Saturday, September 12, 2015


"Jessen was born April 6, 1977 in Los Angeles, California. She was born during the 30th week of pregnancy; her medical records indicate she was born during a failed saline abortion attempt. Jessen's birth certificate is signed by the doctor who was performing the abortion. Jessen weighed 2 lbs at birth, and she was born with cerebral palsy, a non-progressive, non-contagious motor condition that affects various areas of body movement. Jessen spent three months in the hospital before being placed in foster care. She was adopted at the age of four."
Gianna Jessen
September 9, 2015
Planned Parenthood Exposed: Examining the Horrific Abortion 
Practices at the Nation’s Largest Abortion Provider
SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

Good morning,
My name is Gianna Jessen, and I would like to thank you for the opportunity to testify here
today. My biological mother was seven and a half months pregnant when she went to Planned Parenthood, who advised her to have a late-term saline abortion. This method of abortion burns the baby inside and out, blinding and suffocating the child, who is then born dead, usually within 24 hours. (See photo.)
Instead of dying, after 18 hours of being burned in my mother’s womb, I was delivered alive in an abortion clinic in Los Angeles on April the 6th, 1977. (See photo of my medical records.) 
My medical records state: “Born alive during saline abortion” at 6 am. Thankfully, the abortionist was not at work yet. Had he been there, he would have ended my life with strangulation, suffocation, or leaving me there to die. Instead, a nurse called an ambulance, and I was rushed to a hospital. Doctors did not expect me to live. I did. I was later diagnosed with Cerebral Palsy, which was caused by a lack of oxygen to my brain while surviving the abortion. I was never supposed to hold my head up or walk. I do. And Cerebral Palsy is a great gift to me. I was eventually placed in foster care and later adopted. I forgive my biological mother. Within the first year after my birth, I was used as an expert witness in a case where an abortionist had been caught strangling a child to death after being born alive.
Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, said the following: “The most merciful
thing that a large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.” – Margaret Sanger,
“Woman and the New Race” Planned Parenthood is not ashamed of what they have done or continue to do. But we will have to give an account as a nation, before God, for our apathy and for the murder of over 50 million children in the womb. Every time we falter in courage as individuals and fail to confront this evil, I wonder how many lives have been lost in our silence, while we make sure we are lauded among men and do not offend anyone? How many children have died, and been dismembered, and their parts sold, for our ego, our convenience, and our promiscuity? How many Lamborghinis were purchased with the blood of innocent children? The blood that cries to the Lord from the ground, like that of the blood of Abel. Not one of them is forgotten by Him.
I would ask Planned Parenthood the following questions:
If abortion is about women’s rights, then what were mine? You continuously use the argument, “If the baby is disabled, we need to terminate the pregnancy,” as if you can determine the quality of someone’s life. Is my life less valuable due to my Cerebral Palsy?
You have failed, in your arrogance and greed, to see one thing: it is often from the weakest
among us that we learn wisdom – something sorely lacking in our nation today. And it is both our folly and our shame that blinds us to the beauty of adversity. Planned Parenthood uses deception, the manipulation of language and slogans, such as “a woman’s right to choose,” to achieve their monetary aims. I will illustrate how well they employ this technique with the following quote:
“The receptivity of the masses is very limited, their intelligence is small, but their power of
forgetting is enormous. In consequence of these facts, all effective propaganda must be limited to a very few points and must harp on these in slogans until the last member of the public understands what you want him to understand by your slogan.” – Adolf Hitler
We often hear that if Planned Parenthood were to be defunded, there would be a health crisis among women without the services they provide. This is absolutely false. Pregnancy resource centers are located nationwide as an option for the woman in crisis. All of their services are free and confidential, and they can be reached by texting: “HELPLINE” to 313131. There is access to vital exams for women other than Planned Parenthood. We are not a nation without options.
Planned Parenthood receives $500 million dollars of taxpayer money a year, to primarily
destroy and dismember babies. Do not tell me these are not children. A heartbeat proves that. So does 4-d ultrasound. So do I, and so does the fact that they are selling human organs for profit. Do not tell me this is only a woman’s issue. It takes both a man and a woman to create a child. And to that point I wish to speak to the men listening to me: You are made for greatness, not passivity. You were born to defend women and children. Not use and abandon us, nor sit idly by while you know we are being harmed. I am asking you to be brave.
In conclusion, let me say, I am alive because of the Power of Jesus Christ alone. In Whom I live, move, and have my being. Without Him I would have nothing; with Him, I have all.

Abortion Survivor to Congress: 

‘If Abortion Is About Women’s Rights, 

Then What Were Mine?’

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

WASHINGTON — A 38-year-old woman who survived a saline abortion in 1977 shared her story before Congress on Wednesday, speaking out against abortion and Planned Parenthood’s continued slaughter of unborn children.
Gianna Jessen was miraculously born alive at a Los Angeles Planned Parenthood facility after her mother sought an abortion while seven months pregnant. Her mother had been advised to have a saline abortion, which burns the child with a caustic chemical and then suffocates them to death. The dead child is then removed the following day.
“Instead of dying, after 18 hours of being burned in my mother’s womb, I was delivered alive in an abortion clinic in Los Angeles on April the 6th, 1977,” Jessen told those gathered. “Thankfully, the abortionist was not at work yet. Had he been there, he would have ended my life with strangulation, suffocation, or leaving me there to die. Instead, a nurse called an ambulance, and I was rushed to a hospital.”
It was soon declared that Jessen had cerebral palsy, suffered from the lack of oxygen to her brain during the abortion.
“I was never supposed to hold my head up or walk,” she said. “I do.”
Jessen was placed in foster care and soon adopted, and now works to save lives by telling her story nationwide.
“Within the first year after my birth, I was used as an expert witness in a case where an abortionist had been caught strangling a child to death after being born alive,” she shared.
Jessen also spoke about the need for Americans to end abortion, and to protect the rights of unborn children from organizations like Planned Parenthood who shed innocent blood.
“Planned Parenthood is not ashamed of what they have done or continue to do. But we will have to give an account as a nation, before God, for our apathy and for the murder of over 50 million children in the womb,” she said.
“Every time we falter in courage as individuals and fail to confront this evil, I wonder how many lives have been lost in our silence, while we make sure we are lauded among men and do not offend anyone?” Jessen continued. “How many children have died, and been dismembered, and their parts sold, for our ego, our convenience, and our promiscuity?”
“How many Lamborghini’s were purchased with the blood of innocent children?” she declared. “The blood that cries to the Lord from the ground like that of the blood of Abel. Not one of them … is forgotten by Him.”
Jessen then pointed to her own life story in her plea to save the children.
“I would ask Planned Parenthood the following questions: If abortion is about women’s rights, then what were mine?” she asked. “You continuously use the argument, ‘If the baby is disabled, we need to terminate the pregnancy,’ as if you can determine the quality of someone’s life. Is my life less valuable due to my Cerebral Palsy?”
“You have failed, in your arrogance and greed, to see one thing: it is often from the weakest among us that we learn wisdom—something sorely lacking in our nation today. And it is both our folly and our shame that blinds us to the beauty of adversity,” Jessen continued.
“I am alive because of the power of Jesus Christ alone, in whom I live, move and have my being,” she declared. “Without Him I would have nothing, and with Him I have all.”

Abortion Survivor Exposes Planned Parenthood As Nazi Death Cult
Published on Sep 11, 2015
During a congressional hearing Wednesday, Jessen, an abortion survivor, shared with members of Congress the heartbreaking story of her own birth — a story that began when her mother, a 19-year-old college student was advised by Planned Parenthood at seven and a half months pregnant to have a late-term saline abortion. Babies aborted through a saline abortion are slowly burned alive over several days by a toxic solution that is injected into the amniotic fluid surrounding them. The mother is then induced and the baby is usually delivered dead. But against the nearly insurmountable odds, Jessen was born alive. The abortion wasn’t without its lasting consequences, though, as Jessen was ultimately diagnosed with cerebral palsy caused by a lack of oxygen from the saline. Gianna's ad:


Press Releases From Born Alive Truth


GIANNA JESSEN RESPONDS TO SEN. OBAMA’S ATTACKS: “I’VE DEALT WITH WORSE - I’VE SURVIVED AN ABORTION”; FOCUS ON THE FAMILY LAUNCHES $500K AD BUY IN COLORADO releases its second ad denouncing Obama’s abysmal voting record against protecting infants who survive abortions; $500K radio ad buy kicks off in Colorado
CHICAGO - released its second ad today featuring abortion survivor Gianna Jessen responding to Senator Barack Obama’s direct attack on her. See the adhere. Additionally, Focus on the Family Action, a Colorado-based family organization, is kicking off a $500,000 radio ad buy featuring the original Gianna ad revealing Senator Obama’s voting record on born alive infant protections. See here.
Gianna’s first ad will air on radio stations across Colorado and the new Gianna response ad will air on TV in Cleveland, and will be featured on and at
The total ad buy for both radio and TV will be close to $600,000.
Obama’s response spot to the original Gianna ad was filled with false and misleading distortions about Gianna Jessen and Obama’s own voting record against born alive infant protections.
“Senator Obama had the audacity to go after Gianna Jessen, born alive after a failed abortion, and call her and the ad she appeared in ‘a despicable lie,’” said Jill Stanek, executive director of “We want to make sure voters are aware of Barack Obama’s extreme stance on abortion and that he voted four times, while an Illinois State Senator, to deny medical care to infants born alive after abortions.”
Gianna Jessen is the first abortion survivor to appear in a political issue advocacy ad.
In her second ad, a 30-second spot, Gianna addresses Obama’s attacks and says that she has, in fact, dealt with worse: she survived an abortion. The full text of the ad is below:
“Seen this ad? In it, Senator Obama personally attacks me. I’ve dealt with worse; I survived an abortion. State Senator Barack Obama voted 4 times against laws to protect babies who survive abortions. Meanwhile, U.S. Senators voted 98-0 for Born Alive Infant Protections. Senator Obama says deciding when babies get human rights is above his pay grade. Tell him abortion survivors deserve legal protections too.”
Senator Obama has attempted to cover up his abysmal voting record, saying that there were already protections in Illinois state law for babies born alive after abortions. However, existing laws were inadequate to protect and guarantee immediate medical care to all infants born alive after failed abortions.
“Senator Obama had several chances to close that loophole in Illinois law and give babies, like Gianna, the necessary medical care they need to survive after a failed abortion,” said Stanek. “But he didn’t do it - in fact, he voted against bills to close the loophole. Four times he voted against giving infants who survive abortions their basic human rights.” is an organization committed to informing the public about born alive infant protection laws and Barack Obama's opposition as state senator to the Illinois Born Alive Infants Protection Act.
Focus on the Family Action is a cultural action organization created to provide a platform for informing, inspiring and rallying those who care deeply about the family to greater involvement in the moral, cultural and political issues that threaten our nation.
September 24, 2008


 CHICAGO – Executive Director, Jill Stanek, today said Barack Obama hit a new low when he not only attacked an abortion survivor in a political advertisement airing in Ohio and New Mexico but then attempted to intimidate television stations airing the ad to take it down.
Senator Obama’s camp aggressively tried to censor abortion survivor Gianna Jessen by issuing threatening letters to television stations demanding that they pull the ad because, they said, it misrepresented Obama’s record,
”It is one thing to debate each other on campaign issues, but Barack Obama audaciously tried to silence and attack a person who survived her abortion after he, as an elected official, voted four times against legally protecting abortion survivors just like Gianna,” Mrs. Stanek said. “If it were up to Barack Obama, Gianna should have been left to die.“
However, by Obama’s own admission and record, when he was an IL state senator, he voted to deny necessary medical care for infants born after an abortion on four different occasions. He claimed at first he would have voted for the federal version of the bill had it been identical to the state version. But, indeed, they were identical as proven by the National Right to Life Committee and confirmed by
 “This is not some arcane tax topic or a complicated financial crisis, it is a simple issue – these are babies, living, breathing human beings, who deserve the same rights as the rest of us,” Stanek said. 
Obama’s new ad falsely claims that is taking his votes out of context when the opposite is true.
“A vote is a vote, you cannot take it out of context,” said Gianna Jessen, the abortion survivor featured in the ad. “Barack Obama voted four times against affording these babies their most basic human rights. I hope that rather than attacking me personally, he will redirect attention to born alive infants and protect their human rights.”
Senator Obama clearly misstated several “facts” in his ad attacking Gianna Jessen. Here are four:
Deception #1: Insinuating the Gianna ad was issued by theJohn McCain campaign.Truth's web address was displayed throughout the ad and included a written and audio disclaimer at the end stating that BornAliveTruth was responsible for the ad. McCain had nothing to do with it.
Deception #2:Insinuating journalists were calling's Gianna ad "one of the sleaziest ads... ever seen" and "truly vile." Truth #2: Close scrutiny of the dates of those charges reveal they were actually leveled against McCain's ad criticizing Obama's support of comprehensive sex-ed for kindergartners in a Time magazine article and Washington Post story, both written on September 10, 2008, days before the Gianna ad began airing.
Deception #3: Obama stated in the ad he “has always supported medical care for infants.” Truth #3: Obama voted four times against the Illinois Born Alive Infants Protection Act. In fact, Obama voted against the identical version of Born Alive in Illinois on March 13, 2003, that passed unanimously on the federal level.
Deception #4: The Obama ad pulled a quote ("None of those who voted against SB-1082 favored infanticide.") from a September 5, 2008, Chicago Tribune letter to the editor by former state Sen. Rick Winkel, who sponsored Illinois’ Born Alive Act in 2003.  The Obama ad stated, "... accusing Obama of letting infants die? It's a despicable lie. Even the bill's Republican sponsor said it's untrue." Truth #4: Obama took Winkel’s statement out of context. Winkel said, in full, “None of those who voted against SB-1082 favored infanticide. Rather their zeal for pro-choice dogma was clearly the overriding force behind their negative votes rather than concern that my bill would protect babies who are born alive.”
September 15, 2008


Abortion survivor Gianna Jessen contrasts her struggle for life as a newborn with Barack Obama’s four votes opposing protections for babies born from failed abortions
Washington, DC – For the first time ever, an abortion survivor is featured in a new advertisement released today which takes issue with Senator Obama’s four votes against born alive protections when he was an Illinois state senator. The 30-second spot showcases Gianna Jessen, who explains to viewers that she survived an abortion attempt 31 years ago. Jessen then highlights Barack Obama’s four votes against the Illinois Born Alive Infant Defined Act, and asks him to support protections for infants who, like her, are born alive from failed abortion attempts.
Legislation identical to the proposed Illinois law was passed by the U.S. Senate (before Obama became a US Senator) by a vote of 98-0. This included even the most adamant pro-choice Senators.
“If Senator Barack Obama’s position against born alive protections were in place when I was born, I would not be here today. Senator Obama had the opportunity four times to vote to protect infants born from failed abortions and he chose not to. By voting against these protections, he was basically denying these living, breathing babies their most basic human right,” Jessen said.
In the ad, available online at, Jessen asks:
“Can you imagine not giving babies their basic human rights, no matter how they entered our world? My name is Gianna Jessen, born 31 years ago after a failed abortion. I’m a survivor, as are many others…but if Barack Obama had his way, I wouldn’t be here. Four times, Barack Obama voted to oppose a law to protect babies left to die after a failed abortion. Senator Obama, please support born alive infant protections. I’m living proof these babies have a right to live.”
“I want people to understand that there are babies born from failed abortions. No matter how they came to us, these babies are living and breathing human beings and deserve the same protections as the rest of us. Unfortunately, Barack Obama voted four times against affording these babies their most basic human right. I don’t trust Senator Obama on this issue given he voted against these protections four times as a state Senator. Just as abuse victims or rape victims share their stories to educate the public, fight for the common good and hope that as a result politicians do what’s right, I felt it was important to come forward and give these new born babies a voice,” Jessen concluded.

Senator Obama's Voting Record

As an Illinois State Senator, Barack Obama opposed the Illinois Born Alive Infants Protection Act. The legislation defined any infant born alive as a "person” who deserves full legal protection.
The Illinois Born Alive Infants Protection Act was modeled after the federal version, with the identical definition of “born alive.” The World Health Organization created this definition in 1950. The United Nations adopted it in 1955.
Obama actively opposed the legislation in the Illinois State Senate. In 2001, he voted no in committee, spoke against it on the Senate floor, and voted present on the floor. In 2002, he voted no in committee, spoke against it on the Senate floor, and voted no on the floor. Obama was the sole senator to ever speak against it on the Senate floor.
The U.S. Senate passed the federal bill unanimously, with Senators Barbara Boxer and Ted Kennedy speaking in support of it.
The pro-abortion group NARAL expressed neutrality on the federal bill. On August 5, 2002, President George W. Bush signed it into law.
For four years Obama has said he would have supported the federal version, but that simply isn’t true. In 2003, as chairman of the Illinois Senate's Health and Human Services Committee, Obama voted yes on an amendment that made the Illinois version identical to the federal one. However, he then voted no on the amended bill.
(Note the first vote under “DP#1” or “Do Pass Amendment #1” was to allow the amendment to be added, making this bill identical to the federal Born Alive bill. The second vote under “DPA” or “Do Pass as Amended” was on the bill as amended. Obama voted to amend the bill and then voted against the amended bill.)
View the Republican State Senate Staff analysis here.
Click here to see a comparison of the final federal version of Born Alive and the 2003 IL version Obama opposed.
It has been speculated that the IL Born Alive bill became unnecessary after passage of the federal bill. This is not true.
The federal legislation was focused on Federal laws only, ensuring that for purposes of federal law, the terms “human being,” “person,” “child,” and “individual” include all born alive infants. The Illinois statute ensures that the same is true for purposes of Illinois law. The two bills are complementary, and the Illinois legislation was necessary to ensure that born alive infants in IL and not at a Federal hospital were fully protected under Illinois law.
Pastor Rick Warren: "At what point does a baby get human rights, in your view?"
Barack Obama "...answering that question with specificity... uh... you know is, is... uh... above my pay grade."
~ Saddleback Forum, August 16, 2008

Timeline of Obama's Votes


February 22: Born Alive Infants Protection Act (Senate Bill 1095) was first introduced in the Illinois Senate.
March 28: Then State Senator Barack Obama voted "NO" on the bill in the Senate Judiciary Committee. (Re: dating, the bill was introduced one day, and the vote was held the next. The tally is dated the day the hearing on the bill began.)
March 30: Obama spoke against the bill on the Senate floor.
March 30: Obama voted "PRESENT" on the Senate floor.
January 30: Born Alive Infants Protection Act (Senate Bill 1662) was reintroduced after failing to become law the prior year.
March 6: Then State Senator Barack Obama voted "NO" on the bill in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
April 4: Obama spoke against the bill on the Senate floor.
April 4: Obama voted "NO" on the Senate floor.
July 18: Congress passed the federal version of the Born Alive Infants Protection Act.
August 5: The federal version of the Born Alive Infants Protection was signed by the President into law.
February 19: Born Alive Infants Protection Act (Senate Bill 1082) was reintroduced after failing to become law the prior year.
March 13: After first voting for an amendment to make the Illinois Born Alive Infants Protection Act identical to the federal version, Obama voted against the bill. (Re: dating, the bill was introduced one day, and the vote was held the next. The tally is dated the day the hearing on the bill began.)

Congress Discusses Planned Parenthood Baby Whose Face Was Cut Open with Scissors to Take Out Brain

SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
WASHINGTON — A baby who survived an abortion as his heart continued beating, but was soon murdered alive as his face was cut through with scissors to harvest his brain, was mourned by an Arizona Congressman during a hearing on Wednesday regarding Planned Parenthood’s alleged harvesting and sale of the organs of aborted babies.
During his opening comments for the hearing, Rep. Trent Franks (R) relayed testimony from one of the most gruesome Planned Parenthood expose’ videos released to date.
“One of these videos describes an incident where one of [StemExpress’ employees procuring organs from babies at Planned Parenthood] calls one of the younger employees over to witness something that was ‘kind cool,’—that one of the baby’s hearts was still beating,” he explained. “The older employee then said, ‘Okay, this is a really good fetus, and it looks like we can procure a lot from it. We’re going to procure a brain.”
“And then using scissors, together the two employees, starting at the baby’s chin, cut upward the center of this child’s face and pulled out the baby’s little brain and placed it in a container, where it could later be sold,” Franks continued.
He then appeared to hold back tears as he reflected on the brutality of abortion.
“Mr. Chairman, I find this so crushingly sad that the only time this little baby was ever held by anyone in his short life was by those who cut his face open and took his brain,” Franks said. “Have we forgotten that it was not so long ago that authorities entered the clinic of Dr. Kermit Gosnell?”
“And yet the president of the United States of America and many members of Congress have not uttered one single syllable against these gut-wrenching atrocities of Kermit Gosnell or Planned Parenthood. Is this who we truly are?” he asked.
“[Abortion] is the worst human rights atrocity in the history of the United States of America,” Franks proclaimed.
He then chastised his fellow Congressman who would characterize abortion as a choice.
“I know that many of you on this committee will hold to the standard line and try to cloak all of this in the name of freedom of choice, but I beg you to open your own hearts and ask yourselves: What is so liberating about brutally and painfully dismembering living helpless little human babies?” Franks said with emotion.
“In spite of all the political noise, protecting these little babies and their mothers is not a Republican issue, and it is not a Democrat issue,” he declared. “It is a basic test of our humanity and who we are as a human family.”
Wednesday’s hearing also included testimony from abortion survivors Melissa Ohden and Gianna Jessen, both of whom survived saline infusion abortions in 1977.


Judge Orders Kim Davis Released, Demands She Not Stop Deputies From 

Issuing ‘Gay Marriage’ Licenses

SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

ASHLAND, Ky. — The judge that ordered Kim Davis to be placed behind bars nearly one week ago has now ordered her release, but simultaneously demanded that she not stop any of her deputy clerks from issuing marriage licenses to homosexuals.
U.S. District Judge David Bunning’s order came just hours before a rally was set to begin outside of Carter County Detention Center, where Davis had been held for the past six days.
He said that he was satisfied with the Rowan County office’s compliance with the Supreme Court opinion in Obergefell v. Hodges, and issued his order shortly after Davis’ attorneys filed an emergency motion to stay the contempt order.
“Defendent Davis shall be released from the custody of the U.S. Marshal forthwith,” reads Bunning’s order released today. “Defendant Davis shall not interfere in any way, directly or indirectly, with the efforts of her deputy clerks to issue marriage licenses to all legally eligible couples.”
He threatened to punish Davis if she defies the order.
“If Defendant Davis should interfere in any way with their issuance, that will be considered a violation of this order and appropriate sanctions will be considered,” Bunning wrote.
The federal judge, nominated to the bench by then-President George W. Bush, ordered status reports presented to his office every two weeks.
“[C]ounsel for the five deputy clerks who indicated that they would comply with the court’s order shall file a status report every fourteen days from the date of entry of this order unless otherwise excused by the court,” Bunning directed.
“Within those reports Counsel shall report on their clients’ respective compliance with the court’s August 12, 2015 order enjoining the Rowan County Clerk from enforcing her ‘no marriage licenses’ policy, as well as its order of September 3, 2015 requiring them to issue marriage licenses to all eligible couples in compliance with the court’s prior order,” he mandated.
According to reports, Davis’ attorneys have filed an appeal with the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals and are asking that the state take her name off the licenses. They outline that Davis would be willing to compromise and allow the licenses to be issued as long as her name is not on the document.
“If [Davis’ deputies] can issue licenses under someone else’s authority … Kim Davis would not stand in the way of that,” attorney Roger Gannam told CNN on Tuesday.
Gannam, an attorney with Liberty Counsel, says that the state could still make it possible for homosexuals to “marry” while providing an opt-out for Davis.
“It’s the duty of the Kentucky government to accommodate [Davis], and they very easily could do so,” Gannam said. “Gov. Beshear is the one who should do his job or resign, using his words.”
However, some opine that there should be no compromise whatsoever and that Davis should interpose in the matter—as should Beshear.
“We’re still allowing the evil to continue, and it totally nullifies the interposition of the lesser magistrate in abating the just judgment of God,” Matt Trewhella, pastor of Mercy Seat Christian Church in Milwaukee, Wisconsin and author of “The Doctrine of the Lesser Magistrate,” told Christian News Network.
“It’s extremely important for people to understand that the interposition of the lesser magistrate abates the just judgment of God,” he said, “but with the path they’re taking in Kentucky, it will not.”

Pastor: Kim Davis Has Duty to Continue to Defy Federal Court as ‘Lesser Magistrate’ 

to Uphold God’s Law

SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

MILWAUKEE, Wisc. — A pastor and author who supports Kentucky clerk Kim Davis’ decision to disobey a court order rather than violate the law of God says that Davis has a duty to continue to interpose as a civil magistrate and refuse to issue marriage licenses to homosexuals—and the responsibility has nothing to do with personal religious liberty.
Matt Trewhella, pastor of Mercy Seat Christian Church in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and author of“The Doctrine of the Lesser Magistrate” told Christian Network this week that obeying God rather than men is a biblical doctrine that is exemplified throughout the Scriptures.
“This has been the history of Christianity,” he said. “Christianity has always upheld the standard that when the state commands that which God forbids or forbids that which God commands, we are to obey God rather than men.”
“Daniel (a civil magistrate) chose to pray even thought he was told not to. The apostles chose to preach even though they were told not to. The early Christians refused to burn a piece of incense to [Nero] even though they were told to do so. Richard Wormbrandt (a Romanian pastor who was imprisoned for years and tortured) chose not to keep his mouth shut when Christ was being impugned,” Trewhella outlined.
“There’s no difference here with what Kim Davis has done,” he said. “You choose to either obey God or you choose to obey man when there’s a conflict of laws between the state and God’s law and word.”
He said that the biblical example of fidelity to Christ over man is also woven throughout history, and that God’s law was always considered the standard of legal jurisprudence up until recent times.
“For nearly 1500 years [following the resurrection of Christ], the moral law of God was the objective standard by which all men and all governments of men are judged,” Trewhella explained. “It was the standard to determine whether a law was just or unjust, moral or immoral, right or wrong. And any law made contrary to God’s law was considered now law at all, and was to be resisted.”
Various historical figures, including those who influenced early America, often referenced the law of God, he said.
“Whether you read Alfred the Great from the 9th century, Jonathan Salisbury from the 12th century or William Blackstone from the 18th century, they all pointed to God’s law as the higher law to which all men and all governments of men were accountable,” Trewhella explained. “William Blackstone was the most cited legal scholar by America’s founders. … He said that any laws that were made contrary to the law of God should not be suffered among us.”
“That was always the thinking of western man up until the time now where we’ve thrown the law of God under the bus,” he continued. “Now that the objective standard has been removed, it allows the state to make it up as they go. And as you can see, they just change the rule of law based on the lusts, passions and whims of mere men.”
While some say that the Scriptures require unlimited obedience to men, Trewhella said that it no such command is given to obey an order that violates the law of God.
“The authority that a civil magistrate has is delegated to them by God, therefore, they have a duty to govern according to his rule,” he explained. “And that’s why it says in Romans 13 that the civil magistrate is the ‘minister of God,’ or God’s minister, to reward those who do good and punish those who do evil.”
“When we look at other passages of Scripture, we see precisely what the Christian is to do when the civil magistrate wants to rename evil as good and good as evil—that is to obey God rather than men,” Trewhella continued, again pointing to biblical examples. “There are plenty of passages in regard to the Hebrew midwives, Daniel, the Hebrew children and even [“the prisoner of Christ Jesus”] Paul himself, who penned Romans 13 and 2 Corinthians 11.”
Therefore, Kim Davis did what was right, Trewhella said.
“She’s simply following what western man has understood for over 1,500 years now, and that’s divine law trumps human laws,” he stated.
And while some opine that Davis should simply resign and let someone else issue the licenses, Trewhella said that is not Davis’ duty before God.
“She is a magistrate. She is not a private individual,” he noted. “As a magistrate, she posses lawful authority, and so she has the duty in the sight of God when the higher authority makes court opinion contrary to the law and word of God to defy that, to interpose against it.”
Trewhella said that the matter is not about religious liberty and should not be treated as a personal opt-out but a scenario where a lesser magistrate must stand in the gap to hold back the judgment of God. He expressed disappointment over statements by Davis’ attorneys in regard to desired compromises, such as being willing to issue licences as long as her name is removed from the documents.
“We’re still allowing the evil to continue, and it totally nullifies the interposition of the lesser magistrate in abating the just judgment of God,” Trewehella lamented. “It’s extremely important for people to understand that the interposition of the lesser magistrate abates the just judgment of God, but with the path they’re taking in Kentucky, it will not.”


SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

The ultra-leftist Southern Poverty Law Center, described by critics as a radical anti-Christian hate group, was recently implicated in a federal terrorism case after a deranged homosexual activist, citing SPLC hate propaganda, tried to massacre employees at a pro-family group's headquarters. Now, the self-styled “civil rights” outfit is stepping up its campaign to indoctrinate your children. The controversial Alabama-based group, widely ridiculed and criticized even by left-wing leaders for shady practices and deception, recently unveiled a new Common Core-aligned “educational” campaign. It is designed to inject even more pro-homosexual, pro-transgender propaganda into school classrooms across America, along with identity politics, collectivism, “white privilege,” “social justice,” and more.   
However, the “Teaching Tolerance” materials, which the SPLC claims are used by schools and educators reaching “millions of students,” are attracting scrutiny and outrage. Indeed, the propaganda would likely upset just about any parent, regardless of their political views. Under the guise of promoting what the intolerant SPLC calls “tolerance,” for example, students in kindergarten through second grade subjected to the SPLC “anti-bias” propaganda will learn, among other things, to ignore their parents and become cross-dressers if they feel like they were born in the wrong body. That lesson comes from the book 10,000 Dresses by Marcus Ewert, one of several SPLC-recommended texts for K-2 “teaching tolerance” lessons on “gender” highlighted by activists and media reports.
The book's description on retailer Amazon's website reads: “Every night, Bailey dreams about magical dresses: dresses made of crystals and rainbows, dresses made of flowers, dresses made of windows.… Unfortunately, when Bailey’s awake, no one wants to hear about these beautiful dreams. Quite the contrary. 'You’re a BOY!' Mother and Father tell Bailey. 'You shouldn’t be thinking about dresses at all.' Then Bailey meets Laurel, an older girl who is touched and inspired by Bailey’s imagination and courage. In friendship, the two of them begin making dresses together. And Bailey’s dreams come true! This gorgeous picture book — a modern fairy tale about becoming the person you feel you are inside — will delight people of all ages.”
Not everybody is delighted, however. Theresa Lucas-Hubbard, a board member of both Alabamians United for Excellence in Education (AUEE) and the Alabama Eagle Forum, commenting in Breitbart, noted that to find the book, she simply chose the most popular reading as listed on the SPLC project's website. “Once a teacher asks a question and finds a relevant book or story, she can build a learning plan based on what she wants to get across to the class,” Lucas-Hubbard said. “It can be anything from a classroom discussion asking questions such as: 'How did it make Bailey feel when his family did not support his wish to wear a dress? What could you do to help support Bailey?'” Classroom activities might include a game of “dress up” where students would choose what kind of dress they would like to wear, she added after reviewing the materials.  
Such extreme indoctrination tactics deployed against young children's minds, of course, could come with devastating consequences. Especially troubling is the long-term mental and spiritual damage that could be unleashed on children. A recent study tracking children who imagined themselves to be the wrong gender, for instance, found that, absent medical or surgical intervention, between 70 percent and 80 percent of those confused children stopped being confused all on their own. Subjecting them to SPLC propaganda designed to convince children that they really are the wrong gender, though, and that their parents just do not understand, could push many over the edge. And the effects can be deadly: Another study on transgender people who had “sex reassignment surgery” found their suicide levels were 20 times higher than for non-transgenders.
Experts have long warned of such dangers. “Policy makers and the media are doing no favors either to the public or the transgendered by treating their confusions as a right in need of defending rather than as a mental disorder that deserves understanding, treatment and prevention,” explained Dr. Paul McHugh, former psychiatrist-in-chief at Johns Hopkins Hospital, in a piece for the Wall Street Journal. “This intensely felt sense of being transgendered constitutes a mental disorder in two respects. The first is that the idea of sex misalignment is simply mistaken — it does not correspond with physical reality. The second is that it can lead to grim psychological outcomes.”
He pointed to individuals suffering from anorexia and bulimia as other examples of disorders in which assumptions by the individual about themselves do not correspond to physical reality. Neither of those is something to be encouraged. Would you tell a skin-and-bones-thin anorexic that they looked fat just to validate their false beliefs? Of course not. Why the SPLC believes schools should encourage confused students to believe something that is objectively and demonstrably false, and something that could raise their risk of suicide 20 fold, was not immediately clear. What is clear, though, is that under the SPLC's vision outlined in its propaganda materials, there is no objective truth, objective morality, objective gender, or anything else.   
In its “K-2 Grade Level Outcomes and Scenarios,” one “anti-bias” scenario involves a girl with “two moms.” “I call them Mamma Kendra and Mamma Sam,” the girl says. Another scenario features a boy playing with dolls, and another student intervening when the boy's friend informs him that dolls are actually for girls. “It’s OK that he likes different things than you or the other boys,” the other student says. The teacher then comes along and agrees. Plenty of other scenarios involving illegal immigrants, homosexuality, Islam, and more are covered.
There are also “outcomes” which students are expected to meet. In grades 6 through 8, for example, we read: “I will work with friends, family and community members to make our world fairer for everyone, and we will plan and coordinate our actions in order to achieve our goals.” By 9th grade, students should be able to “describe how my own identity is informed and shaped by my membership in multiple identity groups.” They also need to “understand that diversity includes the impact of unequal power relations on the development of group identities and cultures.” Plenty of white, male, heterosexual “privilege” propaganda is also included, with students expected to be made “aware of the advantages and disadvantages I have in society because of my membership in different identity groups, and I know how this has affected my life.” Identifying “strategies and philosophies relevant to the history of social justice around the world” is also key.           
In its “anchor standards,” the framework says children should learn to think of themselves as typical collectivists, based on their “identity” in various “groups” — race, class, gender, sexuality, and so on. “Students will develop positive social identities based on their membership in multiple groups in society,” says the first anchor standard in the “identity” section. In the “action” section it adds: “Students will plan and carry out collective action against bias and injustice in the world and will evaluate what strategies are most effective.” In other words, schools should produce legions of radical leftist social justice warriors to go out and demand wealth redistribution, Big Government, “tolerance” at gunpoint, and more. 
Indeed, the “teaching tolerance” project makes absolutely clear that it is about more than just indoctrinating students — it is also about spawning little activists who will go out into the world and spread the SPLC's radical views in their schools, communities, and beyond. The program, founded in 1991, is described by the SPLC as an “online K-12 literacy-based anti-bias curriculum designed to help teachers deliver culturally responsive instruction while meeting the requirements of the Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts/Literacy.” It also has a magazine that it sends out to half-a-million “educators” across America. But it is much more than that.  
“This Framework is the first road map for anti-bias education at every grade level and is organized into four domains: Identity, Diversity, Justice and Action,” says the latest “teaching tolerance” scheme, dubbed “Critical Practices for Anti-bias Education.” “Together, these domains represent a continuum of engagement in anti-bias, multicultural and social justice education.” And the document does not disappoint.
One section of that framework, for instance, is entitled “Values-Based Assessment, Evaluation and Grading.” As the title suggests, it is about how a system of “classroom evaluation, assessment and grading” can be used to “instill values such as equity, collaboration, justice and respect for diversity.” Under its “grading” strategies, the document makes clear that students must not be permitted to hold fast to any one view — say, Christianity and biblical values, for example — but must be coerced into treating all opinions as equally valid. Again, there is no truth, only "feelings," which are correct and must be respected even if they are flatly and objectively incorrect.  
Another section of the framework tells teachers how to set up their classrooms. First, it compares two classroom arrangements. The first one, implicitly identified as the bad one, features desks facing the teacher, a copy of the Declaration of Independence on the wall, posters of U.S. presidents, quotes from leading Western figures, and students working independently on an assignment. The second features desks arranged “in clusters of four with students facing one another,” along with wall displays featuring the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, anti-Semitic pro-Castro apparatchik Maya Angelou, the socialist daughter of the founder of the Communist Party of Burma, and radical union organizer Cesar Ch├ívez. In the second class setup, students are “working with their table-mates on a group project.”           
The “gender” lunacy features prominently in the same section on classroom setup. “Many teachers, especially at the elementary level, seat or group students along gender lines,” the framework explains. “However, not everyone fits traditional gender categories. Some students may feel they are truly a different gender than their physical bodies suggest; others might not fit neatly into either the male or female identity category. Using gender-neutral categories or allowing students to choose the group with which they identify affirms the experiences of all students.”
The document also calls on teachers to serve as “a social justice leader” in the classroom and beyond. And if parents disagree with all the propaganda and values-shaping, the school and the teacher must fight back. “In the context of school-family relationships, addressing bias may involve (gently) challenging the negative assumptions or comments made by parents, guardians and other family members,” it says. “It also requires finding respectful ways of standing strong if families resist curriculum topics such as race, immigration, economic disparities, LGBT experience and religion.”
The framework goes on to push building “alliances” with others to “forward the agenda” and face down “resistance” to “diversity and social justice topics such as race, immigration and LGBT issues” in the classroom. Teachers are also instructed to attend conferences put on by outfits such as the National Association for Multicultural Education, Teachers 4 Social Justice, White Privilege Conference, Creating Change, Facing Race, and others. The purpose is to “learn new strategies” and “build allies outside their immediate school community.”
Aside from the latest LGBT campaign, the SPLC's “Teaching Tolerance” campaign offers a wide variety of other resources to indoctrinate students into the group's radical views. Among them is a lesson dubbed “Using Photographs to Teach Social Justice: Confronting Unjust Laws.” In the lesson, “students will analyze a photograph of people protesting what they see as an unjust law: A law prohibiting marriage equality in California.” In other words, children will learn that their Christian parents and the majority of California voters who voted to preserve traditional marriage are bigots and that “social justice” demands purporting to redefine marriage. Similar examples are almost endless.
Rather than allowing the SPLCthe UN, and the creators of Common Core to brazenly indoctrinate American children, parents, teachers, lawmakers, and taxpayers should put their foot down. Schools are supposed to be for teaching reading, writing, arithmetic, and other academic essentials — not for trying to reshape children's values to conform with the increasingly unhinged radical Left. Yet, the government education system is failing miserably at teaching the basics (by design) as it focuses incessantly on indoctrination and extremist activism. If liberty and common sense are going to survive in the United States over the long term, Americans need to take a long, hard look at what is happening in government schools — and put a stop to it.    
Related articles: