By Tom Stark, 2/22/12

Parkersburg, WV - As many times as the ACLU, other atheist groups, and other people who do not believe in God have tried and failed to force the country to take “under God” out of our Pledge of Allegiance you would think they would get the idea.   And that idea is that either the courts do not believe that doing so is important enough to force the change, or they truly believe that our system of government allows the Congress, not the courts, make the rules in our country.  Since Congress decided to change the  Pledge then the rest of us should learn to live with it just like we do with a hundred other laws that Congress passes that do not agree with our view of what our representatives were sent to Washington to accomplish.

The “under God” issue has been litigated to death,  but a family of five in Acton, MA, has filed yet another lawsuit against the local school board because they are atheists and their children…well, here’s how their lawyer characterize it:

“Every day these kids go to school and the pledge is recited declaring that the nation is in fact under God. That marginalizes them and suggests that people who don’t believe in God are less patriotic.”

In responding to the suit, the Acton-Boxborough School District pointed out that there is no coersion, no stigma, no harrassment, and no bullying of any student that chooses to remain silent during the daily morning recitation of the Pledge, or simply omit the words “under God” as they recite it.  Apparently the family is not against the Pledge, per se, but does want those two words removed from it.

Read the rest of this entry »

by Nathan A. Cherry, 02/17/2012

Martinsburg, WV – It’s an issue that just won’t go away. Thankfully many pro-life leaders and, most recently, evangelical leaders are keeping this before us and continuing to sound the alarm. By now I would hope you understand the severity of this issue and the danger to our religious liberty if the current insurance mandate does not change.

As it stands today the “compromise” offered by the Obama administration will still force religious institutions, churches, and individuals to pay (through subsidizing) for contraception, sterilization, and abortifacients in insurance plans for employees. Though they will not pay for these services “directly,” this is nothing more than a political sleight of hand because the cost will be passed from the insurance company to the employer in the form of higher costs. NO matter what politicians try to sell us, the fact is, nothing is for free.

Now, evangelical leaders are calling for civil disobedience in order to stand for religious convictions and conscience. This is not simply a “Catholic” issue; this is a religious freedom issue that will impact every one of us both now, and in the future. With Obama’s refusal to change the law and further to secure religious liberties top leaders like Rick Warren, Chuck Colson, Richard Land and Barrett Duke are signaling the time to stand together in civil disobedience and obey God rather than men (Acts 5:29).

Rick Warren tweeted several days ago showing his support for religious freedom:

“I’m not a Catholic but I stand in 100% solidarity with my brothers & sisters to practice their belief against govt pressure…I’d go to jail rather than cave in to a government mandate that violates what God commands us to do. Would you? Acts 5:29”

Read the rest of this entry »

by Nathan A. Cherry, 02/16/2012

Martinsburg, WV – I spent some time watching the Grammy’s this week. Thankfully I had the forethought and wisdom to record it so I could simply fast-forward through some of the garbage. (Dear Nicki Minaj, please retire. Please) (Dear Lady Ga Ga and Katy Perry, please see note to Nicki Minaj). I started out wanting to see the Grammy’s in order to watch Adele perform. I must admit I have a thing for her musical ability; not to mention the fact that she is real. As in, she doesn’t look like a twig about to faint because she has lived on ice-cubes and crackers all week.

I couldn’t help but transition my watching into a sociological exercise to see who I would actually enjoy my kids watching and looking up to. You know, as a role model. Before I go any farther let me say I do hope my kids will see my wife and I as role models and will find Jesus Christ and other Biblical characters to look up to as well. But let’s face it, kids are enthralled by pop-culture and we all at one time looked up to someone in music, television or movies.

And if you have been paying attention lately, there is a distinct shortage of role models in our society. It seems far too many stars end up on drugs, overdosing, being arrest for any number of crimes, or simply lack any substantive character worth emulating. So I was hoping the Grammy’s would showcase someone worth looking up to, someone, anyone? Should I choose Nicki Minaj, Lady Ga Ga, or Katy Perry?

Well, the Grammy’s don’t seem to have anything to offer. But I ran across some stories that I thought were worth sharing because they feature some currently high-profile people that are standing for their faith. These are men and women that believe life is sacred, that religious freedom is important, that the Bible is more than just a book of stories.

Ex-Victoria's Secret model Kylie Bisutti

Maybe you heard about the Victoria’s Secret model that quit because her faith convicted her about her own profession. Kylie Bisutti had a dream job that countless other models only hope to gain. She was working for the world’s most recognized lingerie company and had achieved success and wealth doing so.

Then her heart began to convict her that what she was doing didn’t honor the Lord. So she quit. CBN.com reports:

“The 21-year-old model recently decided to leave one of America’s most well-known lingerie companies because showing off her body left her feeling convicted…‘The jobs that I choose are going to be honoring the Lord.’”

The Gospel Coalition reports that Kylie’s desire to honor her husband also played a factor in her decision:

“But the more I was modeling lingerie – and lingerie isn’t clothing – I just started becoming more uncomfortable with it because of my faith. I’m Christian, and reading the Bible more, I was becoming more convicted about it…My body should only be for my husband and it’s just a sacred thing.”

Read the rest of this entry »

By Tom Stark, 02/15/12

Parkersburg, WV – How do people get to be principals of elementary schools and still believe that a six year old child can be guilty of sexual battery on another student by playing tag on the playground?  Don’t believe it, read the story.

That is exactly what happened recently in a California Elementary School where the very young and tender are now routinely exposed to sex education and homosexual indoctrination which magically extends a child’s ability to commit sex crimes against his classmates.  It’s so crazy it frightens a sane mind to know these people walk among us on a regular basis.

Seriously, though, isn’t this just the ultimate extension of the theory behind granting homosexuals “protected class” status under the new West Virginia Board of Education regulations regarding “bullying?”  Under the new rule (see Page 52,  Category 3 offenses), effective on July 1, 2012:

Acts of harassment, intimidation, or bullying that are reasonably perceived as being motivated by any actual or perceived differentiating characteristic, or by association with a person who has or is perceived to have one or more of these characteristics, shall be reported using the following list: race; color; religion; ancestry; national origin; gender; socioeconomic status; academic status; gender identity or expression; physical appearance; sexual orientation; mental/physical/developmental/sensory disability; or other characteristic (emphasis added).

Don’t get me wrong, bullying is wrong when committed against another within the population of any school or community.  However, if our Constitution is to be given even cursory lip service, it states very clearly that the law shall apply equally across the entire population.  It is clear in more than one place within the document that everyone must be treated with “equal protection under the law.”  It does not say everyone except the largest majority class.  It does not say everyone except this group or that group because there are fewer of them in the country than another group.  It does not single out anyone that deserves more protection from the law than another.

Read the rest of this entry »

Governor Earl Ray Tomblin, Jr.

In this final part of my interview with Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin, Jr., we learn the Governor’s position when it comes to the important topics of religious liberty, abortion, and the definition of marriage.

Frankly, I cannot recall a time when another sitting governor in West Virginia has been asked (let alone answered) as many questions on these important topics.  I urge you to listen carefully to this portion of the interview and hear what Governor Tomblin has to say.  It may be that you will be surprised to learn he holds a position closer to you than you thought.  Or, perhaps, you will discover that what you thought Governor Tomblin was for may not be what he actually professes here.

Finally, listen through to the end for some additional commentary from yours truly and be sure to download the ETI@Home – our companion resource to help you get the discussion going at home.

To listen to Part 2 of my interview with Governor Tomblin, go to FamilyPolicyWV.com or click on the media player below:

by Kelly Clinger, 02/14/2012

Atlanta, GA – Dear Whitney,

I think we owe you a sincere apology.

When we first bought your cassette tapes so many years ago, we were taken in by your voice. The strength and control of every note and the emotion with which you sang was truly captivating. Your voice was described as “timeless” and “flawless”.  You gave us perfection and in return we demanded it from you.

Time after time, you delivered what we wanted. We will never forget when you so effortlessly sang the National Anthem at the Super Bowl in 1991. We watched you receive countless awards and cheered for you as we ascended you to a pedestal among other celebrities we esteem.

Then you gave us The Bodyguard, and you stole our hearts with “I Will Always Love You”. No one could hit those notes like you. We, perhaps prematurely, called you a legend. What a voice. What a heavy burden to bear.

What happened next, only those closest to you would be able to explain and understand…or maybe only God knows. The fame and accolades don’t fill the void like we think they will, so we try other things. We make choices with lasting consequences…destructive relationships, drugs, compromise.

Read the rest of this entry »

by Nathan A. Cherry, 02/13/2012

Is this what Obama thinks of our religious convictions and liberties?

Martinsburg, WV – Over the last several days we have been trying to make sure you are well informed on the current battle in Washington, D.C. over the religious freedoms and convictions of millions of Americans. I’m talking about the insurance mandate of the Obama administration demanding every employer, including religious employers, offer contraception, sterilization, and abortifacients to employees. This mandate clearly violates the religious convictions and conscience protections afforded to citizens by the 1^st amendment.

In about a week’s time Obama went from refusing to compromise on this issue to honor the Constitutional rights of citizens to deciding – most likely in order to gain favor with voters – that a compromise was in order. (If I had his poll numbers and dreadful popularity numbers I would be desperate to gain favor with people as well.)

The problem with the “compromise” is that it’s not really a comprise that solves the problem. As I wrote in an earlier blog, according to Lifenews.com;

“The revised Obama mandate will make religious groups contract with insurers to offer birth control and the potentially abortion-causing drugs to women at no cost. The revised mandate will have religious employers refer women to their insurance company for coverage that still violates their moral and religious beliefs. Under this plan, every insurance company will be obligated to provide coverage at no cost.”

As anyone with a high school education in business and economics knows there is nothing free in this world, the cost must be accounted for somewhere. So while the Obama administration is assuming we are all stupid enough to believe this is a compromise, we clearly understand that this will only raise premiums on everyone in order to offset the cost of these services. In other words, this “compromise” continues to violate the religious convictions and 1^st amendment rights of anyone opposed to offering – or subsidizing – these services in insurance plans.

I’m not the only one that understands this is not a “compromise” we can accept and this is not a fight we can afford to lose. This could be, if unchallenged, just the first step in eliminating the freedoms and liberties we hold sacred. Below is a wide variety of articles from around the country on this issue and the reactions of many of our nation’s top pro-life and pro-family leaders to the so-called “compromise.”

I highly encourage you to take a few moments and scan these articles. They will solidify the urgency of this issue for you and equip you to speak truth in your conversations with others.

“Focus’ Jim Daly Reserving Final Judgment on Obama Contraception Announcement” – Daley made clear that he, and many others are still unsure of how safe our religious convictions and conscience protections truly are. Daley said: “As an unapologetically, unswervingly pro-life organization, we disagree strongly with the Obama administration that free access to drugs that can cause abortions makes women or society healthier or safer. Today’s announcement seems to be an acknowledgement by the White House that it went too far in disregarding the deeply held values, and constitutionally protected conscience rights, of religious organizations and individuals. Still, we are not convinced this tweak to the proposed policy, when analyzed at a level deeper than simple sound bites, truly addresses the religious-liberty concerns that have been raised.”

Read the rest of this entry »

by Nathan A. Cherry, 02/12/2012

Dr. Richard Land of the SBC

Martinsburg, WV – We’ve been doing our best to keep you  up to date on the situation with the Obama administration demanding religious employers violate their convictions and consciences by offering contraception/sterilization/abortifacients in insurance plans. First Obama was resolute and unwilling to give any ground or change the narrow definition of “religious exemption” that excluded churches and religious institutions.

Then, Friday, Obama announced via White House press conference his “compromise” that was supposed to secure religious freedom and conscience protections. The problem is that the president may have made the situation worse with a “compromise” so poorly constructed that it essentially changed nothing from the original mandate.

So where do we stand? Below you will find a couple on the developing story that should offer some insight into the situation and the outrage taking place across the country over this blatant attempt to force citizens to violate their conscience, religious convictions, and trample the 1^st amendment.

This video from CBN.com has commentary from Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission. In it, Mr. Land explains how this “compromise” is not a compromise at all but an “ignorant” attempt to stifle religious freedom. Click here to view the video.

This second video from Family Research Council president Tony Perkins explains the problem with the Obama administration “compromise” and how it will affect every person in America. Perkins show, through nothing more than common sense, that religious employers will still be paying for the services they oppose and the cost will be passed on to every person. In the end, this “compromise” is a lose-lose for employers and insurance companies; not to mention everyone that pays a monthly premium.

Take a moment to watch this video and pass it along to someone that is still trying to make sense of this whole mess. (If the video doesn’t appear please refresh your browser.)

We will continue to bring you updated coverage of this situation because this issue touches us all and the outcome will affect us all. No should be able to choose between their religious convictions and penalty under the law. Yet the Obama administration is demanding such a choice. What’s next? Where does this slippery slope of lost freedoms end?

If we refuse to stand up for the rights and freedoms we have been fortunate enough to enjoy in America we can be sure that those seeking to destroy our country will systematically remove them. This is just one example of religious liberty being threatened and our actions may very well determine the safety or loss of this freedom.

By Tom Stark, 02/12/12

Obama's idea for protecting religious liberty is to violate it.

Parkersburg, WV – To paraphrase FDR’s famous address to Congress after Pearl Harbor was attacked…February 11, 2012, a day that will live as the ultimate day of Obama’s many insults to Americans, was the day that Barack Obama came before the podium to pronounce that he had the perfect solution to allowing all women to receive contraceptives and abortifascient drugs – FREE – without requiring religious employers to pay for those “benefits.”  It’s such a brilliant idea that he had to deliver the message personally to the American people.  Now such benefits will have to be paid for and provided – FREE- by the insurance companies.

Whom does he think he is kidding? Any high school senior should know (but probably doesn’t with the schools we have of late, but that’s a story for a different article) that no business gives anything completely “free.”  Why, you might ask?  Because businesses that give away free stuff are usually not profitable in the long haul and therefore do not exist for very long.

Any reasonably intelligent adult who takes the time to think about it knows that the cost of these benefits will be built into the cost of the other benefits that the employer pays for and thus nothing is changed by this most recent pronouncement by “the messiah” of the left wing progressives.  So that is my simple argument that the “solution” to the problem facing religious employers is not solved, but rather that more smoke and more mirrors have been added to the Obamacare law through regulatory manipulation that has not been approved by our elected legislators.  That’s the obvious tip-off that we’re not getting the whole picture.  Let’s look a little deeper.

What is really at work here with this mandate to provide the contraceptive, sterilization and abortifascient drugs within all health insurance plans?  Most people are seeing this dust-up as something that is unique to the Roman Catholic church because that group specifically prohibits contraception of any kind.

Religious employers represent about five percent of all employers – a relatively small segment.  What many are missing is that these same requirements are imposed on the other 95% of employers as well.  So, if I am a practicing Catholic and I employ x number of employees making me subject to the Obamacare regulations, I am required to violate my beliefs just as much as the Catholic Church-run businesses.  Everyone is affected…not just Catholics.  Nothing is being said about the other 95% because those people are really the targets because…

This is not just about Catholic employers and their principles.  This is about disassembly of First Amendment rights under our Constitution so that the progressive end game of statism and central control is achieved.  Every person in the United States is at risk if this regulation is allowed to remain on the books, and it is highly significant that the administration has insisted that the original regulation remain on the books in spite of yesterday’s alterations which are really meaningless.  As I said, more smoke and mirrors.  Check this video interview with two experts in the field. The point is made at about the 3:oo minute point in the interview.

Exactly how does this threaten every American?  If the government can ignore the First Amendment and impose mandates on religious organizations that force them to compromise their faith, then does this not violate the “free exercise” clause of the First Amendment?  Does this not prevent the free exercise of religion?

If this is OK, then what will stop this or any other administration from creating a regulation that limits the press from telling any story that contradicts the official position of the government?  What stops that administration from declaring public demonstrations illegal?  The recently passed National Defense Authorization Act has already gutted the principle of due process and the right to a speedy trial by a jury of one’s peers.  Why is it such a stretch to see where this is quickly leading?

It is time to step back and take a cold hard look at the picture that has been created once we blow away the smoke, look in the mirror and understand that many have been asleep at the switch and must wake up to what is going on here.  The Catholic Church represents every last citizen in America.  We are all at risk.

by Nathan A. Cherry, 02/11/2012

Is your religious and conscience protections at risk?

Martinsburg, WV – It has been a crazy couple weeks. First there was the Komen/Planned Parenthood fiasco that no one is quite sure where exactly we stand. Now we are dealing with Obama’s demand that religious employers provide contraception, sterilization, and abortion inducing drugs in their insurance policies; even though these violate the religious convictions and consciences of these employers.

Last week it appeared we were heading for a showdown that could only end up in the Supreme Court as the Obama administration seemed unwilling to broaden the definition of “religious exemption” to actually include religious groups such as Catholic charities and churches. Then talk spread late last week that Obama was going to “compromise” on the issue and not force people to violate their conscience or face jail (Is this America or a communist dictatorship?)

After reading a few dozen articles on what has taken place in the last week I think I can help clear up the situation so you know exactly where our religious freedom and convictions stand. The scary part is that Obama would actually try and force anyone to violate their religious convictions. The arrogance of this president continues to astound as he seems to ignore centuries of precedent in protecting the religious freedoms and convictions of American citizens. Then again, his blatant disregard for precedent, the Constitution, and American exceptionalism have no other logical end.

Thankfully the backlash against this mandate was so quick and fierce that Obama – no doubt hoping to woo a few voters – had no choice but to address the issue and seek a compromise. But will the “compromise” actually accomplish what is needed to secure the religious/conscience protections of religious employers? According to a post by LIfenews.com the “compromise” is just as bad as the original mandate:

Read the rest of this entry »