Issues

Moral Action Committee
6273 Miller Road
Swartz Creek, MI 48473
Executive Director:  Dr. Roy L. McLaughlin  

Current News

October 18, 2007

YOU WILL HATE THE “HATE CRIMES” LAW

Here is an issue on which it is imperative we take a stand, right now, today.

 

Federal “Gay Rights” and “Hate Crime” Laws

 

The Hate Crimes bill sounds good on the surface; but it gives preferential protection to homosexuals  . . . whereas we should all receive equal protection under the law.  And should it become law, it would open the door to prohibiting churches from preaching that homosexuality is a sin – thereby possibly subjecting churches that do so to losing their tax-exempt status, and heavy penalties.  In addition, Hate Crimes legislation would pave the way for the government to later tell churches what else they can and cannot preach from the pulpit.  Pastors would then be put into the difficult position of choosing to obey man’s law or God’s laws – not to mention all of the other ramifications of this dangerous bill.

 

This radical “hate crimes” law would threaten to treat pastors as an “accessory” to acts of violence against individuals who engage in homosexual behavior.  In places where it’s already been enacted, such “hate crime” laws have resulted in a Swedish pastor being jailed, a Catholic bishop in Canada being hauled before a “human rights” tribunal for saying marriage should remain between a man and a woman, a dozen Christians - - including two grandmothers, one black, one white - - being arrested and facing 40 years in prison in Philadelphia for reading Bible verses on a public street during a “gay pride” festival.

 

Not only does this bill clearly threaten religious freedom, its very premise is an offense to the American tradition of equal justice under law.  It would literally mean that under federal law, a criminal who physically attacks a pregnant mother, senior citizen, or small child would be punished less severely – receive a shorter prison sentence – than someone who assaults a grown man . . . if that grown man engages in homosexual behavior.

 

On October 2, 2007, the U.S. Senate voted to attach this so-called “hate crime” law to the bill that provides funding to our American military in a time of war.

 

Now our only hope to stop that bill from becoming law is to urge President Bush to veto the Defense Reauthorization Act.

 

Please – today – urge President Bush to VETO the Defense Reauthorization Act,

forcing Congress to pass it again without the “hate crime” amendment attached to it.

 

White House comment line:  202-456-1111    White House switchboard:  202-456-1414

White House fax line:  202-456-2461                        White House e-mail:  comments@whitehouse.gov  

September 9, 2007

Lesbian To Become An Episcopal Bishop In Chicago

 

Despite the worldwide Anglican Communion’s demand that the U.S. Episcopal branch pledge to stop consecrating openly homosexual bishops by September 30, a lesbian priest has been named a finalist for bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Chicago.  According to The Associated Press, the Rev. Tracy Lind, Dean of Trinity Cathedral in Cleveland, would be the second Episcopal bishop living with a same-sex partner (homosexuality).

 

Traditional Lutherans are also facing a nightmare of their own when it comes to the values of those who represent them in leadership.  The leadership of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) passed a resolution by a vote of 583 \ 431 that urges bishops to “refrain from disciplining pastors” who are in “faithful, committed same-gender relationships.”  In my opinion, what they were saying was, it’s okay to sin as long as you are committed to your sin.

 

Tragically, this sinful slide toward tolerance and acceptance of immorality is not unique to the Episcopal or the Lutheran Church.  As is true in any association of churches or a local church, absolute truth must be defended by true believers who will speak and defend church policy (based on the Bible) which is being constantly challenged by those who demand political correctness over biblical truth.

 

A spokesman for a conservative branch of the Lutheran church, by the name of Jaynam England, said, “I don’t know which is worse – a church with no biblical standards to govern our ministry or standards we don’t intend to enforce.  To refrain from discipline in the home is bad parenting, but we’re about to do so in [God’s House].”

 

What Is Radical Christianity?

Perhaps you saw “God’s Warriors,” the recent CNN mini-series that purported to investigate what animates the most fervent followers of the world’s three major religions.  The documentary is just the latest in a steady stream of books and films promoting the ridiculous theory that conservative Christians and orthodox Jews pose as much of a threat to freedom as fanatical Muslims, who preach hatred and send their children off to become suicide bombers.  I do not think that Christianity poses any threat to America, and if anything, there is a greater need for more Christianity in our nation today, than there was in the early days of our founding. 

 

The Gavel Strikes Again

On August 30, 2007, a judge in Polk County, Iowa, declared Iowa’s marriage law unconstitutional and ordered county officials to immediately begin issuing marriage licenses to homosexual couples.  The Polk County Attorney argued that this wasn’t an issue for a lone judge to decide, but once again the raw political power of judicial activism proved too tempting.  Now “gay marriage” has come to the heartland.

 

What is it about some judges that makes them think they know better than the people’s elected representatives?  Do their robes endow them with superhuman intellect?  It’s not supposed to be this way, my friends.  Judges are not supposed to make law in this country.  If they want to make law, they need to be legislators, not judges.  The courts have no authority to impose their will on the people.  The respect and moral authority of the judiciary rests solely upon the premise that its power is limited and restrained.  Judicial activism violates that premise and usurps the authority of the people.  There is a solution:  Rogue judges who abuse their authority should be impeached!

 

It’s worth pointing out that six states neighboring Iowa have passed their own marriage protections amendments by an average vote of 66%.  Pro-family leaders in Iowa have pushed for years to get a marriage amendment through the state legislature.  But last year liberal politicians successfully killed the amendment in the divided state Senate, denying the people of Iowa the opportunity to define and defend traditional marriage for themselves.

 

As upset and alarmed as I am about this judge’s abuse of power, I appreciate that the timing of his decision came at the time when the campaign season kicks into high speed.  Every candidate for President – Democrat and Republican – will have to address the proper role of judges in our society.  I pray that every Christian voter will consider the dangers of liberal activism, as well as the importance of defending America’s traditional values in public policy.  May God help us to vote not primarily on the basis of political party or politician, but according to biblical teaching and principles.

 

August 21, 2006

Some Great Words You May Have Missed

 

Most Americans have probably learned by now that President Bush issued his first presidential veto on July 19, 2006 which prevented the implementation of the embryonic stem cell funding bill.  Even fewer Americans probably know or have heard that the President invited 18 “snowflake” families to the White House on that day who adopted frozen embryos to have children of their own.  Referring to the “snowflake” children, President Bush said, “They remind us of what is lost when embryos are destroyed in the name of research.  They remind us that we all begin our lives as a small collection of cells.  And they remind us in our zeal for new treatments and cures, America must never abandon our fundamental morals.”  Those are some great words you may have missed.

  

Displaying Faith

 

In Texas, a three-member panel of the 5th U. S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on August 16, 2006 that a memorial in front of a county court house that includes a Bible constitutes an unconstitutional promotion of religion by government.  The memorial was erected in 1956 to honor a Houston businessman and philanthropist, and a portion of the display includes a Bible.  The court ruled that although the display was secular in purpose when it was erected, the “character” of the monument changed when it was refurbished in 1995.  How was the display altered?  A neon light was placed inside the display to outline the Bible, which, according to the two-judge majority, transformed the display into something unconstitutional.  Despite the absurd ruling, the county now has the option of appealing the decision to the full 5th Circuit Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court.

 

Now for some encouraging news on the displaying of faith, concerning the legal battle in San Diego, California to force the city to tear down a 29-foot cross atop Mount Soledad dedicated as a memorial to Korean War Veterans back in 1954.  On August 14, 2006, President Bush signed a law transferring the memorial, which included nearly 2,000 plaques honoring war veterans, to the Federal government, thus making it more difficult for the courts to step in and force the cross to be removed.  The fight is not over, however, and there are indications that the U. S. Supreme Court may be interested in hearing the case.  It is very encouraging to see the President act boldly to exercise his legitimate authority to rein in judicial overreach.

 

Using A Baby For A Bomb

 

As more chilling details emerge about the thwarted terror plot in London, the New York Post has reported that two of the suspects now in police custody planned to sacrifice their 6-month old son in the name of jihad.  Apparently, Abjula Ahmed Ali, 25, and his wife, Cosser, 23, secretly plotted to use their child’s baby bottle as a liquid bomb to destroy themselves and their child, along with the entire plane.  As horrifying as this is, it is not an isolated phenomenon.  The British security experts believe this is only the latest example in a disturbing trend that is growing in popularity among the Islamofascists:  a woman using her innocent appearance to dispel suspicions and carry out deadly terror attacks. 

 

Even worse is the willingness of many Muslim women to exploit their young children in order to realize their hideous goals.  Of course, the idea that mothers would use their children as agents of murder is not new.  Palestinian mothers have been sending children to their demise as homicide bombers in Israel for decades.  You might remember that in January one such “mother” had sent three of her six sons on homicide missions against innocent Israelis and was subsequently elected to the Humus-led parliament.

 

Mothers and fathers should have a natural instinct to care for their children, to do everything necessary to protect their children from danger – even to die for their children.  Yet, our enemy embraces a religion that teaches that it is your “holy duty” to kill your own children.  This grim reality underscores the absolute necessity that men and women who recognize the value and dignity of human life stay engaged in this battle.  For, at its foundation, this is a fight between competing views of human life, with one view holding human life as an unalienable right given to us by our Creator; the other that human life can be exploited in the pursuit of jihad.

 

 

June 27 2007

Jimmy Carter Again Blaming America First

It would be nice to see Jimmy Carter once again actively building houses for Habitat for Humanity.  Instead, the former president increasingly lends whatever prestige he has left to supporting terror groups, and to undermining Israel and the United States.  Speaking in Ireland on June 19, 2007, Carter, surveying the carnage in Gaza, finally found a criminal he was willing to name - the United States!  According to Carter, the murder and mayhem is the fault of the United States and Israel because we did not embrace the Hamas killers after they got 42% of the vote in the Palestinian elections.  Never mind that Hamas refused to disavow terrorism or recognize Israel’s right to exist.  Carter says, “That action was criminal,” referring to our unwillingness to accept Hamas and give it foreign aid.

 

Strangely, Carter never calls Hamas criminal – not when they throw rivals off rooftops, not when they indoctrinate seven your-old Palestinian kids to “kill the Jews,” not when they fire rockets into Israel cities, not when they send pregnant women to blow up Israeli hospitals.  Carter only sees his own country and Israel as deserving of condemnation.  Carter has also announced the formation of a new “moderate” Southern Baptist group that wants, among others things, to move evangelical Christians away from their support of Israel.

 

President Bush Wrong on Funding Fatah

Carter’s love affair with Hamas is moronic, but what can one say about the rush by the Bush Administration and Prime Minister Olmert of Israel to “bet the farm” on the better dressed thugs in Fatah, led by Holocaust denier Mahmoud Abbas?  Fatah has the same goal as Hamas – the military and/or demographic destruction of Israel.  It just prefers it be done through negotiations for now.  Under Fahah’s leadership, Palestinian poverty has grown and lawlessness has increased, in spite of the 60,000 uniformed gunmen it employs.  Thousands of those gunmen cut and ran in Gaza in the face of the more militant Hamas fighters.  Yet the Bush Administration, the European Union and the Israeli prime minister apparently agree that supporting this Palestinian mafia is the way to peace.  They are now going to pour millions more of your tax money into Fatah coffers, where it will predictably disappear.  How long will we allow delusions to slap around reality?

 

Why Gaza Should Scare Us

 

I suspect many Americans have only a passing concern about the recent events in Gaza.  Nobody actually wants to see more pictures of masked gunmen shooting up the streets, forcing men to kneel and executing them in front of their families.  But as distasteful as those images are, they have nothing to do with our lives here, right?  Wrong!  What we have been witnessing is another victory for Islamofascism.  The Hamas fighters, as they routed the numerically superior Fatah forces, immediately knelt and praised Allah for their victory.  They attacked a Christian center, collected the Bibles and burned them.

 

Columnist and warrior Ralph Peters hit a grand slam home run in his column in the New York Post with his analysis of the Hamas victory.  He points out that from Gaza to Baghdad, from Lebanon to London, we are witnessing men who have given their lives to Allah and who are willing to die and kill with impunity.  Hamas fighters “at the height of the fighting in Gaza” only numbered “one Palestinian in 300,” but as Peters notes, today they control Gaza and 1.5 million people.

 

We are still in denial about the Islamofascist fanatics.  Many conflicts can be settled by negotiations, but not wars in which one side believes it is taking orders directly from its god.  That is why the Bush Administration should stop pressuring Israel to make more concessions.  No amount of land will satisfy Palestinian Muslims’ thirst for Jewish blood.  That is why the Baker Commission and the diplomatic community are wrong when they say we must get Iran’s cooperation through talks.  They keep forgetting, or are willfully ignoring, that Iranian “president” Ahmadinejad believes the Muslim messiah is coming soon to kill all the Christians and Jews, and that he has been assigned the holy task of paving the way for his arrival.  What possible incentive could we offer for Ahmadinejad to compromise his mission?

 

Across Europe there is but a remnant of Judeo-Christian civilization.  Here, Americans are more religious, but our elites, from the media to our foreign policy establishment, seem to be incapable of understanding the murderers who kill for Allah.  These elites are more frightened by George Bush praying than they are by the Islamists who cut off heads and send women to blow up hospitals.  ABC News recently played a video of a “graduation” ceremony at a terror school in Afghanistan that was sending off its “graduates” to France, England, Canada and the U.S. to wage jihad, while at American universities leftwing educators work nonstop to keep military recruiters off our campuses.

 

So what can we do?

 

“We the people” must first come to grips with the reality confronting us.  While our Marines are at war, most Americans are at the mall, unfazed by the threat to our civilization.  That disconnect is dangerous, and that is what allows some politicians to declare the war “lost” or to denounce it as “George W. Bush’s war.”  We must teach our children what is unique and good about America, and why our values are worth defending.  We must inform our policy makers about the “gathering storm” threatening our civilization and warn them against the siren song of appeasement.  And we must demand that our government do all that is within its power to defend our homeland and crush the lslamofascists who have declared war on us.

A SLAP AT BIBLICAL MORALS

 

By A Not So Super Bowl

   

     The controversy over the Janet Jackson/Justin Timberlake disgusting stunt will not go away. The e-mail box of FCC Chairman, Michael Powell, is filled daily with messages of outrage and CBS is being very foolish for acting surprised by the fiasco that developed onstage last Sunday.

    

     Jackson’s stunt wasn’t the only problem.  The other obscenity was “Kid Rock” prancing around with a U.S. Flag that had been cut in the center and put over his head like a poncho.  When he was finished using the ‘Stars And Stripes” as a prop he threw it to the drummer who dropped it on the ground where it remained during the rest of their show.  Halfway around the globe men and women are dying for the flag while pop culture exhibitionists like “Kid Rock” treat it like a rag.

    

     Do you want to let the FCC and CBS know how you feel about TV trash?  Here is the contact information for FCC chairman, Michael Powell (mpowell@fcc.gov).   You may contact CBS at (212) 975-4321.

 

 

By A Not So Supreme Court

 

      Wednesday, February 4, 2004, the Massachusetts State Supreme Court clarified its November ruling on homosexual “marriage.”  In reaction to the court, the State Senate had requested an advisory opinion from the court as to whether it would accept “civil unions” as a compromise.  In a 4-3 decision the Massachusetts court ruled that nothing less than full gay “marriage” would pass constitutional muster.

 

     A constitutional crisis is now at hand – by order of the Massachusetts Supreme Court marriage in America is no longer the exclusive union of one man and one woman.  Once Massachusetts begins issuing homosexual “marriage” licenses, scheduled to begin in May, homosexual couples will flock to Massachusetts in large numbers to get “married.”  They will then be allowed to return to their home states and file challenges to the 1996 Federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which allowed states to refuse to recognize the same-sex marriages performed in other states.  Many constitutional scholars believe that the U.S. Supreme Court could be prepared to strike down DOMA.  If that happens, homosexual “marriage” will become the law of the land in all 50 states - just like Roe-V-Wade.

 

     It is also worth noting that the undisputed front–runner for the democratic presidential nomination is from Massachusetts.  The state is also selected to host the 2004 Democratic National Convention this summer.  The front-runner from Massachusetts has claimed that he does not support homosexual “marriage” however, his rhetoric rings hollow.  In 1996, this front-runner was one of just 14 senators to oppose the Federal Defense of Marriage Act, which was signed by then President Clinton, a fellow democrat.  The issue of traditional marriage is a clear moral issue that calls all Christians to stand up and speak up for Biblical morality.

 

     Thankfully, President Bush called the ruling “deeply troubling” and said a constitutional amendment will be necessary to ban gay “marriages” if judges persist in approving them.  The BMAA Moral Action Committee is working with other pro-family organizations around the country to preserve one man-one woman marriage.  On February 4, 2004 a strong word of encouragement came from the White House that the president will officially endorse a constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman. 

 

     His formal announcement, which is forthcoming, will demonstrate tremendous leadership, courage, and moral clarity in this historic effort to preserve the sanctity of marriage.  This news could not come at a more needed time.

 

 

 

Respectfully Submitted,

 

 

 

Dr. Roy L. McLaughlin

Executive Director, BMAA

Director of the Department Moral Action Committee

 

 

LET’S REIGN IN THE SUPREMES

 

     Americans in solid majorities strongly oppose homosexual marriage.  Every state that has voted on this issue has voted overwhelmingly against such perversion including socially liberal California.  Yet it took less than 24 hours after the Supreme Court struck down the Texas anti-sodomy law for the radical homosexual movement to insist the Court’s decision paves the way for a radical redefinition of marriage in our nation and that’s not all.  Look for a new court challenge to the military’s ban on homosexuality.  The Boy Scout’s moral standard rule, prohibiting homosexual scoutmasters, will most likely come under renewed attack.

 

     As Justice Scalia so accurately put it, “Today’s opinion is the product of a Court, which is the product of a law-profession culture, that has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda, by which I mean the agenda promoted by some homosexual activists directed at eliminating the moral opprobrium that has traditionally attached to homosexual conduct.”

 

     There are two things every conservative believer should be earnestly praying for and working to see happen to stop this continual onslaught against traditional values.

 

CHANGE THE COURT

 

     President Bush, by power of appointment, can change the Court’s ideological balance when vacancies occur.  The President repeatedly promised to appoint strict constructionists, like Justices Thomas and Scalia, who would interpret the law, not invent it as the Court did 30 years ago in Roe and yet again in the Sodomy case.  Was the President sincere?  We must pray that he was and he keeps his word.

 

AMEND THE CONSTITUTION 

 

     It would be a Herculean task to be sure, but a Constitutional Amendment is another option.  Many conservatives are working behind the scene to get this accomplished.  Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist has whole-heartedly endorsed such an amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman.  We are working to get the White House to openly say that they would support such an amendment.  Here is the language the Moral Action Committee and many larger conservative groups have signed on to as the proposed amendment:

 

“Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman.  Neither this Constitution nor the constitution of any State, nor state or federal law, shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups.”

 

      This Amendment would be stronger than the 1996 Federal Defense of Marriage Act, in that it bans homosexual marriages in all 50 states.  DOMA did not do that.  There are 13 states that did not pass DOMA-style laws.  Ask yourself if you have any confidence that this Supreme Court could or would uphold DOMA after this Court’s Lawrence [Sodomy] decision?  I don’t and that is why I believe an amendment is the only way to reign in these not so “Supreme” Justices. 

 

 

Dr. Roy L. McLaughlin

Executive Director:  Moral Action Committee

Old News Archived

March 28, 2006

 

A CHRISTIAN – A PERSON INSANE – OR A CORPSE?

 

The news on March 21, that an Afghan man was facing the death penalty for converting to Christianity sparked international outrage.  Most Americans thought we had defeated the Taliban there, but is seems it’s evil ideas still have life.  The governments of Italy and Germany filed strong protests with the Afghan government, and former Italian President Francesco Cossiga said they will withdraw their 1,175 troops from the country if it happens.  President Bush said he was “deeply troubled” and pledged to do everything he could to protect this mans right to religious freedom.

 

The brave convert, Abdul Rahman has been prosecuted under Afghanistan’s Islamic laws for converting 16 years ago while working as a medical aid worker for an International Christian group helping Afghan refugees in Pakistan.  He was arrested last month and charged with apostasy, a crime punishable by death.

 

Reports just two days later (March 23) from Kabul quoted Afghan officials as saying that Abdul Rahman may be insane, and Islam is compassionate toward the mentally ill.  A top religious advisor to President Hamid Kharzai has said Rahman will undergo a psychological examination.  “If he is mentally unfit,” said Moayuddin Baluch, “he must be forgiven.  The case must be dropped.”  Such talk is itself unbalanced.  Contrast it with the quiet dignity of Rahman himself.  He told BBC: “I am not an infidel or a fugitive.  I am a Christian.  If they want to sentence me to death, I accept that.”

 

On March 26, an Afghan court in Kabul dismissed the case against Rahman.  The announcement came as U.S. backed President Kharzai faced mounting pressure from several countries to free Rahman, a move that angered Muslim clerics who are calling for him to be killed.

 

An official closely involved with the case told The Associated Press that it has been returned to the prosecutors for more investigation, but that in the meantime, Rahman is being held in a high-security prison outside of Kabul.  Many death threats were made against him by other inmates where he had been previously held.  There are media reports that Rahman may have been allowed to secretly leave Afghanistan.

 

At the very heart of this issue is religious freedom.  Already, Muslim clerics such as a so-called “moderate” named Abdul Raoulf in Afghanistan has demanded that Abdul Rahman be killed.  Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said she has raised this issue “in the strongest possible terms” with Afghan President Hamid Kharzai.  Rice went on to say:  “There is no more fundamental issue for the United States than freedom of religion and religious conscience . . . it is at the heart of democracy.”

 

May I add to this that I am certain that everyone must know how devastating the execution of Abdul Rahman would be to our soldiers and even the support of the war.  So many U.S. soldiers fought in Afghanistan, many of them of the Christian faith, have delivered, through the sacrifice of their blood, freedom to the Afghan people.  Now is the time for the Afghan government to show that their sacrifice was worth it.

 

 

IS ISLAM NATURALLY VIOLENT?

 

There continues to be an ongoing debate in the West about whether the Islamofascists are a perversion of Islam or the natural outgrowth of the Koran’s teachings.  Dr. Wafa Sultan, who was raised as a Muslim in Syria, has, at risk to her life, expressed her view on the question on Al Jazeera television.  She recounted how, as a college student in 1979, she witnessed members of the Muslim brotherhood kill one of her teachers and said, “This was the turning point of my life.”  Dr. Sultan said at that point she began to read the Koran carefully and came to this conclusion:

 

“There are too many verses in the Koran which say you must kill those who are non-Muslim; you must kill those who don’t believe in Allah and his messenger.  I started to ask: is this right?  Is this human?  All our problems in the Islamic world, I strongly believe, are the natural outcome of these teachings.  Go open any book in any class in any school in any Islamic country and read it.  You will see what kind of teachings we have:  Islam tells its followers that every non-Muslim is your enemy.”

 

Hopefully moderate Muslims who want to bring their faith into the modern world and make it compatible with human freedom and dignity will follow Dr. Sultan’s courageous example.

 

WHO IS SMARTER?                                                                                          Feb 2003
By Cindy Osborne

The Hollywood group is at it again.  Holding anti-war rallies, screaming about the Bush Administration, running ads in major newspapers, defaming the President and his Cabinet every chance they get, to anyone and everyone who will listen.  They publicly defile them and call them names like “stupid”, “morons”, and idiots”.  Jessica Lange went so far as to tell a crowd in Spain that she hates President Bush and is embarrassed to be an American.  So, just how ignorant are these people who are running the country?  Let us look at the biographies of these “stupid”, “ignorant”, “moronic” leaders, and then at the celebrities who are castigating them:

President George W. Bush:
Received a Bachelors Degree from Yale University and an MBA from Harvard Business School.  He served as an F-102 pilot for the Texas Air National Guard.  He began his career in the oil and gas business in Midland in 1975 and worked in the energy industry until 1986.  He was elected Governor on November 8, 1994, with 53.5 percent of the vote.  In a historic re-lection victory, he became the first Texas Governor to be elected to consecutive four-year terms on November 3, 1998 winning 68.9 percent of the vote.  In 1998 Governor Bush won 49 percent of the Hispanic vote, 27 percent of the African-American vote, 27 percent of Democrats and 65 percent of women.  He won more Texas counties, 240 of 254, than any modern Republican other than Richard Nixon in 1972 and is the first Republican gubernatorial candidate to win the heavily Hispanic and Democratic border counties of El Paso, Cameron and Hidalgo.  (Someone began circulating a false story about his I.Q. being lower than any other President.  If you believed it, you might want to go to BANLEGENDS.COM and see the truth.)

Vice President Dick Cheney:
Earned a B.A. in 1965 and a M.A. in 1966, both in political science.  Two years later, he won an American Political Science Association congressional fellowship.  One of Vice President Cheney’s primary duties is to share with individuals, members of Congress and foreign leaders, President Bush’s vision to strengthen our economy, secure our homeland and win the War on Terrorism.  In his official role as President of the Senate, Vice President Cheney regularly goes to Capital Hill to meet with Senators and members of the House of Representatives to work on the Administration’s legislative goals.  In his travels as Vice President, he has seen first hand the great demands the war on terrorism is placing on the men and women of our military, and he is proud of the tremendous job they are doing for the United States of America.

Secretary of State Colin Powell:
Was educated in the New York City public schools, graduating from the City College of New York (CCNY), where he earned a Bachelor’s Degree in geology.  He also participated in ROTC at CCNY and received a commission as an Army second lieutenant upon graduation in June 1958.  His further academic achievements include a Master of Business Administration Degree from George Washington University.  Secretary Powell is the recipient of numerous U.S. and foreign military awards and decorations.  Secretary Powell’s civilian awards include two Presidential Medals of Freedom, the President’s Citizens Medal, the Congressional Gold Medal, the Secretary of State Distinguished Service Medal, and the Secretary of Energy Distinguished Service Medal.  Several schools and other institutions have been named in his honor and he holds honorary degrees from universities and colleges across the country.

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld:
Attended Princeton University on Scholarship (AB, 1954) and served in the U.S. Navy (1947-57) as a Naval aviator; Congressional Assistant to Rep. Robert Griffin (R-MI), 1957-59; U.S. Representative, Illinois, 1962-69; Assistant to the President, Director of the Office of Economic Opportunity, Director of the Cost of Living Council, 1969-74; U.S. Ambassador to NATO, 1973-74; head of Presidential Transition Team, 1974; Assistant to the President, Director of White House Office of Operations, White House Chief of Staff, 1974-77; Secretary of Defense, 1975-77.

Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge:  
Was raised in a working class family in veterans’ public housing in Erie.  He earned a scholarship to Harvard, graduating with honors in 1967.  After his first year at The Dickinson School of Law, he was drafted into the U.S. Army, where he served as an infantry staff sergeant in Vietnam, earning the Bronze Star for Valor.  After returning to Pennsylvania, he earned his Law Degree and was in private practice before becoming Assistant District Attorney in Erie County.  He was elected to Congress in 1982.  He was the first enlisted Vietnam combat veteran elected to the U.S. House, and was overwhelmingly re-elected six times.

 

National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice:
Earned her Bachelor’s Degree in Political Science, Cum Laude and Phi Beta Kappa, from the University of Denver in 1974; her Master’s from the University of Notre Dame in 1975; and her Ph.D. from the Graduate School of International Studies at the University of Denver in 1981.  (Note:  Rice enrolled at the University of Denver at the age of 15, graduating at 19 with a Bachelor’s Degree in Political Science (Cum Laude).  She earned a Master’s Degree at the University of Notre Dame and a Doctorate from the University of Denver’s Graduate School of International Studies.  Both of her advanced degrees are also in Political Science.)  She is a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and has been awarded Honorary Doctorates from Morehouse College in 1991, the University of Alabama in 1994, and the University of Notre Dame in 1995.  At Stanford, she has been a member of the Center for International Security and Arms Control, a Senior Fellow of the Institute for International Studies, and a Fellow (by courtesy) of the Hoover Institution.  Her books include Germany Unified and Europe Transformed (1995) with Philip Zelikow, The Gorbachev Era (1986) with Alexander Dallin, and Uncertain Allegiance.  The Soviet Union and the Czechoslovak Army (1984).  She also has written numerous articles on Soviet and East European foreign and defense policy, and has addressed audiences in settings ranging from the U.S. Ambassador’s Residence in Moscow to the Commonwealth Club to the 1992 and 2000 Republican National Conventions.  From 1986 through March 1991, the period of German reunification and the final days of the Soviet Union, she served in the Bush Administration as Director, and then Senior Director, of Soviet and East European Affairs in the National Security Council, and a Special Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs.  In 1986, while an international affairs fellow of the Council on Foreign Relations, she served as Special Assistant to the Director of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.  In 1997, she served on the Federal Advisory Committee on Gender – Integrated Training in the Military.  She was a member of the boards of directors for the Chevron Corporation, the Charles Schwab Corporation, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the University of Notre Dame, the International Advisory Council of J.P. Morgan and the San Francisco Symphony Board of Governors.  She was a Founding Board member of the Center for a New Generation, an educational support fund for schools in East Palo Alto and East Menlo Park, California and was Vice President of the Boys and Girls Club of the Peninsula.  In addition, her past board service has encompassed such organizations as Transamerica Corporation, Hewlett Packard, the Carnegie Corporation, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, the Rand Corporation, the National Council for Soviet and East European Studies, the Mid-Peninsula Urban Coalition and KQED, public broadcasting for San Francisco.  Born November 14, 1954, in Birmingham, Alabama, she earned her bachelor’s degree in political science, cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa, from the University of Denver in 1974; her Master’s from the University of Notre Dame in 1975; and her Ph.D. from the Graduate School of International Studies at the University of Denver in 1981.  She is a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and has been awarded Honorary Doctorates from Morehouse College in 1991, the University of Alabama in 1994, and the University of Notre Dame in 1995.  She resides in Washington, D.C.

So who are these celebrities?  What is their education?  What is their experience in affairs of State of in National Security?  While I will defend to the death their right to express their opinions, I think that if they are going to call into question the intelligence of our leaders, we should also have all the facts of their educations and background:

Barbara Streisand – Completed High School.  Career:  Singing and acting

Cher – Dropped out of school in 9th grade.  Career:  Singing and acting

Martin Sheen – Flunked exam to enter University of Dayton.  Career: Acting

Jessica Lange – Dropped out of college mid-freshman year.  Career: Acting

Alec Baldwin – Dropped out of George Washington U. after scandal.  Career: Acting

Julia Roberts – Completed High School.  Career: Acting

Sean Penn – Completed High School.  Career: Acting

Susan Sarandon – Degree in Drama from Catholic University of American in Washington, D.C.  Career: Acting

Ed Asner – Completed High School.  Career: Acting

George Clooney – Dropped out of University of Kentucky.  Career:  Acting

Michael Moore – Dropped out first year of University of Michigan.  Career: Movie Director

Sarah Jessica Parker – Completed High School.  Career:  Acting

Jennifer Anniston – Completed High School.  Career:  Acting

Mike Farrell –  Completed High School.  Career:  Acting

Janeane Garofelo – Dropped out of College.  Career:  Stand up comedian

Larry Hagman – Attended Bard College for one year.  Career:  Acting

While comparing the education and experience of these two groups, we should also remember that President Bush and his cabinet are briefed daily, even hourly, on the War on Terror and threats to our security.  They are privy to information gathered around the world concerning the Middle East, the threats to America, the intentions of terrorists and terrorist-supporting governments.  They are in constant communication with the CIA, the FBI, Interpol, NATO, the United Nations, our own military, and that of our allies around the world.  We cannot simply believe that we have full knowledge of the threats because we watch CNN!!!  We cannot believe that we are in any way as informed as our leaders.

These celebrities have no intelligence-gathering agents, no fact-finding groups, no insight into the minds of those who would destroy our country.  They only have a deep-seated hatred for all things Republican.  By nature, and no one knows quite why, the Hollywood elitists detest Conservative views and anything that supports or uplifts the United States of America.

The silence was deafening from the Left when Bill Clinton bombed a pharmaceutical factory outside of Khartoum, or when he attacked the Bosnian Serbs in 1995 and 1999.  He bombed Serbia itself to get Slobodan Milosevic out of Kosovo, and not a single peace rally was held.  When our Rangers were ambushed in Somalia and 18 young American lives were lost, not a peep was heard from Hollywood.  Yet now, after our nation has been attacked on its own soil, after freedom-hating terrorists killed 3,000 Americans while going about their routine lives, they want to hold rallies against the war.

Why the change?  Because an honest, God-fearing Republican sits in the White House.  Another irony is that in 1987, when Ronald Reagan was in office, the Hollywood group aligned themselves with disarmament groups like SANE, FREEZE and PEACE ACTION, urging our own government to disarm and freeze the manufacturing of any further nuclear weapons, in order to promote world peace.  It is curious that now, even after we have heard all the evidence that Saddam Hussein has chemical, biological and is very close to obtaining nuclear weapons, there is no cry from these weapons of mass destruction, even though it is certain that these deadly weapons will eventually be used against us in our own cities.

So why the hype out of Hollywood?  Could these celebrities believe that since they draw such astronomical salaries, they are entitled to also determine the course of our Nation?  That they can make viable decisions concerning war and peace?  Did Michael Moore have the backing of the Nation when he recently thanked France, on our behalf, for being a “good enough friend to tell us we were wrong”?  I know for certain he was not speaking for me.  Does Sean Penn fancy himself a Diplomat, in going to Iraq when we are just weeks away from war?  Does he believe that his High School Diploma gives him the knowledge (and the right) to go to a country that is controlled by a maniacal dictator, and speak on behalf of the American people?  Or is it the fact that he pulls in more money per year than the average American worker will see in a lifetime?  Does his bank account give him clout?  The ultimate irony is that many of these celebrities have made a shambles of their own lives, with drug abuse, alcoholism, numerous marriages and divorces, scrapes with the law, publicized temper tantrums, etc.  How dare they pretend to know what is best of an entire nation?  What is even more bizarre is how many people in this country will listen and accept their views, simply because they liked them in a certain movie, or have fond memories of an old television sitcom!

It is time for us, as citizens of the United States, to educate ourselves about the world around us.  If future generations are going to enjoy the freedoms that our forefathers bequeathed us, if they are ever to know peace in their own country and their world, to live without fear of terrorism striking in their own cities, we must assure that this national remains strong.  We must make certain that those who would destroy us are made aware of the severe consequences that will befall them.

Yes, it is a wonderful dream to sit down with dictators and terrorists and join hands, singing Cumbaya and talking of world peace.  But is not real.  We did not stop Adolf Hitler from taking over the entire continent of Europe by simply talking to him.  We sent our best and brightest, with the strength and determination that this Country is know for, and defeated the Nazi regime.  President John F. Kennedy did not stop the Soviet ships from unloading their nuclear missiles in Cuba in 1962 with mere words.  He stopped them with action, and threat of immediate war if the ships did not turn around.  We did not end the Cold War with conferences.  It ended with the strong belief of President Ronald Reagan…

PEACE through STRENGTH.

   

 

Moral Action Committee Department
6273 Miller Road
Swartz Creek, MI 48473
Executive Director:  Dr. Roy L. McLaughlin

 “God Be With You”

On March 19, 2003, Captain Ronnie Johnson of the 3rd Battalion, 15th Regiment spoke the following words to his men as they prepared to go into combat.

“Take care of yourself, take care of your brother.  Don’t leave your honor in Iraq.  Do what’s right.  Do what millions of soldiers have done before you.  Do the right thing…What we do in life echoes in eternity.  God be with you all.”

Hearing these “final words” spoken by Captain Johnson to his young troops before the war began, echo some of the most powerful words I ever remember hearing President Ronald Reagan speak.  The date was June 6, 1984.  The occasion was the 40th anniversary of D-Day.  The location, the windswept cliffs of Pointe de Hoc, France and the main audience was the U. S. Army Rangers.  The Rangers had survived a terrible assault up those cliffs to begin the liberation of France.  Here is what he said.

“Forty summers have past since the battle that you fought here.  You were young the day you took these cliffs; some of you were hardly more than boys, with the deepest joys of life before you.  Yet you risked everything here.  Why?  Why did you do it?  What impelled you to put aside the instinct for self-preservation and risk your lives to take these cliffs?  What inspired all the men of the armies that met here?  We look at you, and somehow we know the answer.  It was faith, and belief; it was loyalty and love.

 

The men of Normandy had faith that what they were doing was right, faith that they fought for all humanity, faith that a just God would grant them mercy on this beachhead or on the next.  It was the deep knowledge – and pray God we have not lost it – that here is a profound moral difference between the use of force for liberation and the use of force for conquest.  You were here to liberate, not to conquer, and so you and those others did not doubt your cause.  And you were right not to doubt. 

 

You all knew that some things are worth dying for.