Thursday, October 21, 2010

"Why in the world does this so-called Christian President keep forgetting the 'Creator' part of the Declaration of Independence?"

"Why in the world does this so-called Christian President keep forgetting the 'Creator' part of the Declaration of Independence?" Glenn Beck asked that question in his newsletter today. He also said something in his newsletter that made me think how relevant our rights are in our free country. It concerned the fact that Barack Hussein Obama, who grew up in Indonesia and attended school there as a Muslim and supposedly became a Christian, had, for the third time in the past few weeks misquoted that essential line from The Declaration of Independence about God being the source of our inalienable rights. The actual line from The Declaration of Independence says:  "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Obama has referred to that sentence several times and each time he has omitted the part about being “endowed by their Creator”. On September 22nd, Obama spoke to a fundraising event for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and he said: “"... if we believe that all people are created equal and everybody is endowed with certain inalienable rights and we're going to make those words live…”

A few days before that, on September 15th, while speaking before the Congressional Hispanic Congress, Barack Hussein Obama first misquoted the line by saying: “"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, endowed with certain inalienable rights: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

While Obama reflects his Muslim teachings by refusing to acknowledge the Judeo-Christian God as the source of our laws and our inalienable rights, Democrats elsewhere seem to be following Obama’s line of attack against Republican candidates. In a televised debate from Delaware, the Democrat candidate for U.S. Senate Chris Coons repeatedly attacked Republican Christine O’Donnell’s position opposing evolution. As Glenn Beck commented: “But you remember if God didn't create, if things evolved, then your rights evolve. You're not endowed by your Creator. It's interesting. You're not endowed by your Creator with certain inalienable because your rights evolve.” So the progressive Democratic position seems to be that your rights to free speech can be changed and change means that those rights can be taken away.

Lester Kinsolving, the White House Correspondent for WorldNet Daily News asked Robert Gibbs, the White House Press Secretary: "In his interview with Rolling Stone, the President called Fox News 'destructive to the country.' And my question: Does he also believe that talk radio is destructive to the country, or is it only Fox News?". The question went unanswered but it seems that it isn’t FOX News that is the problem but the fact that the freedom of speech that FOX News enjoys is the problem.

To illustrate how Freedom of Speech is disregarded in other cultures here is an exchange on the subject from a report written by Stephen M. Kirby, ACT! for America Chapter Leader, Des Moines, Iowa who attended a forum titled “What it means to be an American Muslim” on October 7th at the Sheslow Auditorium of Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa.
The four panelists and the moderator were all Muslim Americans. They were:
Mahmoud Hamad, Moderator, Assistant Professor, Politics Department, Drake University
Luai Amro, President of the Islamic Cultural Center of Des Moines
Bill Aossey, President of Midamar Corporation
Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, MD, Founder and President of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy
Dr. Saima Zafar, MD, Member of the Iowa Campaign Ethics and Disclosure Board
Mr. Kirby writes:

“As the forum continued, an eye-opening moment came when the panelists were faced with an issue involving our First Amendment right to free speech."

"The First Amendment “is not relevant”"

"I was among the first to get up to ask a question of the panel. Here is what I said:  Molly Norris used to be the editorial cartoonist for the Seattle Weekly. She came up with the idea earlier this year of Everybody Draw Muhammad Day. Because of threats of death from people who said they were Muslims and from a particular Muslim, Anwar Al Awlaki, and advice from the FBI, Molly Norris is now in hiding and has changed her name. What I would like to do is offer the panelists, being Muslims in America, the chance to show that the First Amendment has significance. I’d like, I’d like our panelists to go on record and say that everybody in the United States has the First Amendment right to criticize Muhammad and to draw a picture of Muhammad if they’d like. And two, to also, to also condemn anybody who says they’re a Muslim who threatens death or physical harm to anybody exercising that First Amendment right."

"The moderator started saying “thank you” before I had ended the last sentence. I walked back to my seat expecting to hear an interesting panel discussion about the First Amendment versus Sharia Law. However, even before I had arrived at my seat the moderator had already gone on to the next person in line to ask a question. I sat down and soon realized that my comments to the panel were not even going to be addressed. "

"A few minutes later we found out why the moderator had ignored my comments. Dr. Jasser had been asked a question about the separation of mosque and state. At the end of his response to that question Dr. Jasser said:
"Our moderator said that the question on Molly Norris is not relevant. I can’t tell you how relevant I think it is. I think American Muslims should stand up --- "
"Jasser got no further because at this point the moderator actually took the microphone out of Jassers’s hand, said something that was unintelligible to me but which made many in the audience laugh, and went on to the next person who wanted to ask a question. Sadly, there was no comment about this from any of the other panelists. "
"The issue involving Molly Norris comes down to the question of which takes precedence now in the United States: our Constitutional right to freedom of speech, or Sharia Law’s ruling that to revile Muhammad is apostasy, which is punishable by death? Luai Amro had earlier talked about the obligation for Muslim Americans to say what they believed and to say who they really were, and this was the panelists’ opportunity to do both. It was troubling to see that by the actions of the moderator and the inaction of the majority of the panelists, it appeared that for them Sharia Law took precedence over our First Amendment right to freedom of speech."
There are now two elected members of Congress who are Muslims, Keith Ellison, a Democrat from Minnesota’s 5th Congressional District and AndrĂ© Carson, another Democrat from Indiana’s 7th Congressional District. Keith Ellison took his oath of office by placing his hand on a Qur'an, not a bible. According to the beliefs of Islam, Muslims may use the tactic of Taqiyya to tell lies when it furthers the interests of Islam. So Mr. Ellison committed no crime when he swore to defend and uphold the Constitution of the United States when, in fact, he does not. AndrĂ© Carson, on the other hand, used the Bible when he took his oath of office and in doing so he also wasn't being truthful when he swore to uphold the Constitution. Neither was telling the truth because both of these lawmakers openly espouse replacing our Constitutional laws with Islamic Sharia Law. Sharia Law does not recognize Freedom of Speech nor is it compatible with many other parts of our Constitution as pointed out in the excellent article entitled Quran vs. Constitution: Why they're incompatible, written by William J. Federer.

The more you learn about Democrats and Muslims the more you find to disagree with both.

No comments:

Post a Comment

No foreign language comments allowed. English only. If you cannot access the comments window send me an email at