QUICK LINKS
Last Weekend for Referendum 65
As many of you know, this is the last week-end to circulate Referendum 65 petitions. Please do so. If you have any petition forms, gather as many last minute signatures as possible and mail them in. Please follow the mailing instructions on our website. Click here for instructions.
Many are calling to ask where we are in regard to the number of names collected. We don’t know because Tim Eyman has not disclosed the numbers.
For the latest news source on the Referendum, click here to view the news link on our home page.
______________
Gary Randall
President
Faith & Freedom
Click here to add this blog to your email inbox
7 Comments:
Tim Eyman, dressed as Darth Vader, showed up at his June 5th 11 am appointment to turn in the Ref 65 signatures without any, he didn't have enough.
Thank goodness for the wisdom of the vast majority of Washington voters who understand that tolerance of others, even if they think or do things you would not personally, is the basis of American society.
We have allowed our Christ filled message to be co-opted by a moron
Darth Vader represents the "dark force." Tim Eyman show disrespect for the Christian view by wearing a satanic outfit.
We should distance ourselves as soon as possible.
well, there still was some good left in Darth Vadar. He did kill the emporer in the end. Maybe there is some good in Tim Eyman. Somewhere. In a gallaxy far, far away. Wow, that was just too easy.
Pride Foundation News
Referendum 65 Will Not be on the November Ballot
Antidiscrimination law stands
Jun 06, 2006 Today Tim Eyman, The Christian Coalition, the Faith & Freedom Network and Concerned Women of America announced they were not successful in collecting the 112,440 valid signatures needed to qualify Referendum 65 for the November ballot. Signatures on the referendum were required to be received by the Washington Secretary of State by 5 p.m. today in order to qualify the measure for the November ballot. “The failure of Eyman and the fundamentalist networks to collect enough signatures after three months of trying is a credit to the people of Washington state. Washingtonians made it clear they do not want to go back to the days when it was legal in our state to fire someone or deny them housing simply because of their sexual orientation,” said Anne Levinson, Chair of the Washington Won’t Discriminate Campaign, the organization leading the fight to keep the anti-discrimination law.
“Our campaign was just getting started and already more than 5,000 people and hundreds of religious organizations, businesses and community groups from around the state had publicly taken a stand in support of keeping the law. I’ve been involved in many campaigns over the years, and I have never seen an outpouring of support as we have received for making sure the law against discrimination remains the law in our state,” Levinson added. “Tomorrow, thousands of people will be able to go to work in towns across Washington without fear of being fired because of their sexual orientation,” said John Vezina, Washington Won’t Discriminate campaign manager. “A great deal of effort went into collecting signatures based on a mistaken assumption by the proponents that the people of the state didn’t support the anti-discrimination law. To not get enough signatures for a referendum – only half as many are needed as for an initiative – makes a strong statement that the proponents of the referendum do not represent the vast majority of Washingtonians,” added Vezina.
Hello all
Related on RenewAmerica:
Outlawing America for Gays http://www.RenewAmerica.us/columns/adams/050123
Gay Marriage in America--is it Wise? http://www.RenewAmerica.us/columns/adams/050630
The End of the World as we see it http://www.RenewAmerica.us/columns/adams/051024
The Secularization of America http://www.RenewAmerica.us/columns/adams/060224
What is Truth? http://www.RenewAmerica.us/columns/adams/060409
Constitutional and Declarationist Principles http://www.RenewAmerica.us/readings/principles.htm
Who Benefits from Gay Marriage? http://www.RenewAmerica.us/columns/evans/040711
Take a stand for liberty before it is too late http://www.RenewAmerica.us/columns/weaver/040212
Full Faith and Credit http://www.RenewAmerica.us/columns/erwin/031202
Important related websites:
http://www.RenewAmerica.us/--Multi-dimensional; reclaiming America
http://www.EagleForum.org/--CHECK THIS OUT!
http://www.Persecution.org/--CHECK THIS OUT!
http://www.ValuesVoter.org/--Values into action!
http://www.CultureAndFamily.org/--Bob Knight's group
http://www.AFA.net/--Fighting for family values
http://www.LC.org/--Protecting religious liberties
http://www.Falwell.com/--Biblical & moral issues
http://www.FRC.org/--Defending Christian values
http://www.MissionAmerica.com/--Exposing homosexuality!
http://www.Family.org/--Focus on the Family (Dr. Dobson)
http://www.CWFA.org/--Critical issues addressed
http://www.ReclaimAmerica.org/--American values restored
http://www.AmValues.org/--Excellent! Gary Bauer's group
http://www.Heritage.org/--Conservative think tank
http://www.DeclarationAlliance.us/--Restoring our founding principles
http://www.MoralLaw.org/--Judge Roy Moore
http://www.NLF.net/--Defending Biblical concepts in American law
http://www.ReclaimAmerica.org/--D. James Kennedy & Gary Cass
http://www.CoralRidge.org/--Christian Conservative issues
http://www.MassResistance.com/--on our side
http://www.Faith2Action.org/--Fighting for faith & culture
http://www.PacificJustice.org/--Defending civil/religious freedoms
http://www.ChristianLaw.org/--Christian liberties
http://www.StopTheACLU.org/--Fighting the ACLU
http://www.ACLJ.org/--Fighting the ACLU
http://www.AllianceDefenseFund.org/--Fighting the ACLU
http://www.CC.org/--Christian Coalition
http://www.TheConservativeVoice.com/--Important Conservative viewpoints
http://www.TruthTellers.org/--Anti-Hate Speech views!
http://www.HateLawsExposed.org/--a clear & present danger!
http://www.ChangingWorldViews.com/--Sharon Hughes
http://www.HelpSaveAmerica.com/
http://www.AmericanVision.org/
http://www.TraditionalValues.org/
http://www.JillStanek.com/--Anti Abortion
http://www.FoundationsofLawPAC.org/
http://www.SBMinistries.org/--Help for the homosexual!
http://www.NARTH.com/--Therapy for the homosexual
http://www.GrassTopsUSA.com/--Fighting Liberalism
http://www.FreeCongress.org/--Fighting for our Culture
http://www.OliveTreeViews.org/--Biblical perspectives
http://www.TruthForAmerica.com/--Reclaiming & Restoring America
http://www.FreedomAlliance.org/--American heritage group
http://www.TownHall.com/--Various conservative issues
http://www.CultureCampaign.com/--Illinois activism
More info to counter the De Vishanti codes. His idea of tolerance meanns yourr opinion is left out or never was ///
1. Patent Untruths
Numerous history texts make claims such as: our “national government was secular from top to bottom,” or that the Founders “reared a national government on a secular basis.” Those who have studied the American Founding know that this is a patent untruth — proved by numbers of Founders, including John Adams, who declared: “The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were the general principles of Christianity.” (Even the text of the Declaration of Independence refutes any charges of government secularism.) This approach usually relies on a general lack of public knowledge about that untruth; consequently, such untruthful claims are rarely made in areas where citizens have broad general knowledge (such as claiming that James Madison used an atomic bomb to end the Civil War, or that the first sub-machine gun was developed in 1536 in Nevada by the Quakers). Revisionism relies on a lack of citizen knowledge in specific areas.
2. Overly Broad Generalizations
This revisionist tool presents the exception as if it were the rule. For example, texts often name Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, and Thomas Paine as proof of the lack of religiosity among the Founders yet fail to mention the rest of the almost 200 Founding Fathers — including the dozens of Founders who not only received their education in schools specializing in the training of ministers of the Gospel but who also were active in Christian ministry and organizations (e.g., John Hancock, Samuel Adams, John Adams, Benjamin Rush, Roger Sherman, et. al).
Similarly, when discussing religion in America, the Salem Witch trials are universally presented; but rarely mentioned are the positive societal changes produced by Quakers, Baptists, Presbyterians, and dozen of other religious groups and organizations that worked for the abolition of slavery, secured religious freedoms for all, and fought to end societal abuses of all types. (Also never mentioned is that the American witch trials resulted in some two dozen deaths — and were halted by religious leaders, while the European witch trials resulted in 100,000; that is, American Christianity at that time might not have been perfect but it was light years ahead of both the Christianity practiced in Europe and the European secularism that resulted in 40,000 executions in the French Revolution.)
3. Omission
Notice the following three examples from American history works:
We whose names are under-written . . . do by these presents solemnly and mutually in the presence of God, and one of another, covenant and combine our selves together into a civil body politick. MAYFLOWER COMPACT, 1620
Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? . . . I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death? PATRICK HENRY, 1775
. . . ART. I.—His Britannic Majesty acknowledges the said United States . . . PEACE TREATY TO END THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION, 1783
What was omitted from these important historical quotes?
We whose names are under-written having undertaken for the glory of God, and advancement of the Christian faith and honor of our king and country, a voyage to plant the first colonie in the Northern parts of Virginia do by these presents solemnly and mutually in the presence of God, and one of another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil body politick.
Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death?
In the name of the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity. It having pleased the Divine Providence to dispose the hearts . . . ART. I.—His Britannic Majesty acknowledges the said United States . . .
The omitted segments are those that indicate the strongly religious nature of American government documents and leaders. Also regularly omitted from texts is the fact that gratitude to God was central to the first Pilgrim Thanksgiving — and the fact that in 1782, the Congress of the United States was responsible for America's first English-language Bible; and that in 1800, Congress voted that on Sundays, the Capitol Building would serve as a church building and that by 1867, the largest protestant church in America was the one that met inside the U. S. Capitol; etc.
4. A Lack of Primary Source References
The avoidance of primary-source documents is characteristic in revisionism. For example, the authors of the widely-used text The Godless Constitution blatantly announce that they have “dispensed with the usual scholarly apparatus of footnotes” when discussing the documentation for their thesis that America’s government is built on a secular foundation. Similarly, the text The Search for Christian America purports to examine the Founding Era and finds a distinct lack of Christian influence. Yet 80 percent of the “historical sources” on which it relies to document its finding were published after 1950! That is, to determine what was occurring in the 1700s, they quote from works printed in the 1900s.
Summary
To locate revisionism in a text, look at its tone, the documents it presents, and the heroes it elevates.
To discover a revisionist tone, find the answers to these questions in the textbook: Is exploration and colonization motivated only by the desire for land or gold? Are those who promoted religious and moral values portrayed as harsh, punitive, and intolerant? Is traditional family ignored? Is government presented as statist — that is, that the state (rather than individuals, families, churches, or communities) is to take care of society's needs? Is there a victim ideology — a steady diet of those who have been exploited throughout history rather than those who have uplifted their culture? Are other religions portrayed positively and Christianity negatively (if at all)?
Are original documents presented? (Do students see the actual text or only what someone else says about it?) Do they see the Mayflower Compact, the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, George Washington's “Farewell Address,” and Abraham Lincoln's Second Inaugural Address? Are the documents heavily edited to present only a sentence or two or do they provide a substantive amount of text?
Who are the heroes presented? Do they tend to be angry - fighting an unjust society or government? Do they tend to be modern heroes only? Do they tend to be only secular leaders? For example, the U. S. Capitol displays some 100 statues of the most important individuals in America's history; a significant percentage of those statues are of ministers and Christian leaders. Will your children receive in their textbooks at least the same view of American heroes that is presented in America's pre-eminent government building?
When examining a text, always remember that your children do not know as much about history as you do and consequently have no basis for identifying bias. Therefore, examine each text as if you knew nothing at all about history except what is presented in that text; on that basis, will you be pleased with the tone toward America inculcated in your child through that text? If not, then urge your school to get a better text or be diligent to supplement for your children what is missing or wrongly presented in the text.
It is not melodramatic to state that America's future rests on what is taught to our children, for as Abraham Lincoln wisely observed:
The philosophy of the school room in one generation will be the philosophy of government in the next. (attributed)
Famous American educator Noah Webster therefore rightly admonished:
The education of youth should be watched with the most scrupulous attention. . . . [It] lays the foundations on which both law and gospel rest for success.
Indeed!
vishanti said...
Thank goodness for the wisdom of the vast majority of Washington voters who understand that tolerance of others, even if they think or do things you would not personally, is the basis of American society.
Constitution of the State of North Carolina (1776), stated:
There shall be no establishment of any one religious church or denomination in this State in preference to any other.
Article XXXII That no person who shall deny the being of God, or the truth of the Protestant religion, or the divine authority of the Old or New Testaments, or who shall hold religious principles incompatible with the freedom and safety of the State, shall be capable of holding any office or place of trust or profit in the civil department within this State. (until 1876)
In 1835 the word “Protestant” was changed to “Christian.” [p.482]
Constitution of the State of Maryland (August 14, 1776), stated:
Article XXXV That no other test or qualification ought to be required, on admission to any office of trust or profit, than such oath of support and fidelity to this State and such oath of office, as shall be directed by this Convention, or the Legislature of this State, and a declaration of a belief in the Christian religion.”
That, as it is the duty of every man to worship God is such a manner as he thinks most acceptable to him; all persons professing the Christian religion, are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty;
wherefore no person ought by any law to be molested… on account of his religious practice; unless, under the color [pretense] of religion, any man shall disturb the good order, peace or safety of the State, or shall infringe the laws of morality… yet the Legislature may, in their discretion, lay a general and equal tax, for the support of the Christian religion. (until 1851) [pp.420-421]
Articles of Confederation (November 15, 1777), were proposed and signed. They constituted the government in America during the period between the end of the Revolutionary War and the writing of the Constitution. The Articles were finally ratified by the states on March 1, 1781:
… on the fifteenth day of November in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and seventy seven.
And whereas it has pleased the Great Governor of the world to incline the hearts of the Legislatures we respectively represent in Congress, to approve of, and to authorize us to ratify the said articles of confederation and perpetual union. [p.29]
Constitution of the State of South Carolina (1778), stated:
Article XXXVIII. That all persons and religious societies who acknowledge that there is one God, and a future state of rewards and punishments, and that God is publicly to be worshipped, shall be freely tolerated… That all denominations of Christian[s]… in this State, demeaning themselves peaceably and faithfully, shall enjoy equal religious and civil privileges. [p.568]
The Constitution of the State of Massachusetts (1780) stated:
The Governor shall be chosen annually; and no person shall be eligible to this office, unless, at the time of his election… he shall declare himself to be of the Christian religion.
Chapter VI, Article I [All persons elected to State office or to the Legislature must] make
and subscribe the following declaration, viz. “I, _______, do declare, that I believe the Christian religion, and have firm persuasion of its truth.”
Part I, Article III And every denomination of Christians, demeaning themselves peaceably, and as good subjects of the commonwealth, shall be equally under the protection of the law:
and no subordination of any sect or denomination to another shall ever be established by law.” [p.429]
Continental Congress (September 10, 1782), in response to the need for Bibles which again arose, granted universal approval to print “a neat edition of the Holy Scriptures for the use of schools.” … This edition has come to be known as the Bible of the Revolution. The following Endorsement of Congress was printed on its front page.
Whereupon, Resolved, That the United States in Congress assembled… recommended this edition of the Bible to the inhabitants of the United States, and hereby authorize [Robert Aitken] to publish this recommendation in the manner he shall think proper. [pp.148-149]
Continental Congress (1783), ratified a peace treaty with Great Britain at the close of
the Revolutionary War. The treaty began:
In the name of the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity. It having pleased the Divine Providence
to dispose the hearts of the most serene and most potent Prince George the Third, by the
Grace of God, King of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, Defender of the Faith… and of the United States of America, to forget all past misunderstandings and differences… [p.149]
Constitution of the State of New Hampshire (1784,1792), required senators and representatives to be of the:
Protestant religion. (in force until 1877)
The Constitution stipulated:
Article I, Section VI. And every denomination of Christians demeaning themselves quietly, and as good citizens of the state, shall be equally under the protection of the laws. And no subordination
of any one sect of denomination to another, shall ever be established by law. [p.469]
Constitution of the State of Vermont (1786), stated:
Frame of Government, Section 9. And each member [of the Legislature], before he takes
his seat, shall make and subscribe the following declaration, viz: “I do believe in one God, the Creator and Governor of the universe, the rewarder of the good and punisher of the wicked.
And I do acknowledge the Scripture of the Old and New Testament to be given by divine inspiration, and own and profess the [Christian] religion. And no further or other religious test shall ever, hereafter, be required of any civil officer or magistrate in this State.” [p.623]
The Constitution of the United States(September 17, 1787), reads:
Article I, Section 7, Paragraph 2: If any bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted)…
Done in Convention, by the unanimous consent of the States present, the seventeenth day
of September, in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty seven.
[Of note is the fact that virtually every one of the 55 writers and signers of the United States Constitution of 1787, were members of Christian denominations: 29 were Anglicans, 16 to 18 were Calvinists, 2 were Methodists, 2 were Lutherans, … [and] 1 lapsed Quaker and sometimes Anglican.] [p. 180]
Note: There were also two who were Roman Catholic, and one was an open Deist Dr. Benjamin Franklin who attended every kind of Christian worship, called for public prayer, and contributed to
all denominations.
What did the Constitution mean in 1787 by "no religious test" ? (Steve Lefemine)
The very last sentence of the last substantive article (Article VI.) of the Constitution states:
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial
Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
1) The US Constitution went into effect June 21, 1788 as New Hampshire became the ninth
State to ratify, as required by Article VII.
2) The first ten Amendments (the Bill of Rights) were ratified effective December 15, 1791.
3) As can be seen by study of the numerous state constitutions which contained statements
requiring governors, legislators, and others appointed or elected to public office to make
declarations as to their belief in Protestant Christianity, the divine inspiration of both the
Old and New Testaments, and / or a future state of rewards and punishments, some after
1791 and into the 1800’s, the last sentence of Article VI. of the US Constitution did not
preclude such required declarations of belief in general Christianity by officials of civil
government in the states.
4) The term “religion” in 1787 meant “the Duty which we owe our Creator, and the Manner of
discharging it,..” It was to “be directed only by Reason and Convictions, not by Force or
Violence; and therefore all Men [were] equally entitled to the free exercise of Religion,
according to the Dictates of Conscience; and [it was] “the mutual Duty of all to practice
Christian Forbearance, Love, and Charity towards each other.” (Virginia Bill of Rights,
June 12, 1776) [pp.627-628]).
5) The Virginia Statute of Religious Liberty (January 16, 1786) stated: “Well aware that
Almighty God hath created the mind free; that all attempts to influence it by temporal
punishments or burdens, or by civil incapacitations… are a departure from the plan of the
Holy Author of our religion.” [emphasis added] [p.628]
6) In 1787, the term “religion” included the various forms of Christianity expressed by the
different Christian denominations. The phrase, “no religious test” in 1787 meant there
would be “no denominational test,” as we would understand it today in 2004; no test as
to whether a man was a Presbyterian, Baptist, or Anglican; however, “no religious test”
did not mean any exclusion of a required declaration of Christian beliefs for men aspiring
to office in civil government, as can be seen by examination of the early state constitutions.
7) David Barton states, “Our current understanding of what constitutes a religious test was
considerably different from that of early Americans, as demonstrated by this excerpt from
the 1796 Tennessee constitution:”
Article VIII, Section II. No person who denies the being of God, or a future state of
rewards and punishments, shall hold any office in the civil department of this State.
Article XI, Section IV. That no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification
to any office or public trust under this state.
“A fixed set of religious beliefs for an office holder is prescribed in Article VIII, and then
a religious test is prohibited in Article XI. Obviously, in their view, requiring a belief in
God and in future rewards and punishments was not a religious test.
“… Prescribing a requirement professing ‘I, ________, do profess faith in God the
Father, and in Jesus Christ His only Son, and in the Holy Ghost, one God, blessed
for evermore; and I do acknowledge the holy scriptures of the Old and New Testament
to be given by divine inspiration [DELAWARE, 1776]’ was not considered a religious
test.”
Post a Comment
<< Home