Yesterday, Friday, January 23, 2009, under Barack Obama's orders, the U.S. military launched two series of missile attacks. The first was on the village of Zharki, which is in Waziristan, Pakistan. The second attack was a few hours later in Gangikhel, also in Waziristan. The estimated death toll is 22. Who knows the degree to which the dead were guilty? The dead were termed "suspected militants." [emphasis added] That means there was and remains doubt. In other words, Obama wasn't sure they were guilty before he had them killed, which is murder under even the mundane law. They say they are getting "minimal or no civilian casualties," as if any civilian deaths are acceptable in God's eyes. Suffice it to say though that Barack Obama is going to get it wrong over and over and over again.
The Real Liberal Christian Church stands foursquare against the death penalty and war inflicted and waged by humans. We are not looking forward to 20,000 more U.S. Marines in Afghanistan. The Afghanis did not attack the U.S. on 9/11. The Taliban did not attack the U.S. on 9/11. Osama bin Laden never took responsibility for 9/11. The U.S. has never proved that Osama bin Laden or al Qaeda were responsible. The U.S. has refused to do a thorough investigation of the events of 9/11. Even the two nearly yes-men supposedly in charge of the 9/11 Commission, Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, called the 9/11 Commission a farce, in so many words. Where is Barack Obama's order to investigate 9/11? It should have been among his first orders.
Of course, he's working for the plutocrats. It just wouldn't do for Obama to get to the bottom of anything. The last thing he'll be allowed to do is get at the root cause of anything. He knows that.
You may say that he's just doing the best anyone could do given the current situation of the world. Well, I say to that that if no one would go along with evil, there wouldn't be any. Obama is just part of the problem and not the solution.
Everyone who voted for John McCain or Barack Obama is complicit and needs to repent of that vote. Everyone needs to start following Jesus instead.
Now, people all over the Internet are writing how they are praying for Barack Obama as their leader. Well, I pray he finally sees the light; but he's not my leader. I don't follow him. Neither was George W. Bush my leader.
- "Suspected U.S. Missile Strikes Kill at Least 20 in Pakistan," Attacks in Northwest Border Province Are First Since Obama's Inauguration, by Candace Rondeaux. Washington Post. January 23, 2009
- "President orders air strikes on villages in tribal area," by Ewen MacAskill. The Guardian. January 24, 2009.
- " ." Daily Times. January 25, 2009.
The following should appear at the end of every post:
According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":
Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.
Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.
Political Campaign Intervention
Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.
Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.
Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
- Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
- Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
- Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
- Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
- Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office
Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:
- The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
- Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
- We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
- When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
- It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
- We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
- We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
- When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
- We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
- It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)