purplemoon3's Revelife

Nancy Pelosi Moves To Gag Abortion Debate

Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:37:21 GMT

Dear Hope,

Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI) is urgently warning us that Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) may attempt to muzzle pro-life leaders in Congress.

Tell your Representative, Rep. Forbes, to join Bart Stupak in opposing any tactics that silence pro-life leaders in Congress.

The Pitts-Stupak Amendment, which bans federal funding of elective abortions and plans that pay for elective abortions, has become the focal point of heated debate in Congress.

Nancy Pelosi has delegated to Henry Waxman (D-CA), the Chair of the Energy and Commerce Committee, the task of negotiating with Bart Stupak, the co-author of the pro-life amendment.

After the first 'negotiation,' Henry Waxman spoke to the AP about the refusal of Bart Stupak to back down from his demands for an explicit exclusion of abortion funding:

"We have a difference of opinion at the moment we cannot bridge," he said. "We have done everything we can to ensure that there will be no federal funds for abortion services."

Everything they can ... except for the one thing we have repeatedly asked for:

Put the Pitts-Stupak Amendment into the bill!

Now, Bart Stupak is convinced that Nancy Pelosi and Louise Slaughter (D-NY), the Chair of the Rules Committee, will propose a Rule that does not include any debate on the pro-life amendment - imposing a gag on pro-lifers.

However, no Rule can go into effect unless it is approved by a majority of the Representatives in the House.

Urge Rep. Forbes to oppose any Rule that does not include a debate on the Pitts-Stupak Amendment.

Bart Stupak, who has been a warrior in this battle, has asked pro-lifers everywhere to demand that their Representatives oppose any Rule that muzzles pro-lifers in this critical debate.

Make sure that Rep. Forbes joins Bart Stupak in voting against any Rule that does not allow for a vote on the Pitts-Stupak Amendment.

Thank you for fighting to make sure that those who forever silence the unborn do not silence us.

For Life,

Marjorie Dannenfelser
President, Susan B. Anthony List
www.sba-list.org

P.S. Donate today to support our efforts to stop this deadly legislation.

"The Cybersecurity Act of 2009" S. 773

Wed, 21 Oct 2009 01:34:59 GMT

okay, i just received this n my in box please read & pray& take action.

October 15, 2009

Dear Patriot:

Please take your time and read this email carefully.

Because if a bill quietly sneaking its way through Congress passes, an email like this could be the last non-government message to ever hit your inbox.

In fact, someday you may even find yourself unable to log in to your email in the first place!

I know what you're thinking: Maybe this is just another Internet hoax.

I wish it were.

But Barack Obama and Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) want to make this nightmare a reality.  That's why Rockefeller recently introduced S. 773, "The Cybersecurity Act of 2009."

Initial cosponsors include Senators Evan Bayh (D-IN), Bill Nelson (D-FL) and Olympia Snowe (R-ME).

You see, Barack Obama is seeking sweeping new powers to "shut down" all private internet in the event of a "cybersecurity emergency" — a vague term that the President can define at his discretion.

And Rockefeller's bill gives Barack Obama just what he wants.

That's why this expansive new power grab should really be called "The Internet Takeover Bill."

As you know, the Internet has developed into an independent sphere where 1st Amendment Rights can still be (fairly) freely exercised.

It's also become an important outlet for liberty-minded speech, cutting around the Obama-worship and corporate censorship of the mainstream media.

And we've already seen the Obama Administration's reaction to any online speech they deem "fishy."

In July, the Administration called upon Americans to report their friends' and neighbors' emails to help Barack Obama silence the "disinformation" about the Obamacare bills in Congress.

Well, now Barack Obama wants to cut out the middle man.

If the Internet Takeover Bill passes, Barack Obama can silence his dissenters directly — by ordering a shutdown of all Americans' access to the Internet.

That's right. Under this bill Barack Obama can order all non-government U.S. networks to shut down access to the Internet.

But that's not all.

Even outside of periods of White House-declared "emergency," this bill mandates that private-sector networks only be managed by government-licensed "cybersecurity professionals."

If you think dealing with your office IT department is bad now, just wait until they're federally-licensed bureaucrats.

And God forbid you like to visit websites that spread "fishy disinformation" like freemarket healthcare solutions: Passing socialized medicine could soon become enough of an "emergency" for Barack Obama to shut them down.

You know, for the public good.

Well, I know I like writing to you, and I hope you like hearing from me.

Or if not me, at least you probably like staying in touch with your family and friends, and having access to uncensored news and current events.

And that's why I hope you'll help Campaign for Liberty stop the Internet Takeover Bill by signing our Internet User's Mandate to Congress.

Today, legislation like this — built on the same statist principles as the infamous Patriot Act — has to sneak through Congress quietly.

They know Americans are no longer willing to swallow this "for our own good" swill.

And it's especially critical that Campaign for Liberty and other fellow R3volutionaries fight this power grab.

Can you imagine how easily those in power could fabricate an "emergency" on a big money bomb day for a strong liberty candidate threatening the establishment?

Or how about message boards vital to planning and freedom rallies and protests of socialized medicine?

With "right-wing extremists" freely and visibly exercising their 2nd Amendment rights at such events, no doubt the White House could declare an "emergency" and shut down all online planning.

I don't want to see good politicians lose potential millions or demonstrations of liberty extinguished. I hope you don't either.

That's why I hope you'll sign your Internet User's Mandate and make a donation right now to Campaign for Liberty to make sure that never happens.

We're going to fight this bill hard, because it's clear that the Internet is the next frontier for liberty politics, and Campaign for Liberty is right on the forefront.

So please click here to sign your Internet User's Mandate to Congress in opposition to Barack Obama's Internet Takeover and Shutdown Bill.

And in addition to signing your mandate, please make a generous contribution of $250, $100 or $50 so we can fight this Internet takeover.

We need to fight to make sure Barack Obama doesn't disconnect your computer, shut down your favorite websites, or block your email.

And frankly, with Audit the Fed, Cap and Tax and socialized healthcare debates, Campaign for Liberty is stretched pretty thin.

And unlike the government, we don't print, borrow or take money by force (taxes).  Our only revenue comes from voluntary contributions from liberty activists like you.

We need you to stay educated and active.

We've put too much time into building our pro-liberty online networks, websites and email lists.  We simply cannot afford to give Barack Obama the power to dismantle all that at the drop of a hat.

So please, click here to sign your Internet User's Mandate, and if you can, make a contribution of $250, $100 or $50 or whatever you want to Campaign for Liberty to stop this power grab...

...to defend our rights...

...and most importantly, to protect this movement.

I trust you'll join this fight to protect all the progress we've made.

In Liberty,

John Tate
President

P.S. The Internet Takeover Bill (S. 773) is threatening to "unplug" private networks from the Internet on the order of the President and dismantle the online army we've worked so hard to build.

Click here to sign your Internet User's Mandate to Congress, and please make a generous contribution of $250, $100 or $50 to Campaign for Liberty so we can lead the fight against this Obama power grab.

If you were in need would you want someone to Stand inTheGap for you?

Mon, 12 Oct 2009 14:31:36 GMT

Please go to: http://rifqabary.com/ & stand in the gap for

Rifqua Bary!

her life is n danger & she needs her brothers & sisters n Christ to lift her up before the mercy seat of Our Heavenly Father today. If you were in need you would want people lifting your needs before the throne room to Yahweh. Plead the blood speak the words of deliverance & life over Rifqa Bary.

thank you for your prayers :)

In Him,

Hope

Ireland Adopts Lisbon Treaty but Pro-life Guarantees Remain Suspect

Fri, 09 Oct 2009 12:59:32 GMT

Volume 12, Number 43

October 8, 2009

Ireland Adopts Lisbon Treaty but Pro-life Guarantees Remain Suspect

By Susan Yoshihara, Ph.D.

     (NEW YORK – C-FAM) Irish voters overwhelmingly accepted the Lisbon Treaty on October 2nd after they were given guarantees that their pro-life and pro-family laws would be protected. While some pro-life and pro-family voices hail the guarantees as a step forward, many analysts argue that the nature and extent of those guarantees are far from certain and that the “yes” vote will eventually lead to intense pressure on Ireland from the European Union (EU) to liberalize its laws and policies on abortion and homosexual “marriage.”

     In the midst of a severe economic downturn, Irish citizens voted 67% to 33% to adopt the Treaty of Lisbon after rejecting it only a year ago amidst fears about the erosion of national sovereignty on social issues as well as taxation and national security. Ireland was the only country to bring the treaty to a public referendum. Two more countries, Poland and Czech Republic, must adopt the treaty before it is enacted though Ireland will have been the only EU country to put the treaty up for a vote of its citizens.  

     One of the most controversial aspects of the “Lisbon Treaty amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community” is that if it is enacted it will make the Europe’s Charter of Fundamental Rights binding on all EU members. Among the 54 rights in the Charter are the right to life and the right to marry which activists use to promote a radical social agenda.  

     The Irish guarantee states, “Nothing in the Treaty of Lisbon attributing legal status to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, or in the provisions of the Treaty in the area of Freedom, Security and Justice affects in any way the scope and applicability of the protection of the right to life…the protection of the family…and the protection of the rights in respect to education…provided in the Constitution of Ireland.”

     Pro-life and pro-family advocates of the treaty hailed the vote and the guarantees as a step forward for all of Europe. The president of the Commission of the Bishops’ Conferences of the European Union (COMECE) said, “Thanks to the guarantees given to Ireland - the right to life, the protection of family and the right of parents to educate their children … these rights will be made more secure in the whole Union.”

     Skeptics argue that the guarantee only protects Ireland from the Charter on Fundamental Rights and not from all EU laws. They further point out that while the EU does not have authority or “competence” on family matters, this has not stopped EU bureaucrats from using EU competence in other areas such as “equality” to pressure states to liberalize abortion and marriage laws. One EU legal expert told the Friday Fax that the guarantee is only diplomatic and not legally binding. What is more, the EU has stated that it reserves the right to intervene on family law when it has “cross-border implications.” Pro-family EU analysts warn that this provision could mean that Ireland would have to recognize homosexual “marriage” that takes place in other EU countries.

for more stories & pro-life updates please see the following link :http://www.c-fam.org/publications/id.1443/pub_detail.asp

Pro-Life Groups Raise 100-Foot Tall Banner at White House to Oppose Abortion

Mon, 05 Oct 2009 14:56:59 GMT

Okay we all need to get together & do this ..youthg roups, younga dults, familys friends.. let make a stand to speak out & stand up for Life!!

Pro-Life Groups Raise 100-Foot Tall Banner at White House to Oppose Abortion

by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
October 2, 2009

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Several pro-life groups have banded together to hoist a 100-foot tall banner of the number 71 on the west lawn of the White House. The number is representative of the percentage of people in a recent Zogby poll who said they don't want their tax dollars to pay for abortions.

With Congress considering health care reform proposals -- all of which contain abortion funding -- the polling figure is especially poignant.

The Christian Defense Coalition and other pro-life groups are raising the banner to remind Congress that Americans don't want abortion funding in the health care bills.

In collaboration with other pro-life groups, Operation Rescue is launching the "I AM 71" Project.

"We are asking Americans to take a digital photo of them holding a paper with the number 71 and send it to Operation Rescue," the group tells LifeNews.com. "These photos will be posted on the Internet and compiled and sent to members of Congress and President Obama."

"We want Obama and Congress to have to look at the faces of the citizens they are betraying by ignoring their will on this critically important issue," OR president Troy Newman said today. "Seventy-one percent is not just a number. We are Americans of good conscience who deserve to be heard."

"We are also urging our supporters to spread the word to their friends and family members, and post our request for photos on their social networking sites," Newman said.

The project comes after the latest votes from members of the Senate against amendments to strike abortion funding from the Baucus version of the health care bill.

Jesus Culture 01 Heaven Is Here

Mon, 14 Sep 2009 19:40:33 GMT

CNN Spins Poll Following Obama Speech Favoring Pro-Abortion Health Care Bill

Mon, 14 Sep 2009 19:21:29 GMT

Okay don't know if you guys saw this or heard about it but should we even be supprised ?

by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
September 10, 2009

addthis_pub = 'sertelt';

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- CNN has earned itself significant criticism following a poll it conducted after President Barack Obama's speech touting the pro-abortion health care bills. CNN manipulated the number of Republicans and Democrats in the poll to make it appear the speech went over well with the American public.

"Two out of three Americans who watched President Barack Obama's health care reform speech Wednesday night favor his health care plans — a 14-point gain among speech-watchers," CNN trumpeted today.

"Sixty-seven percent of people questioned in the survey say the support Obama's health care reform proposals that the president outlined in his address," the news services claimed.

However, at the bottom of its news story on its own survey, CNN admits to polling more than twice as many Democrats as Republicans.

"The sample of speech-watchers in this poll was 45 percent Democratic and 18 percent Republican," it says.

Although CNN gave Democrats a 23 percent edge in the partisan breakdown for the polling, it admitted "the sample is about 8-10 points more Democratic than the population as a whole" -- which would likely bring down the numbers to just over half saying they favored the pro-abortion health care bill after Obama's speech.

Matthew Balan, an analyst for the Media Research Center, noticed the skewed results.

"The pollsters interviewed 427 Americans before and after their speech- only 18% were Republicans, while 45% were Democrats," he explained. "Due to this skewing, CNN didn't really play up the poll’s results on air, but they tried to do that on their CNN.com website."

"CNN’s senior political correspondent Candy Crowley detailed the poll’s results on Anderson Cooper 360 less than an hour after the President delivered his speech on Wednesday evening, and the following morning on the American Morning program," he said.

Crowley appeared to realize the bias wouldn't go over well with viewers and heavily disclaimered her remarks.

“I think we have to just understand that these are not- you know, that polls go up and down, particularly flash polls. This is an interesting look. Obviously, Democrats loved what they saw tonight," she said. "I think that is good news for him, even given that it’s just among Democrats."

CNN.com’s home page touted how the poll “finds big swing after Obama speech."

MRC President and NewsBusters publisher Brent Bozell released the following statement regarding the CNN poll:

"CNN has no business airing a ‘poll’ that is straight partisan reaction from those already in the can for ObamaCare," he said.

"Caveat or no caveat, CNN was dead wrong to run this and on national television proclaim, ‘We have important numbers here.’ It is an embarrassment that their news directors deemed it newsworthy to begin with. This network simply cannot be trusted to cover this hugely important story fairly," he said.

Buzz up!

Channels of Glory

Mon, 14 Sep 2009 19:11:52 GMT

Wow its been awhile but im back ..lol I ama currently reading this excellent book tht I highly reccomend its called Digging the wells of revival by Loue Engel (with Catherine Paine) I know I have posted befroe tht Im reading this book but its really good jam packed with info so im trying tot take it slow & soak up all the info. Id like to share a quote with you from the book :

"America is spiritually dying because God has sales reps and not channels of his glory. We feverishly do the right things, almost as a bribe to pospone the needed pouring out of ourselves on God as a living sacrifice."-p49 ch4 (Mario Murillo, Critical Mass)

When I read this I it struck a coard within me Iam a vessel that can be used to channel glory what knid of stuff is flowing through me & whose glory am I letting come through? I must daily deny my flesh and my sinful desires to make room and a place for God's glorly to come through to touch others lives. waht kind of impact am I currently making in the lives of others?

“When Barna becomes more important than the Bible” by D.A. Carson

Wed, 26 Aug 2009 18:24:36 GMT

I was listening to the ramp podcast "FIRST WORKS" this afternoon when Damon Thompson read a quote from D.A. Carson so naturally i looked it up and found the following: http://tollelege.wordpress.com/2009/08/11/when-barna-becomes-more-important-than-the-bible-by-d-a-carson/ (i didn't type this & these r not my woords but this is powerful. Ipray that it not just compells you to think but to live ur life in a way tha glorify's the Father in heaven. also i reccomemd tht you listen to the podcast: 'First Works" by "THE RAMP" really powerful

~**~*~*~*`*~8~8~8~8`88`*~*~*`*~*~*~**~*~~*~~*~*~~*~*~~*~*~~*~*~~*~*~~*~*~~*~~*~*~~*

At the moment, books are pouring off the presses telling us how to plan for success, how ‘vision’ consists in clearly articulated ‘ministry goals,’ how the knowledge of detailed profiles of our communities constitutes the key to successful outreach. I am not for a moment suggesting that there is nothing to be learned from such studies.

But after a while one may perhaps be excused for marveling how many churches were planted by Paul and Whitefield and Wesley and Stanway and Judson without enjoying these advantages. Of course all of us need to understand the people to whom we minister, and all of us can benefit from small doses of such literature. But massive doses sooner or later dilute the gospel.

Ever so subtly, we start to think that success more critically depends on thoughtful sociological analysis than on the gospel; Barna becomes more important than the Bible. We depend on plans, programs, vision statements–but somewhere along the way we have succumbed to the temptation to displace the foolishness of the cross with the wisdom of strategic planning. Again, I insist, my position is not a thinly veiled plea for obscurantism, for seat-of-the-pants ministry that plans nothing.

Rather, I fear that the cross, without ever being disowned, is constantly in danger of being dismissed from the central place it must enjoy, by relatively peripheral insights that take on far too much weight. Whenever the periphery is in danger of displacing the center, we are not far removed from idolatry.”

–D.A. Carson, The Cross and Christian Ministry (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2004), 26. [HT: JT]

Abortion in Health Care Reform: Fact or Fiction? part 2

Mon, 24 Aug 2009 14:22:41 GMT

this is the second part of Abortion in Health Care Reform: Fact or Fiction? from Matt Lockett Director of Bound4LIFE and JHOP DC

Below is an itemized list (compliments of FRC) of the facts so far. I ask you, does this still look like a "fabrication" to you?

The House bill specifically includes it. The Capps amendment explicitly allows abortion coverage in the public health plan and subsidizes health plans that cover abortion. (Passed 30-28 in the House Energy and Commerce Committee, July 30)
Senate Democrats admit it. "[The health care bill] would include, uh, it would include, uh, Planned, uh, Parenthood clinics." (Sen. Barbara Mikulski, July 9, Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee meeting--Planned Parenthood is the No. 1 U.S. abortion chain.)
Senate Democrats refused to ban it. Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah): "Madam Chairman, would you be willing to put some language in [about] not including abortion services? Then I think you would have more support." Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.): "...No, I would not, uh, be willing to do that at this time." (July 9, Senate HELP Committee meeting)
House Democrats promote it. "... [A]bortion will be covered as a benefit by one or more of the health care plans available to Americans, and I think it should be." (House Representative Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), August 12, San Jose, California Townhall meeting)
The mainstream media confirms it. ("Government insurance would allow coverage for abortion," Associated Press, August 5, 2009).
The Obama administration includes it in its definition of reproductive health care. "Reproductive health care includes access to abortion." (Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, April 22, House Foreign Affairs Committee Hearing)
Every amendment to exclude it from health care legislation was defeated by the liberal sponsors. The following is a list of pro-life amendments that would have prevented abortion funding or prohibited abortion mandates for covered services.
- Rep. Sam Johnson Amendment in the Ways and Means Committee (July 16)
- Rep. Eric Cantor Amendment in the Ways and Means Committee (July 16)
- Rep. Mark Souder Amendment in the Education and Labor Committee (July 17)
- Rep. Joe Pitts Amendment in the Energy and Commerce Committee (July 30)
- Reps. Bart Stupak and Pitts Amendment in Energy and Commerce Committee (July 31)
- Sen. Orrin Hatch Amendment #227 in the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee (July 13)
- Sen. Mike Enzi Amendment #277 in the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee (July 13)

Sincerely,

Matt Lockett
Director of Bound4LIFE and JHOP DC

Bound4LIFE, 205 3rd Street SE, Washington, DC 20003, USA