Eagle Forum of Sacramento

Please continue to pray that an Obama Nation does not turn in to an abomination! Godly principles are at risk in our country.
Thank God that Proposition 8 passed, but there is already talk of creating entirely new Constitutions at the State and Federal levels. This is the next step towards communism and the complete abandonment of God in America.

September 12, 2008
by Phyllis Schlafly
The past two presidential elections taught the losing Democrats a couple of political lessons. They learned that attacks on guns and defense of abortion are no longer winning issues for them, and this new awakening is reflected in their 2008 Party Platform adopted in Denver. The Platform grudgingly states: “we will preserve Americans’ Second Amendment right to own and use firearms.” The powers-that-be in the Democratic Party have learned to tolerate a few pro-gun candidates. Feminist pressure won’t let the Democrats recede from their “proudly”-stated 2004 Platform position that “Abortion should be safe, legal, and rare.” This year’s Platform is just as pro-abortion, but uses slightly softer words, stating that the Democrats support “a woman’s ability to make her own life choices and obtain reproductive health care, including birth control” (throughout nine months and with taxpayers’ money, of course). Proclaiming that “we will end the Bush Administration’s war on science,” the Democratic Platform promises to “lift the current Administration’s ban on using federal funding for embryonic stem cells.” The genuinely pro-life Republican Platform calls for “a ban on human cloning and a ban on the creation of or experimentation on human embryos for research purposes.” The 2008 Democratic Platform stridently toadies to the feminists on all their issues. The Platform reaffirms support for the Equal Rights Amendment (which was declared dead by the Supreme Court 26 years ago), enforcement of Title IX (which has canceled hundreds of men’s college athletic teams, thereby costing us dearly in the recent Olympics), passage of the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (which would use a UN treaty to keep abortion legal), and the Violence Against Women Act (which puts a billion taxpayer dollars a year into the coffers of the radical feminists). The Platform reiterates the phony feminist slogan that “women still earn 76 cents for every dollar that a man earns.” That figure includes women who have spent many years out of the workforce and, of those who do have jobs, about a third work only part-time. The Platform promises to “expand” the Family and Medical Leave Act. “Expanding” means forcing employers to pay wages to employees who are on extended leave at times of their own choosing. The Democratic Platform goes all-out in recognizing the support of their gay rights constituency. “We support the full inclusion of all families, including same-sex couples, in the life of our nation, and support equal responsibility, benefits, and protections.” The Platform adds, “We oppose the Defense of Marriage Act.” Overwhelmingly passed in 1996 to prevent judges from forcing other states to validate Massachusetts’ same-sex marriages, DOMA was one of the most popular laws ever passed and it was even signed by Bill Clinton. Most of the Democratic Platform consists of promising benefits that will cost already burdened taxpayers aplenty. There’s no mention of how these extravagant handouts will be paid for. For example, the Democratic Platform enthusiastically endorses the incredibly extravagant worldwide handouts in the bill sponsored by Barack Obama called “the U.S. Millennium Development Goals, which aim to cut extreme poverty in half by 2015.” The Platform promises to “double our annual investment in meeting these challenges to $50 billion by 2012.” The Democrats’ mindset is that “we need stronger international institutions.” So, the Platform promises to “create a $2 billion Global Education Fund … with the goal of supporting a free, quality, basic education for every child in the world.” The Democrats want the government to take care of American kids from birth through college. “We will make quality, affordable early childhood care and education available to every American child from the day he or she is born,” and “we will provide all our children a world-class education, from early childhood through college.” The Democratic Platform is full of proposals to raid the pockets of John Q. Taxpayer and reduce the American standard of living. This includes “an economy-wide cap and trade program,” a plan to “reduce oil consumption by at least 35 percent, or ten million barrels per day, by 2030,” and designing legislation based on the belief that “global climate change is the planet’s greatest threat.” These expensive plans will require a giant expansion of government money and government jobs. The Democrats must have had this result in mind when they promised they “will make government a more attractive place to work.” There is much more expensive foolishness in the Democratic Platform, but the plank that takes the cake is: “we oppose laws that require identification in order to vote or register to vote.” That sounds like the Democrats are planning on winning the 2008 election by stuffing the ballot box.

With lawmakers embroiled in heated budget negotiations that have brought state government
to a standstill, the Democrats are playing hardball-and not just with Republicans.
The buzz in the capitol is that Democrat Assemblywoman Nicole Parra has been ousted
from her capitol office by Speaker Karen Bass for refusing to vote for the Democrats’
budget proposal-a budget that fails to reign in excessive spending and includes
a tax increase.
Moments ago on the Assembly floor, Assemblyman Todd Spitzer rose to question why
the Speaker had given Assemblywoman Parra just 2 hours to vacate her capitol office.
The response from leadership was that the Speaker has full discretion to reassign
capitol offices whenever she chooses.
Typically, a member is reassigned a smaller office in the capitol when they have
disobeyed or displeased leadership. In Assemblywoman Parra’s case, she was not
just reassigned a smaller capitol office, she is being moved across the street to
the Legislative Office Building.
“This is unprofessional and undignified behavior on the part of Speaker Bass,” stated
Meredith Turney, legislative liaison for Capitol Resource Family Impact. “Assemblywoman
Parra was elected by the people of her district to represent them in the capitol
building. By kicking the assemblywoman and her staff out of the capitol, Speaker
Bass has effectively told the people of Assemblywoman Parra’s district that their
voice will not be represented or heard in the capitol.”
“This type of political punishment proves that Democrats will not tolerate independent
thought,” stated Karen England, executive director of Capitol Resource Family Impact.
“How many other lawmakers are being bullied and intimidated by Democrat leadership
for refusing to join them in their out-of-control spending?”
“We urge all citizens to call Assembly Speaker Karen Bass and ask her why she’s
kicked Assemblywoman Nicole Parra out of the office her constituents voted her into,”
stated Turney. “And we urge them to call Assemblywoman Parra and their legislator
and encourage them to hold the line against higher taxes and irresponsible spending!”
Call Speaker Karen Bass to ask why she is punishing Assemblywoman Nicole Parra:
(916) 319-2047
Call Assemblywoman Nicole Parra and encourage her:
(916) 319-2030

Well, folks, I’m afraid this is only the beginning. Tyson has willingly allowed 125 years of American history to be trashed in one fell swoop–in the name of “Let’s accommodate the new immigrants”! I wonder which American holiday will be replaced next-Memorial Day, Independence Day, Christmas? I contacted Tyson to let them know my feelings regarding this.

Chicken company: Workers wanted Islamic religious event recognized

Posted: August 02, 2008

By Bob Unruh

© 2008 WorldNetDaily

Food workers at the Shelbyville, Tenn., plant for Tyson Foods, which boasts on its corporate website that it strives “to honor God,” will have time off for Eid al-Fitr, the Muslim holiday closing the month of Ramadan, instead of the American tradition Labor Day.

Officials with the company told WND the labor union representing the 1,200 plant workers, including about 700 immigrants from Somalia who largely are Muslim, sought the holiday change in the new five-year contract, and the company agreed.

Officials with the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union issue a press statement about the new “contract [that] creates an additional paid holiday, [Eid al-Fitr,] a Muslim holiday that occurs toward the end of Ramadan.”

A spokeswoman at the union’s office told WND no one was in the office today who could comment on the request.

To the Shelbyville Times-Gazette, Gary Mickelson, Tyson’s media chief, said there is no new holiday, but at the union’s request the company agreed to discontinue the Labor Day holiday and implement Eid al-Fitr.

“Union leadership did request and receive Eid al-Fitr (which is apparently spelled various ways including Id al-Fitr and Eid ul-Fitr) as a paid holiday in place of Labor Day,” Mickelson told the newspaper.

“Since all Team Members will still have eight paid holidays, the change will not affect production,” Mickelson said.

On the paper’s forum page, readers were outraged.

“If this holiday is that important to them, make them take it off instead of Christmas Day and allow ALL workers to be off Labor Day. Most AMERICAN families have some type of function on Labor Day,” wrote one anonymous participant.

“It says union leadership made this request, makes you wonder who runs the union. I guess they are already working on a plan to replace Memorial Day, that means nothing to the Muslims so why should we have the right to celebrate it. Labor Day commemorates the plight of workers and the struggle of labor unions to improve working conditions for American workers. The Muslims will not stop until all of our rights and laws are changed to accommodate their beliefs. This will be a new America but it will be their America,” said another.

The union boasts on its website, “Diversity is one of the strengths of our union. . We may come from different countries and speak different languages. But what unites us is the belief that by standing together we can better advance our interests.”

The holiday comes at the conclusion of the month-long Ramadan for Muslims, but it not on the same day each year. Officials with Tyson said they were working out how best to address what apparently now will be a floating holiday for the company.

Mickelson said other holidays for the company workers include birthday, New Year’s Day, Martin Luther King Jr. Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day.

Union spokesman Randy Hadley told the newspaper, “The negotiating committee felt this was extremely crucial, since this holiday is as important to Muslims as Christmas is to Christians.”

The union also reported “two prayer rooms have been created to allow Muslim workers to pray twice a day and return to work without leaving the plant.”

Ironically, the company on its website also promotes a variety of traditional and customary Christian and secular blessings for food – its primary product.

“This is America, founded by the blood of our forefathers and should not be challenged by Somalians, Hispanics, or any other immigrants. If they come to America, they need to learn our language and our ways. They can practice their culture in private if they so please, but not shove it down our throats. Would they let us go there and change their country? I have banned Tyson’s products from my home for years because of the illegals they were hiring. I am sorry for the producers that are supplying them, but Tyson’s has once again crossed the line with the American people. Labor Day was here long before Tyson’s. What holiday will be next to be taken away and replaced to accommodate an immigrant. This stinks worse than the plant,” said another anonymous forum participant.

“Disgusting … appalling … horrifying … there just aren’t enough words to describe this situation. There will never be another Tyson product in my home EVER!! Bedford County and the rest of the nation needs to take notice. Is this what we are coming to?” said another.

A Muslim website says the holiday is a “joyous three-day celebration” that concludes Ramadan, during which Muslims fast during the day.

According to the U.S. Department of Labor, the national holiday dates from Sept. 5, 1882, and is “dedicated to the social and economic achievements of American workers. It constitutes a yearly national tribute to the contributions workers have made to the strength, prosperity, and well-being of our country.”

The California State Supreme Court, lead by Chief Justice Ron George, repealed California law stating that marriage is between a man and a woman as set forth by both the Legislature and the people through the passage of Prop. 22.< ?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

The Court’s ruling is breathtaking for its overreach. Using words like “dignity” (23 times), “liberty” (34 times), and “privacy” (37 times) to describe same-sex partners full right to marry, the Court overturned millennia of experience and more than 150 years of state law precedence. (For the ruling, see: http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S147999.PDF.) In so doing, their strained justifications threw the door wide open to polygamous and incestuous marriage. How? By using the flawed logic that marriage is none of the government’s business insofar as marriage should be afforded to all to afford people privacy, liberty and dignity. The same weak logic can be applied to the “plural” marriages of the Fundamentalist LDS cult in Texas or to a devout Muslim citizen of Saudi Arabia who wishes to emigrate to California with his four wives. In fact, due to the equal protection provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment, both a Fundamentalist LDS cult member and a devout Muslim could argue that their First Amendment right to free exercise of religion are being violated by any restriction on polygamy “after all, their ‘dignity,’ ‘liberty,’ and ‘privacy’” would be violated otherwise.

Allow me to close my comments with two political observations.

First, the Court’s sweeping ruling is likely to ignite support for the California Marriage Protection Act, a constitutional ballot initiative that would overrule the Court’s decision that should appear on the ballot this November. (See: http://www.protectmarriage.com/.) This, in turn, may have an impact on other California races, from the President on down to the legislative races. In this, liberal Democrats should be wary of what they wish for!

Second, I find it ironic to see commentators describe the Court as conservative since the majority of its members were appointed by Republican governors. Lest we forget, there is a simmering divide in the Republican Party over whether the label “conservative” includes social policy, or only tax and fiscal policy. Chief Judge Ron George was first appointed by Gov. Deukmejian, then appointed chief justice by Gov. Wilson. Justice Ron George has had a long history of very liberal rulings long before the same sex marriage ruling. In fact, back in 1997, I drafted a resolution opposing Justice Ron George for his election in 1998. It passed the Orange County Republican Party Central Committee, then stalled when it hit the California Republican Party. It was argued that Justice George was a Republican, so the Party should support him. The reason for my opposition to Judge George in 1997 was his ruling in American Academy of Pediatrics v. Lungren which overturned a California law requiring parental consent for minors to obtain abortions (“privacy” of the minor girl was the reason cited in that case too). Other bad rulings already made by Justice George at that time included: a pro-criminal decision in People v. Superior Court (Romero), three anti-private property rights decisions in Ehrlich v. Culver City, Smith v. Fair Employment and Housing Commission, and Alcarez v. Vece, a pro-public union decision in Loder v. City of Glendale, and an anti-business decision in Stevenson v. Superior Court.

Of course, there is the remote possibility that Judge George’s terrible ruling really is a Republican plot in the vast right wing conspiracy to boost conservative turnout so much that McCain wins California and is elected President in 2008, stranger things have happened in the world of politics.

Just for old time’s sake, I’ve reprinted below the 1997 resolution that passed the OC Republican Party Central Committee only to fail at the California Republican Party convention. It was authored by me and my long time friend, Fred Whitaker, a respected Orange attorney who should someday be on the California Supreme Court.

*************************************
A Resolution Calling to Oppose Confirmation of Certain California Supreme Court Judges.

WHEREAS, The California Supreme Court overturned a 1987 law requiring parental consent for minors to obtain abortions.

WHEREAS, The law in question was a carefully written to meet the U.S. Supreme Court’s strict guidelines for valid parental consent legislation.

WHEREAS, Chief Justice George, Justice Chin, Justice Kennard, and Justice Werdegar ruled that the parental consent law violated the “autonomy privacy rights” of minor girls. Further that a minor girl’s uninhibited right to an abortion “is so central to the preservation of her ability to define and adhere to her ultimate values regarding the meaning of human existence and life, “we conclude that a minor who is pregnant has a protected privacy interest under the California Constitution in making the decision whether to continue or to terminate her own pregnancy.” Yet, almost a year earlier, the court ruled that the same law was valid.

WHEREAS, Lower courts in California blocked enforcement soon after its passage in 1987, claiming that girls as young as 13 or 14 possess the necessary maturity and rationality to make informed decisions about abortion. Yet, under the law do not have maturity and rationality for ear piercing and medical treatment without parental consent until age 18.

WHEREAS, These arguments, aside from ignoring common sense and human experience, are irrelevant to the issue of constitutionality which is supposed to be the only reason for the court to overturn legislation.

WHEREAS, A parent’s right to direct his or her child’s upbringing is among the most basic of human rights.

WHEREAS, Justice Mosk, in dissent, pointed out that according to the ruling, the privacy rights for minor girls would reach to those who were as young as nine years old.

WHEREAS, Justice Brown, noted in her dissent that the California Constitution protects “a parent’s interest in directing his child’s upbringing” and that the “liberty interest of a minor is qualitatively different than that of an adult, being subject both to reasonable regulation by the state and to an extent not permissible with adults.”

WHEREAS, It is illogical and inconsistent to require that minors obtain parental permission for aspirin at school, tattoos, tanning salons, body piercing, drivers’ licenses, etc., but not for a dangerous and invasive procedure like an abortion.

WHEREAS, This Court’s judicial activism is reminiscent of the Rose Bird Court when, the rule of law in California succumbed to the whim of four justices occupying seats on its highest court.

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the California Republican Party joins the Republican Party of Orange County in calling upon itself and all those of good will to actively oppose confirmation for any California State Supreme Court Justice who voted to overturn the 1987 law requiring parental consent for minor girls to obtain abortions.

Cosponsors:
Fred M. Whitaker, Member
Chuck DeVore, Member

Chuck DeVore
California State Assemblyman, 70th District
www.ChuckDeVore.com

April 30, 2008 by Phyllis Schlafly
It’s a good thing that British Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s U.S. visit was upstaged by the dramatic reception Americans gave Pope Benedict XVI. Brown might have been booed if he hadn’t delivered what aides called his “signature” speech within the cloistered walls of Harvard’s Kennedy Center. Brown’s tedious, hour-long speech impudently demanded that we issue a “Declaration of Interdependence” in order to submit to global governance. That’s another way of calling on us to repeal our Declaration of Independence. No thanks for the advice, Mr. Brown. Brave Americans rose up and rejected Britain’s royalist rule in 1776, and we’ve gotten along mighty well without transatlantic interference in our government for more than two centuries. We certainly don’t want to reinstate any foreign supervision today. The redundancy of Brown’s outrageous semantics was
oppressive. His speech used the word global 69 times, globalization 7 times, and interdependence 13 times. He referred to Kennedy 19 times, lavishing fulsome praise on John F. (“his influence abides everywhere”), Robert (he sent forth “ripples of hope”), and Ted (“one of the greatest Senators in more than two centuries”). Brown rejected the traditional concept of national sovereignty, which means an independent nation not subservient to any outside control, telling us to replace it with “responsible sovereignty,” which he defined as accepting what he calls our global “obligations.” Hold on to your pocketbook. Brown admitted that his “main argument” is that we must accept “new global rules,” “new global institutions,” and “global networks.” Brown’s global rules include massive U.S. cash handouts and opening U.S. borders to the world. Brown’s use of well-known American political phrases was tacky. He tried to morph FDR’s New Deal into a “New Global Deal,” and JFK’s New
Frontier into “the New Frontier is that there is no frontier.” Brown even slipped in an attempt at thought control: “Americans must learn to think inter-continentally.” He declaimed, “We are all internationalists now.” Using the rhetorical device of inevitability, Brown warned us that his vision of the globalist future is “irreversible transformation.” He wants to “transcend states” and “transcend borders” as he builds the “architecture of a global society.” Brown peddled the nonsense that the peoples of the world “subscribe to similar ideals.” He tried to tell us that all religions (Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists) have “common values” and “similar ideals.” No, they certainly do not. Brown wants to increase the power of the United Nations to become the source of “an international stand-by capacity of trained civilian experts, ready to go anywhere at any time,” and even be able to exercise “military force.” Americans do not intend to cede
such authority to the corrupt UN. The silliest part of Brown’s ponderous speech was his claim that “a global society” is “advancing democracy widely across the world.” In fact, he doesn’t even practice democracy in his own country. Brown refused to allow the British people to vote on whether or not they want to accept the European Union (EU) constitution. He acquiesced in the plot of the constitution’s author, Valery Giscard d’Estaing, to put the EU constitution into effect by calling it a treaty so it did not have to be voted on by the people. Brown was chicken about the treaty subterfuge and did not permit a photographic record of his participation. He sent his Foreign Secretary to perform the official treaty signing in front of cameras. The EU constitution, now called the Treaty of Lisbon, requires all signers to surrender their sovereignty and democracy to unelected bureaucrats in Brussels and judges in Strasbourg. The EU constitution takes away England’s right
to pass its own laws, forces England to surrender more than 60 UK vetoes of EU decisions, and gives the EU bureaucracy and tribunals total control over England’s immigration policy. Instead of a self-governing nation whose democratic system was developed over centuries, England is now ruled by what Margaret Thatcher called “the paper pushers in Brussels.” Brown made his globalism speech emphatic by repeatedly invoking the words “New World Order.” The New World Order Brown tries to con the United States into accepting would mean taxing Americans for foreign handouts so immense they would make the Marshall Plan look puny, global warming rules to drastically reduce our standard of living, and putting American workers in a common labor pool with the world’s billions who subsist on less than $2 a day. Gordon Brown invited us to march forward to globalism “where there is no path.” He’s correct that there is no path on which we can expect globalism to lead us to a better
world; in fact every path toward global government is a surrender of our liberty and our prosperity. Gordon Brown should go back home and study up on how Americans refused to accept orders from King George III.

Eagle Forum of Sacramento
Georgiana Preskar-Director

People say “If we don’t fix America soon, we will lose our freedoms.” We already have lost our freedoms!

Tonight we went to see Ben Stein’s new movie Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed. Many people do not know about it; why should they, for the media is not going to advertise it. The churches certainly will not talk about it. Many movie theaters would not show it. Some people just do not want to see it.

Fortunately The Century in Elk Grove did show it. It is a powerful movie about Darwinism and Intelligent Design. Clearly academic freedoms to present Intelligent Design, and/or Creationism, as possibilities, are gone, but this applies to all areas of truth in America today. Freedom to speak out is unacceptable and you will pay a price if you cross the line!

Five years ago I began my adventure into the discovery of why America had changed. I honestly believed that if people heard the truth of nationwide deception in schools and workplaces, through my writings and speaking engagements, they would be concerned and take action. Certainly presenting the Day of Silence, and outrageous programs like SEED, with documented evidence, would outrage parents and citizens. I was convinced that they would take their children out of schools on that day; and that churches would ask members to speak out against programs that not only abuse adults, but also our most vulnerable citizens, children and teens.

Yet no one spoke out. In fact Christians were silent. We sent over 100 letters to pastors, ministers, and priests in regards to Day of Silence and the SEED program; only one pastor responded. Even people in some conservative organizations did nothing to support our effort to stop the Day of Silence or diversity programs such as SEED. It was a rude awakening to apathy reality.

The last week I have tried to write updates about legislation, issues surrounding the next election, and other topics. I was not able to write. The reality of our loss of freedoms made me sick to my stomach.

No one can speak out anymore without receiving hate mail and even life threatening notes. A Catholic orphanage had to close its doors after 100 years because the homosexuals have become so powerful that they demanded children be given to them in adoption. God bless the orphanage for closing their doors in Massachusetts, rather than handing over children to homosexual couples.

Brigitte Bardot, in France, was arrested and could be fined $23,000 for saying that the Muslims intruded in her country, destroyed it, and that they need to leave. An Oklahoma Assemblywoman, Sally Kern, received thousands of hate mails because she said the homosexuals cause a greater threat to America than the terrorists. She has to have security guards because of many life-threatening emails. Capitol Resource Institute’s website was shut down by hackers because of the work they are doing to fight legislation that is homosexual oriented.

Now this courageous man, Ben Stein, has called the scientific community on their politically correct agenda when dealing with Darwinism and Intelligent Design. It is an outstanding movie; creative, truthful, and profound. Do not miss it and tell others about it.

God bless this man for his work and effort. After writing two books, I understand the frustration connected with trying to deliver the truth to closed minds that are addicted to diversity thinking.

However, our job is not to know the outcome of our efforts, or to avoid frustration, but to be the best we can be in delivering His word. Ben Stein accomplished this and that is the truth!

March 31, 2008
Dr. Ignatius Piazza
Founder and Director

http://www.frontsight.com/free-gun.asp

Get Civilized! Get a Gun and Training…

As the Supreme Court hears arguments for and against the
Washington DC Gun Ban, I offer you another stellar example
of a letter (written by a Marine) that places the proper
perspective on what a gun means to a civilized society.

Read this eloquent and profound letter and pay close
attention to the last paragraph of the letter…

If you want be a true, civilized individual, then get your
gun and training at: http://www.frontsight.com/free-gun.asp

The Gun is Civilization by Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret)

Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another:
reason and force. If you want me to do something for you,
you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or
force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every
human interaction falls into one of those two categories,
without exception. Reason or force, that’s it.

In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively
interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid
method of social interaction, and the only thing that
removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as
paradoxical as it may sound to some.

When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You
have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have
a way to negate your threat or employment of force.

The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound
woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year
old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang
banger, and a single guy on equal footing with a
carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes
the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers
between a potential attacker and a defender.

There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the
source of bad force equations. These are the people who
think that we’d be more civilized if all guns were removed
from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a
[armed] mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only
true if the mugger’s potential victims are mostly disarmed
either by choice or by legislative fiat–it has no
validity when most of a mugger’s potential marks are
armed.

People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic
rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that’s
the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even
an armed one, can only make a successful living in a
society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

Then there’s the argument that the gun makes
confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in
injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways.
Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the
physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury
on the loser.

People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don’t
constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people
take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at
worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier
works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the
stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level.

The gun is the only weapon that’s as lethal in the hands
of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight
lifter. It simply wouldn’t work as well as a force
equalizer if it wasn’t both lethal and easily employable.

When I carry a gun, I don’t do so because I am looking for
a fight, but because I’m looking to be left alone. The gun
at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded.
I don’t carry it because I’m afraid, but because it
enables me to be unafraid. It doesn’t limit the actions of
those who would interact with me through reason, only the
actions of those who would do so by force. It removes
force from the equation…and that’s why carrying a gun is
a civilized act.

By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret)

Eagle Forum of Sacramento
Georgiana Preskar-Director

The voice was loud and filled with anger. No matter what Michael Medved said to him, the caller had his ideas about the Boy Scouts of America. The group was hateful and must be eliminated. The caller was homosexual.

There was no tolerance in this man’s voice nor in the many that followed. Even though the boy scouts in Pennsylvania had done remarkable things for the youth, these callers said it would be better for the entire organization to be dissolved than for them to continue doing good deeds. The suggestion to start their own Rainbow Scouts was unacceptable. Their desire is for the traditional organization to acknowledge that homosexuality is normal and even in line with “natural” law.

Each voice sent chills down my body. Hatred radiated through the radio and I knew that these callers had an agenda and nothing would stop them. Corporations, schools, government and churches have compromised to meet the needs and wants of homosexuals. Now there stands two groups who will not compromise; the Salvation Army and the Boy Scouts of America.

How supportive will we be for their cause? Most people will just say in their usual apathetic voice, “Isn’t that a shame. They were such a wonderful group for children.” Then they will move on with their busy lives.

The voices filled with anger will continue. The owners of these voices will not hush until their lifestyle is accepted as natural and normal. Homosexual activists will trample everything in their way. Some churches still stand in dignity and the family unit is still somewhat strong on marriage between one man and one woman. But civil unions, partnerships, and same-sex benefits are commonly accepted.

Our last stand is the Salvation Army and the Boy Scouts of America. As they stand their ground, the homosexual voices grow louder letting America know that they will not be silenced. They have no tolerance and the ugliness of the act to destroy this group of Scouts in Pennsylvania is truly the voice of hate.

I asked myself, as I read the attached article, how I missed this news in December. Was it ever a big news story? People I talked with today, had not heard of it either. But once again, diversity addiction has never been recognized for what it is, or for its incredible power to orchestrate change.

The homosexuals have won. We cannot erase this new form of love that allows the closing of the boy scouts’ building, over natural law and God’s way? We can, however, take action, and save any voice of liberty that we may have left!

Eagle Forum of Sacramento
Monday Morning Thoughts
Georgiana Preskar-Director

The dangers of diversity addiction are far reaching in the months prior to the next election. Many Americans are transformed already and countless people have moved into the compromise stage that encourages the acceptance of diversity thinking. The schools, workplace, and churches have done their job.

Already we see words being used that elicit feelings rather than reality. This is how diversity addiction works. Everyone wants to “feel” good and Obama mania offers “good” feelings of hope and security.

The new politics that Obama uses are front-row fainting females to show compassion and kindness. During each incident, he uses the same “caring” words as he throws the supposed fainter a bottle of water. Does he know they need one, or are his actions and words used to depict “healings” that move the audience toward feelings of euphoria?

He uses the words hope and change flippantly with shallow socialist programs to support them. Hope for what? Why are people so desperate to take the words hope and change and use them for solutions that are totally unrealistic?

Hope has become magic. All of a sudden everyone’s desires become possible through change and many American minds that have evolved into diversity thinking are vulnerable. Any methods to get what people perceive as their rights are acceptable and achievable by taking from the rich and giving to the poor.

This is amazing since when you analyze who will be affected, it is the very people who thought they would be helped. Citizens will be shocked when the Obama’ hope becomes the reality that they are now the rich people who must contribute to socialist programs.

This great change, ruled by hope, will find people sacrificing more than they want to give. Suddenly when they have to pay for their own health insurance and their neighbors, and don’t forget the entitlements, the average citizen will face the reality of the phony utopia promised them by Obama or Clinton.

The more of our life and the more money taken away from us by the government, offers us less freedom, not greater freedom. But as long as “feelings” are ruling the schools, workplaces, and churches, liberal and pseudo conservative citizens will continue to believe misleading rhetoric of hope leading them toward a new freedom.

The “fainting” continues and the mouth of America shouts Obama hope as it is led to its destruction. The only hope for traditional Americans, in the months prior to elections, is that our shouts to win back this great nation will be loud enough to be heard!