to touch, use a knife to create a small cross slit on top of each potato. A Moschino party frock is 160 while must have Plein Sud green suede flat booties, usually around 200, are only 50, and the celebrity favourite black patent peep toe platform shoes by Christian Louboutin are a mere 120, instead of around 350. Are you sick of bizarre sex acts. Find Chompers outside Door 8 of The Better Living Center, near the Flag Plaza.. Within the Wharton community, we've uncovered a conversation that is more tactical: at what level should public policy be set, and how can the government's role be fair and effective. Coach Woodens maxim reminds that all of those great ambitions, and all of the good you are capable of doing in the world, coach outlet clearance starts with your actions. Car les rserves de morue ont fini par s'puiser. In five years' time half the infant population of Wolverhampton will be named Ruben. We needed to be more rigorous. Most are mentors, all are role models. Industry into new products is one of the things his company does, designing and manufacturing upcycled bags, packs, accessories and apparel from materials companies are getting rid of.. The test also suggested that man are more independent in Malaysia and are very positive in Retirement Village lifestyle and single females surpassed married females in the preference to live in the Retirement Village. "I love this country, I love softball, I love playing for this team," the catcher said, the words sticking slightly in her throat. Air Force and other military branches.. It did to a degree, the Americans didn't dominate the same way when play resumed, but the team's control of the match remained intact long enough to see the Americans add a second goal, one started by McKennie and finished off by Pulisic.. These limitations could be reduced with further thorough research.. Ethan Wharton was not in the dock because psychiatrists had decided he was unfit to stand trial, but the jury found that he had committed the acts of the conspiracy charge and a separate charge of possessing cocaine with intent to supply it a year earlier. The male began yelling and cursing. With his second big league save and first since August 2016, Shreve preserved a 7 6 Subway Series victory Saturday that enabled Sonny Gray to win consecutive starts for the first time since the Yankees acquired him last summer.. Always wear a mask and latex or vinyl gloves while cleaning up mouse infected spots. Thus, conventional risk management techniques such as credit scoring are of limited use in such contexts. 18042.. Bake for half an hour or until the egg mixture solidifies.. Weather: Cuba is generally hot all year round. What he would need after two stints on the disabled list and some hobbling on the basepaths was a second surgery. For storage up to one year, place tightly wrapped rolls in the freezer.. It drew support from the Romanians abroad who, as in the past, turned out in substantial numbers at embassies and consulates to cast their vote.. Castellanii trophozoites was measured by RMS for up to 48 hours post infection (hpi).

[epistolizer]

Hit & Run Commentary #111

A missionary said that Christians ought to share the Gospel with those that do not look like them.  But shouldn’t the Christian also be willing to share the Gospel with those that DO look like them, even if this includes White and Americans?  If missiological theory now holds that it is often best to let the natives reach out to other natives if at all possible, why should Whites and Americans be chastised if they are most comfortable with reaching out to other Whites and Americans?

A missionary praised a letter by Adoniram Judson to his prospective father in law essentially berating him that he was a bad Christian if he did not consent to surrender his daughter to a man readily admitting he was unfit to provide for her in the name of missionary outreach. That’s certainly a ballsy approach to persuade a father to grant the hand of his daughter in marriage.

Reflecting on a missionary’s admonition on the need to genuinely respect Muslims, a pastor confided that in public he is careful not to directly look at Muslim women for fear of offending their high moral standards. First, if Muslim women do not want to be looked at, they can return to their excrement pile homelands. This is America. If you are a woman and you don’t even want to be looked at, don’t come here. Given that where many of these women come from they can pretty much be raped if caught in public unaccompanied by a male family member, one would think simply being looked at would be a welcomed improvement.  If Americans are obligated to pander to this extent to the Islamist adversary, this global worldview war is already lost. What other defeatist postures are Christians obligated to assume? Are believers in Bible Belt states such as North Carolina now expected to eliminate their thriving pork barbecue culture?

Because of the wave of a missionary’s hand, the congregation of a Baptist church where the pastor once regularly went out of his way to emphasize what a wretched religion Islam is  is now harping how believers are obligated to show “genuine” respect to Muslims such as at least hearing out what the Koran has to say.  One must ask will such an open approach now be extended to Catholics, science fiction enthusiasts, and women that wear pants?

If ever criticized in Independent Baptist circles for my interest in science fiction and comics, I might just ask how is this different than the “genuine” respect and interest we are now obligated to manifest on behalf of Muslims.  If I was any good at outstretching my hand and expecting something to be placed into it, I should have claimed I need funds for outreach to ComiCon.

Of Adoniram Judson, he and his first wife lost their first child through miscarriage, their second child eight months after his birth, and their third child sixth months after his first wife’s death.  Of the 13 children he sired, only six survived. Given that these deaths were likely attributable to the squalor endemic to the heathen world, though he is worthy of praise as a missionary, is anyone going to have the courage to point out that he was a lousy husband and father?

Baptist functionary Paige Patterson ahas been castigated for remarks suggesting  that teen boys often display an enthusiastic appreciation for female physical attributes.  If these marms are eager to chastise men for determining a woman’s worth based on the size of her measurements going to be as eager in disabusing the young women that the value of a man is determined by the size of his bank account or the horsepower of the automobile that he drives?

Because the thoroughfare is named after the President of the Confederacy, Jefferson Davis Highway in Northern Virginia is slated to be renamed Richmond Highway.  But since Richmond was also the capital of the Confederacy, shouldn’t that name itself also be just as offensive? If we are to be consistent, shouldn’t the entire city of Richmond be “renditioned”  in a manner similar to that which occurs on the USA drama “Colony” in order to remove this geographical “trigger”?

A 104 year old scientist who technically wasn’t terminally ill killed himself at a Swiss suicide clinic.  Is there no reason he couldn’t have waited a few days

Technically, isn’t the Captain Marvel being foisted upon the movie going public in the upcoming film actually just Ms. Marvel from the comics before these periodicals become hyper-political?

Regarding this level of abuse that Southern Baptist functionary Paige Patterson is alleged to have endorsed.  Does that consist of actual hitting or is this merely of a man simply articulating disagreement with a woman and raising his voice in reply to a voice that was first raised at him?  Do these Dana Carvey-style good church women intend to say anything about the increasing number of women that mistreat and disrespect men as well?

If professional sports teams can ban fans living outside of certain zip codes from purchasing play off tickets or from wearing the paraphernalia of the visiting team as in the case of the NHL playoffs, why should we give a flip when these enterprises cry a river about decreasing attendance at these high priced competitions?  If people want to be berated and ordered about in a surly manner, they can just go to the DMV.

So will authoritarian progressives feigning opposition to human oppression to the extent that all vestiges of the Confederacy from statues to road names must be obliterated from public consciousness toss hissy fits as vehement against the erection of an 18 feet tall Karl Marx statue paid for by the Red Chinese in his hometown of Trier, Germany to celebrate the bicentennial of the deadbeat philosopher?  

In a tweet, Maxine Waters quipped, “How many diet Cokes did Trump consume while he gulped and waited for the defeat of his pedophile candidate?”  How is Trump’s consumption of diet soda any more outrageous than those in her preferred constituency known for their proclivity for gape soda? Roy Moore might have dated a few a bit young for his age. But unlike many in the community this particular legislator claims to represent, at least Moore did not leave these gals with a litter of out of wedlock children in his wake.

If it is unacceptable irrespective of what statutory law allows for 30 year olds to date 18 year olds because such young minds are impressionable and easy to manipulate into compliance, why is it acceptable to manipulate those of that age into giving their lives in their country’s wars?  Is not the government making promises of education and enlistment bonuses not much different than a man promising to lavish nice things upon a compliant young woman?

It is insisted that Confederate statues should only be allowed to exist if these memorials are placed in an historical context.  That means they must be exhibited in a way so as to maximize the amount of White guilt elicited. So if exacting nitpicky detail is the ultimate goal, will additions be made to the Martin Luther KIng memorial pointing out that he fooled around on his wife, denied a number of fundamental Christians doctrines, and that he received support from a number of avowed Communists likely themselves at the behest of the Soviet Union?  Or is this one of those instances where we are supposed to overlook Russian meddling in American affairs but are expected to react as if it is the opening scene from Patrick Swayze’s version of Red Dawn if subversive operatives are accused of conducting under the table discussions with Trump administration representatives?

Outrage erupted when Ben Carson observed that a good measure of poverty is actually a mindset.  Are those jacked out of shape that this is a criticism of individuals or that government complicity in the welfare racket has been exposed.?  This mental shackling has ensnared nearly all of us to some degree. When considering an undertaking or an enterprise, often thoughts  no longer dwell upon  do I possess the skill need to succeed or what will happen if the idea we think is so great turns out to be a flop. Rather, we calculate is it even worth the effort given the penalties likely to be incurred for failing to comply with with the intricacies of complex taxing regulations or even the violence one is likely to incur for criticizing ideas contrary to the orthodoxies of entrenched elites.

Homeschool activist Kevin Swanson suggests avoiding the public library because of books on the shelves that promote the homosexual agenda rather than simply avoiding those books. Among certain fundamentalist sects, attendance at places such as amusement parks, beaches, and the cinema are also forbidden. Children probably shouldn’t visit museums either because their impressionable minds might be exposed to evolution. Extending this logic a bit further, one supposes these youngsters should not be allowed to go to the supermarket either because they might catch a glimpse of the condom display or the heaving bosoms of the tramps on the covers of Cosmo magazine or those trashy paperback romances. So when is the homeschool child ever allowed to leave the house? Even if they aren’t allowed to date, won’t their mail order brides be exposed to assorted carnal evils racing through the airport on their way to the cordoned off family compound? If those from this Evangelical sociological subgrouping are to live lives this sheltered or separated, on what grounds do such thoroughgoing Protestants gripe about cloistered monks and nuns?

Mitt Romney has condemned the selection of Robert Jeffress to offer the opening prayer of the U.S. embassy in Jerusalem on the grounds that the Baptist minister is a religious bigot.  So what Romney is saying is that it is unacceptable for someone to articulate why they are reluctant over religious grounds to vote for a candidate running for elected office but perfectly acceptable to exclude that individual from a public event over refusal to embrace religious universalism.  Technically, Romney is not much different then philosophically from the Romans that tossed Christians to lions in the gladiatorial arena. If dedicated temple Mormons like Mitt Romney really do believe no religion is better than any other with all sincerely held paths leading the individual to an eternity with God in Heaven, why does his sect spend so much time canvassing the neighborhoods of the world with missionaries many of whom have been strongarmed pretty much into this service taken away from their families?

President Trump is being criticized for acknowledging the hero in the Waffle House mass casualty incident three weeks after the fact.  Had Trump thanked the individual at the time, the President would be accused of being a media whore having to interject himself into the story.

By Frederick Meekins

[alexajuryrels390b]

Before reading this article, I had no idea of how all the U.S. president’s ranged in terms of their religious choices.  I figured that there would be a pretty big variety in terms of religion throughout the hundreds of years, but I was wrong.  in reading this article, I realized that almost all of our U.S. presidents are and have been Christian, including Trump.  I actually did not even know that Trump had a religious background.  

In the article, it explains a lot about religion and things that we have learned in class the entire semester.  In our Constitution of the United States, it prohibits any religious test or religious requirement for anyone to hold public office, but still, almost all of them have been Christians.  Trump is actually our nation’s ninth president to be affiliated with a Presbyterian church, even though he no longer attends a church on the regular.  He grew up in a Presbyterian and still considers himself one as he says that his religion is a wonderful religion.  One of the first Presbyterian’s to occupy the White House was Andrew Jackson and there was also Ronald Reagan.  

Personally, I do not care much for what a president’s religion is because everyone’s faith should be respected.  Just because they have different beliefs and morals than you or us as a whole does not necessarily make them unfit to be president, but many Americans truly do care about their leaders’ faith.  According to the Pew Research Center, 40% of people say that there is too little religious discussion by our political leaders while 27% say there is too much.  

With our past presidents, John F. Kennedy was the only Catholic president.  There were two presidents, Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln had no religious affiliation.  Obama was raised in a nonreligious household but was converted to Christianity as he grew up and into adulthood.  All of these people were really interesting to find out about and learn more about.  We have learned a lot about presidents through this class, but to see each president's affiliation and religious beliefs mapped out and shown in a way that is easy to see everything at once.  

[eekispyykes]

The First 15 points of The New Establishment Generation.

The New Establishment Generation.

1.No judge may serve more than 10 years in the supreme court.All US Supreme court opinions are subject to academic review. Antonin Scalia has voiced criticism of law school electives when in fact the threat he feels from young law students applying theory early reduces the grandiosity he makes presenting law in limited scopes, narrow glances and conservative judicial activism(ie McCutcheon v FEC, Citizens United v FEC)

2.Prior to Supreme Court opinions, Law schools are requested to submit faculty per curiam opinions and Appeals/District Courts likewise encouraged to present Opinion on cases. Intrajudicial review has a duty to raise concensus by which State and US Supreme Court cannot venture outside expected precedents lower courts would be promptly overturned for exercising.

3.Journalists reviewing/recycling the term ' me generation”, “selfie generation' or any similar accusation of narcissism are hereby denounced as reputable sources. The outcome of these misguiding trope labels applied to young people result in a) feelings of obligation to serve in unofficial wars, 2) to neglect their owed duty to call for term limits for a congress of aging narcissists representing only themselves and their re election lobby's interest.

4.Term Limits are now a litmus and legally binding contract for any candidate seeking office.No thanks to a conservative activist supreme court; no matter their official leans, the 22nd Amendment sufficiently provided for a norm of limitations for sitting Legislators and White House officials. We see this ageism in persons like Elizabeth Porter who reduced the gun dialog down to 'do your homework and don't bother me”. The Congresspersons took a sworn oath to protect the people from threats foreign and domestic and they are failing.By lack of term limits we see arrogance reeking out of the doors of our legislative houses. The days great orators by their own personal camera are not the days best reformers.  The first lobbyist is the incumbent themselves.

I’m suggesting the protective measures of two terms in each house of congress, a total of 26 years total service, a lowering of voting age to 15, a lowering of congress access age to 19. It is by a protective notion of wanting candidates that will willfully vacate office to do other things these measures are such. Also, that candidates are more aligned to education interests and not lobby interests. Long term donations have a strong association to candidate influence and so the appearance of corruption without term limits has been a neglected artifact in the Supreme Court evaluation. 

House term 9 yrs, Senate term 6yrs. The two year cycle is a money drain and congress must be held to their own performance stats.

5.In as long as NRA will turn a blind eye to circumvention of federal law , aspire slavery  and through their evangelical base distort gun rights a christian/protestant policy, the NRA and its industry will be considered a baseless faction disservicing the 2nd amendment more than representing it. They’re white privilege mongers. This does not stand to dismiss concealed carry and if assault weapons were ever to be legal, additional licensing was necessary.

6.The republican party is found negligent and culpable for the costs of all gun deaths relating from the expiration of the assault weapons ban. We additionally call for police harboring and collaborating false statements to exonerate murderers behind a badge to be charged for accessory to murder and obstruction of justice.

7.The killing of a man need no greater than semi automatic capability in the reason of self defense. All mechanisms of automatic fire, or greater expiring of ammunition than one trigger pull per bullet is prohibited . Semi automatic weapons have been on the market for awhile , including rifles. The recent choice to appeal a military style carbine has been highly specialized to illegal modifications even though military recruits are also trained only for single round shooting. Automatic and modified semiautomatic weapons are frivolity measures explicitly unlike purposes of self defense.

8. No legitimate christian could ever have blessed AR-15s in the presence of Jesus under his teachings. The militancy of white radicalized gun idolators raises a cult alert about conservative politics and delusional expressions more similar to Sharia law than unlike. When a shooter entered Youtube headquarters in what is presumed confrontation of banning DIY gun videos the reality of fringe NRA militancy groups was manifested. If the political link is factual it is but a wider example of conservatives being unfit to have guns due to their death threat tendencies for political reasons. They’re taking as much offense to gun control as extreme Muslims to heckling Mohammed is an absolute parallel. The conservative message divides themselves from willing christian martyrs. The narrow gate in christianity is the only gate; to school christian post on Trumps adulterous exemptions.

9.Money is not speech. However  in the time that it continues to be so , money cannot be divided from speech. Stock ownership is a political and business association  that need not have divided its influence from the stock itself. In the creation  of PACs and unfortunately then sPACS, transparency was decreased as for stock holders being aware what funding was going to political purposes. Goldman Sachs has just been called upon by its shareholders to release its lobbying budget.. Unitarian Universalist Association representing 1000 religion organizations seems to be proving that when a company is allowed to perform corporate political speech, it doesn't see its own association to its shareholders to be a sufficient  basis of representing shared interest. Corporate speech is not entitled freedom from, or anonymous association.

10.The first six points are the focus of for debate.

11.A fetus is inert property of the mother up to birth and only until a successful birth is a fetus actually assured survival noting birth injuries like cerebral palsy, erbs palsy , ischemia. There is no creationist providence to its opposition to abortion due to first :a) birth -beginning-life is the official start of life in creationism  b)only since 1910 have premature birth babies been consistently viable. Christianity is not a rabbinical reform religion . c) the antiabortion lobby function as a female harassment lobby posturing only against nonrepublicans. d) the creationist republican lobby does not support life for it finds healthcare more appealing as a profit agenda, not a social well-being agenda. e) the creationist republican lobby doesn't respect life in its pollution and deregulation policies that allow industry to spoil water sources and poorly dispose of wastes. f) the republican creationist agenda doesn't support life because “texas” (business regulation absence).

12.No state is legitimately entitled to hold closed primaries for they feature only the attention of republicans and democrats. Ballot access has been largely inhibiting to any additional parties where money , not policy, is the limiting feature in the market place of ideas. Elections need not only be reformed but assuring the end of the monopoly by the democrat-republican trust. It's really a shame the country United States broke from; England , is doing better for Democracy than this country is. For a country of 65 million people, they have 12 parties. By that ratio , there should be 58 accessible and electable parties. We define the republican and democrat umbrellas of thought too large to be serviced, too profitable to be effectively translated to reasonable public interest, and too spent on protecting the legitimacy of their antipopulist behaviors.

13. We redact Congress's constitutional right to manage its order and affairs and issue a need of a New Constitutional convention recognizing that government's enabled to organize themselves without term limits will become corrupt.    

14. We announce a retirement of the American republic flag and pledge for expectation of even monotheism and a loyal appeasement to the wealthy to be unconstitutional division from representation. Instead a new flag and pledge steering away from eurocentrism and white creationist racism; assuring a “Liberal Democracy” system will be drafted.

15.  Single payer healthcare shall be the policy in that congress’s role to regulate and cost contain have failed by all other measures. Democrats individually are damned for extending an olive branch to the republican party during the healthcare debate. Managed care didn’t manage and its certainly not an adequate system to run government either. The airfare alone is reckless. Net Neutrality is guaranteed and synonymous in protecting the market place of ideas.

M Bench

[trendingnewsb]

Republican Women in Alabama Begin to Turn on Roy Moore

ANNISTON, AlabamaB.L. Shirley is a Republican woman from a Republican county who alwaysalwaysvotes Republican. And yet, on a windy, grey morning last weekend, the Talladega, Alabama, retiree found herself in, of all places, a Democrats campaign office, wondering just what she could do to defeat the GOP candidate running for a seat in the U.S. Senate from her state.

Roy Moore, she said, when asked why she would go canvassing for Democrat Doug Jones before the special election on Dec. 12. I think Roy Moore is an impostor.I am a Christian and I dont want to be counted in his camp. Hes a divisive person.

If Jones is to pull off a victory, it will be because women like Shirley knocked on doors, called neighbors, and worked to convince otherwise skeptical voters that his opponent is fundamentally unfit for the office hes seeking. A few weeks ago, that seemed like a tall order. As the election nears, it no longer appears quite so improbable.

Allegations that Moore routinely pursued teenage girls and in some cases assaulted them when he was a single man in his thirties have caused Republican voters in Alabama to reassess their options. Some have decided to rally around the nominee. But others have recoiled, leaving Moore in real risk of losing his attempt to take over the seat vacated by Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

More than any other group, it is the women of Alabama, specifically Republican women, who will be the divisive voting bloc.

Women like Walton Foster.

A Republican and a Christian, Foster voted for Sen. Luther Strange (R-AL) in the special election primary and said she plans to cast her ballot for Jones in the general. She considers Roy Moore an abomination.

Our historically Republican-leaning suburb is covered with Doug Jones signs. I have seen one for Roy Moore, said Foster, a mother of two teenage boys who lives in a suburb of Birmingham. He is more about his personal agenda and less about what is good for the state of Alabama. He does not seem interested in working with anyone. He has refused to debate and defend his positions publicly. When you add the nine accusationsnine!it is clear he is unfit for office.

Moore himself seems acutely aware that his standing among the women of Alabama is precarious at best. Over the past few days, his campaign has held press events with women testifying to his character while his wife has become his most public-facing surrogate.

The message has been that he is a victim of the liberal media, not a predator who targeted underage girls. Democrats in the state say it isnt working.

Sheila Gilbert, the chair of the Calhoun County Democratic Party, said shes heard from a number of unhappy Republican women since the allegations against Moore came to light in The Washington Post several weeks ago. She believes that those woman, and that story, have fundamentally changed the course of the Senate race.

I worked on a phone bank the other night with women calling women and a lot of women just wanted to talk, Gilbert said. They were saying they were Republicans and theyre going to vote for Doug Jones. They are appalled.Ive heard a lot of that.

A Fox News poll released last Friday showed that Gilberts phone bank conversations may reflect a larger trend taking place across the state. In the poll, Jones had an eight point lead over Moore50 percent to 42 percentmuch of it owed to his lopsided support from women, especially young women voters. While Jones was up 58-32 percent among all women, he had a monster 49-point advantage among women under age 45. Jones also received about one-fifth, 19 percent, of the votes of Republican women.

Strategists on both sides believe the race will come down to whether Jones can convince suburban Republican women from the states larger cities, like Birmingham, that Moore is, simply, unacceptable. And after strategically holding back on making an issue of the sexual assault allegations, the Jones campaign on Tuesday unveiled a television ad highlighting the prominent conservatives who had condemned his opponent.

The spot prominently featured President Donald Trumps daughter Ivanka. But there were plenty of other national Republican women Jones ad team could have chosen for cameos. Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) has called on Moore to drop out of the race. And Peggy Noonans column in The Wall Street Journal Saturday called on the Women of Alabama to Say No to Roy Moore.

But for all the national hand-wringing and the increased activity at local Democratic campaign headquarters, many Alabama Republican women seem ready to stick by Moore. That includes the states governor, Kay Ivey, who has said shell vote for Moore despite believing the accounts of his accusers. And it includes others who testified that they simply didnt find the allegations credible.

Why are we just now hearing about these women? said Angel Martin as she stood in a line at the Starbucks outside of Oxford, Alabama. Why is this just now coming out right before an election?

Two other women agreedthe timing was too convenient for Democrats- but neither wanted to be quoted supporting Moore. I just dont want to talk about all that, one said.

And then there is B.L. from Talladega. She asked that she only be quoted by her initials because her sister, who also lives in Alabama, is voting for Roy Moore.

B.L.s act of protest against her Republican Party for nominating a man she called an imposter would, in essence, be canceled out.

Read more: http://ift.tt/2iEuqYX

from Viral News HQ http://ift.tt/2BAtQ5q via Viral News HQ

[dominatingyourpussy-blog]

A Declaration by the Representatives

of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, in

General Congress assembled.

WHEN in the Course of human Events it becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the Powers of the Earth the separate & equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent Respect to the Opinions of Mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the Separation.

WE hold these Truths to be self-evident: that all Men are created equal; that they are endowed by their creator with inherent and* [certain] inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, & the pursuit of happiness: that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, & to institute new government, laying it’s foundation on such principles, & organizing it’s powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety & happiness. Prudence indeed will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light & transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses & usurpations begun at a distinguished period and pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty to throw off such government, & to provide new guards for their future security. Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; & such is now the necessity which constrains them to expunge [alter] their former systems of government. The history of the present king of Great Britain is a history of unremitting [repeated] injuries & usurpations, among which appears no solitary fact to contradict the uniform tenor of the rest but all have [all having]in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this let facts be submitted to a candid world for the truth of which we pledge a faith yet unsullied by falsehood.

HE has refused his assent to laws the most wholesome & necessary for the public good.

HE has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate & pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; & when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

HE has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of representation in the legislature, a right inestimable to them, & formidable to tyrants only.

HE has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

HE has dissolved representative houses repeatedly & continually for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

HE has refused for a long time after such dissolutions to cause others to be elected, whereby the legislative powers, incapable of annihilation, have returned to the people at large for their exercise, the state remaining in the meantime exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without & convulsions within.

HE has endeavored to prevent the population of these states; for that purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners, refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, & raising the conditions of new appropriations of lands.

HE has suffered [obstructed] the administration of justice totally to cease in some of these states [by] refusing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers.

HE has made our judges dependant on his will alone, for the tenure of their offices, & the amount & paiment of their salaries.

HE has erected a multitude of new offices by a self assumed power and sent hither swarms of new officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

HE has kept among us in times of peace standing armies and ships of war without the consent of our legislatures.

HE has affected to render the military independent of, & superior to the civil power.

HE has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitutions & unacknowledged by our laws, giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation:

FOR quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

FOR protecting them by a mock-trial from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states

FOR cutting off our trade with all parts of the world:

FOR imposing taxes on us without our consent:

FOR depriving us [in many cases] of the benefits of trial by jury

FOR transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offences:

FOR abolishing the free system of English laws in a neighboring province, establishing therein an arbitrary government, and enlarging it’s boundaries, so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these states [colonies]:

FOR taking away our charters, abolishing our most valuable laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our governments:

FOR suspending our own legislatures, & declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in allcases whatsoever.

He has abdicated government here withdrawing his governors, and declaring us out of his allegiance & protection. [by declaring us out of his protection and waging war against us.]

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, & destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation & tyranny already begun with circumstanccs of cruelty and perfidy [scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, & totally] unworthy the head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow citizens taken captive on the high seas to bear arms against their country, to become the executioners of their friends & brethren, or to fall themselves by their hands.

He has [excited domestic insurection among us, & has] endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes, & conditions of existence.

He has incited treasonable insurrections of our fellow-citizens, with the allurements of forfeiture & confiscation of our property.

He has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating it’s most sacred rights of life and liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating & carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere, or to incur miserable death in their transportation thither. This piratical warfare, the opprobium of INFIDEL Powers, is the warfare of the CHRISTIAN king of Great Britain. Determined to keep open a market where MEN should be bought & sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable commerce. And that this assemblage of horrors might want no fact of distinguished die, he is now exciting those very people to rise in arms among us, and to purchase that liberty of which he has deprived them, by murdering the people on whom he also obtruded them: thus paying off former crimes committed against the LIBERTIES of one people, with crimes which he urges them to commit against the LIVES of another.

In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injuries.

A prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant is unfit to be the ruler of a [free] people who mean to be free. Future ages will scarcely believe that the hardiness of one man adventured, within the short compass of twelve years only, to lay a foundation so broad & so undisguised for tyranny over a people fostered & fixed in principles of freedom.

Nor have we been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend a [an unwarrantable] jurisdiction over these our states [us]. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration & settlement here, no one of which could warrant so strange a pretension: that these were effected at the expense of our own blood & treasure, unassisted by the wealth or the strength of Great Britain: that in constituting indeed our several forms of government, we had adopted one common king, thereby laying a foundation for perpetual league & amity with them: but that submission to their parliament was no part of our constitution, nor ever in idea, if history may be credited: and, we [have] appealed to their native justice and magnanimity [and we have conjured them by] as well as to the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations which were likely to [would inevitably] interrupt our connection and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice & of consanguinity, and when occasions have been given them, by the regular course of their laws, of removing from their councils the disturbers of our harmony, they have, by their free election, re-established them in power. At this very time too they are permitting their chief magistrate to send over not only soldiers of our common blood, but Scotch & foreign mercenaries to invade & destroy us. These facts have given the last stab to agonizing affection, and manly spirit bids us to renounce forever these unfeeling brethren. We must endeavor to forget our former love for them, and hold them as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace friends. We might have been a free and a great people together; but a communication of grandeur & of freedom it seems is below their dignity. Be it so, since they will have it. The road to happiness & to glory is open to us too. We will tread it apart from them, and [We must therefore] acquiesce in the necessity which denounces our eternal separation! [and hold them as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace friends.]

We therefore the representatives of the united States of America in General Congress assebled [appealing to the Judge of the World for the recititude of our intentions] do in the name & by authority of the good people of these states [colonies] reject and renounce all allegiance & subjections to the kings of Great Britain & all others who may hereafter claim by, through or under them: we utterly disolve all political connection which may heretofore have subsisted between us & the people or parliment of Great Britain: and finally we do assert and declare these colonies to be free and independent states, [solemly Publish and Declare that these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be, Free and Independent States; that they are dissolved from allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political Connection between them and the State of Great-Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved;] and that as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract allies, establish commerce, & do all other acts & things which independent states may of right do.

And for the support of this declaration, [with a firm reliance on the protection of divine providence] we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, & our sacred honor.

[anchorarcade]

Republican establishment bails on Alabama candidate after sex allegations

http://ryanguillory.com/republican-establishment-bails-on-alabama-candidate-after-sex-allegations/

Republican establishment bails on Alabama candidate after sex allegations

(Reuters) – The Republican Senate campaign wing on Friday cut fundraising ties with Roy Moore, the party’s U.S. Senate nominee in Alabama, the latest sign that the Republican establishment was abandoning his campaign a day after sexual misconduct allegations upended a seemingly one-sided race.

FILE PHOTO: Alabama Republican candidate for U.S. Senate Roy Moore speaks with reporters as he visits the U.S. Capitol in Washington, U.S. October 31, 2017. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst/File Photo

Meanwhile, Democrats and progressive groups, emboldened by Democratic election victories in Virginia and New Jersey on Tuesday, sought to capitalize on the accusations in support of the Democratic nominee, former U.S. Attorney Doug Jones.

Moore, a controversial former judge and a staunch Christian conservative, was accused by a woman of initiating a sexual encounter in 1979 when she was 14 years old and he was a 32-year-old prosecutor, the Washington Post reported on Thursday.

Three other women said he pursued them when they were between the ages of 16 and 18, though none accused him of sexual contact.

The 70-year-old Moore again denied any wrongdoing on Friday during an appearance on conservative commentator Sean Hannity’s national radio show.

“These allegations are completely false and misleading,” Moore said of claims that he engaged in sexual misconduct.

The National Republican Senatorial Committee, which helps elect Republicans to the Senate, filed paperwork with federal election officials on Friday severing its fundraising relationship with Moore for the special election on Dec. 12.

Numerous Republican leaders either called on Moore to drop out immediately or said he should do so if the allegations prove true.

“Moore is unfit for office and should step aside,” former Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney said on Twitter.

But several Alabama Republican officials did not waver in their support of Moore.

The contrasting reactions echoed the rift exposed when Moore bested the incumbent, Luther Strange, in the Republican primary.

Strange was backed by Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and his allies, while Moore’s candidacy earned the support of self-styled outsiders such as Steve Bannon, the former strategist for U.S. President Donald Trump.

Following the publication of the Washington Post story, several Democratic senators, including liberal Elizabeth Warren, sent email blasts to their donor lists, soliciting donations to Jones’ campaign.

The Democratic Party has been coordinating with the Jones campaign behind the scenes, offering logistical aid while wary of providing overt support such as television advertising in the deeply Republican state.

“The best thing that Democrats can do in the Alabama Senate race is make sure the Doug Jones campaign can run the strongest, most aggressive race that the campaign can,” said a Democratic operative, who requested anonymity.

Progressive groups MoveOn, Democracy for America and Indivisible expect the revelations to boost their grassroots efforts to engage voters in Alabama.

“We were planning to go bigger already,” Matt Blizek, who oversees election mobilization for MoveOn, said. “With the news and the fact that this is a close race, that’s only going to increase.”

A win for Jones could transform the political picture in Washington, where Senate Republicans hold a narrow 52-48 edge.

The race had been seen as a long shot for Democrats in Alabama, which has not elected a Democratic senator in a quarter century.

But a confluence of events even before Thursday had given some Democrats hope of an upset victory, despite Jones’ double-digit deficit in some opinion polls.

Moore was twice forced out of his position as the state’s chief justice, once for refusing to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the courthouse and once for defying the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling legalizing same-sex marriage. Democrats have highlighted his penchant for incendiary statements about Muslims and homosexuality.

Zac McCrary, a veteran Democratic pollster based in Birmingham, Alabama, said he now sees Jones as the favorite.

“Roy Moore had much less margin for error than a Republican does traditionally in Alabama,” McCrary said. “Maybe for the first time in this campaign season, I would bet against Roy Moore representing Alabama in the U.S. Senate.”

But Jonathan Gray, a Republican consultant in Alabama, said voters were already questioning the veracity of the Washington Post story, given its timing. The only development that could sink Moore’s candidacy is a write-in campaign from a Republican backed by the party, he said.

Absent that, he said, all the analysis in the world will not change a simple fact: “Roy Moore wins December 12.”

Reporting by Joseph Ax; Additional reporting by Eric Beech, Eric Walsh, David Alexander and James Oliphant; Editing by Mary Milliken and Grant McCool

Our Standards:The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Source link

[awesomefelicitylewis-blog]

Republican establishment bails on Alabama candidate after sex allegations

http://ryanguillory.com/republican-establishment-bails-on-alabama-candidate-after-sex-allegations/

Republican establishment bails on Alabama candidate after sex allegations

(Reuters) – The Republican Senate campaign wing on Friday cut fundraising ties with Roy Moore, the party’s U.S. Senate nominee in Alabama, the latest sign that the Republican establishment was abandoning his campaign a day after sexual misconduct allegations upended a seemingly one-sided race.

FILE PHOTO: Alabama Republican candidate for U.S. Senate Roy Moore speaks with reporters as he visits the U.S. Capitol in Washington, U.S. October 31, 2017. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst/File Photo

Meanwhile, Democrats and progressive groups, emboldened by Democratic election victories in Virginia and New Jersey on Tuesday, sought to capitalize on the accusations in support of the Democratic nominee, former U.S. Attorney Doug Jones.

Moore, a controversial former judge and a staunch Christian conservative, was accused by a woman of initiating a sexual encounter in 1979 when she was 14 years old and he was a 32-year-old prosecutor, the Washington Post reported on Thursday.

Three other women said he pursued them when they were between the ages of 16 and 18, though none accused him of sexual contact.

The 70-year-old Moore again denied any wrongdoing on Friday during an appearance on conservative commentator Sean Hannity’s national radio show.

“These allegations are completely false and misleading,” Moore said of claims that he engaged in sexual misconduct.

The National Republican Senatorial Committee, which helps elect Republicans to the Senate, filed paperwork with federal election officials on Friday severing its fundraising relationship with Moore for the special election on Dec. 12.

Numerous Republican leaders either called on Moore to drop out immediately or said he should do so if the allegations prove true.

“Moore is unfit for office and should step aside,” former Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney said on Twitter.

But several Alabama Republican officials did not waver in their support of Moore.

The contrasting reactions echoed the rift exposed when Moore bested the incumbent, Luther Strange, in the Republican primary.

Strange was backed by Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and his allies, while Moore’s candidacy earned the support of self-styled outsiders such as Steve Bannon, the former strategist for U.S. President Donald Trump.

Following the publication of the Washington Post story, several Democratic senators, including liberal Elizabeth Warren, sent email blasts to their donor lists, soliciting donations to Jones’ campaign.

The Democratic Party has been coordinating with the Jones campaign behind the scenes, offering logistical aid while wary of providing overt support such as television advertising in the deeply Republican state.

“The best thing that Democrats can do in the Alabama Senate race is make sure the Doug Jones campaign can run the strongest, most aggressive race that the campaign can,” said a Democratic operative, who requested anonymity.

Progressive groups MoveOn, Democracy for America and Indivisible expect the revelations to boost their grassroots efforts to engage voters in Alabama.

“We were planning to go bigger already,” Matt Blizek, who oversees election mobilization for MoveOn, said. “With the news and the fact that this is a close race, that’s only going to increase.”

A win for Jones could transform the political picture in Washington, where Senate Republicans hold a narrow 52-48 edge.

The race had been seen as a long shot for Democrats in Alabama, which has not elected a Democratic senator in a quarter century.

But a confluence of events even before Thursday had given some Democrats hope of an upset victory, despite Jones’ double-digit deficit in some opinion polls.

Moore was twice forced out of his position as the state’s chief justice, once for refusing to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the courthouse and once for defying the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling legalizing same-sex marriage. Democrats have highlighted his penchant for incendiary statements about Muslims and homosexuality.

Zac McCrary, a veteran Democratic pollster based in Birmingham, Alabama, said he now sees Jones as the favorite.

“Roy Moore had much less margin for error than a Republican does traditionally in Alabama,” McCrary said. “Maybe for the first time in this campaign season, I would bet against Roy Moore representing Alabama in the U.S. Senate.”

But Jonathan Gray, a Republican consultant in Alabama, said voters were already questioning the veracity of the Washington Post story, given its timing. The only development that could sink Moore’s candidacy is a write-in campaign from a Republican backed by the party, he said.

Absent that, he said, all the analysis in the world will not change a simple fact: “Roy Moore wins December 12.”

Reporting by Joseph Ax; Additional reporting by Eric Beech, Eric Walsh, David Alexander and James Oliphant; Editing by Mary Milliken and Grant McCool

Our Standards:The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Source link