Thursday, July 14, 2016


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

A Muslim council sanctioned by the government? For what? To insure that we adhere to sharia restrictions? To punish those of us, like me, who refuse to adhere to sharia law and its crushing speech laws? Why a Muslim council? Where’s the Hindu council, Jewish council, Pagan council, Church of Scientology council, Christian council?
This is a violation of the Establishment Clause. Freedom-loving Illinois residents should file a class action suit as soon as this passes.
This is how far and how deep Islamic supremacists and their running dogs on the left have infiltrated the senior levels of state and federal government.
“Illinois To Create Official State Government Muslim Council?” By Bruce Cornibe | Counter Jihad, July 7, 2016
There are no councils to represent the interests of other faiths in Illinois, and the likely leaders of this council are from the same band urging the Federal government towards censorship of criticism.
At the end of an especially bloody month of Ramadan, which included the worst terror attack in America since 9/11, some politicians and lawmakers feel the solution is to give Muslim community more of a voice in government.  The state government of Illinoiscurrently has legislation pending the approval of Governor Bruce Rauner that would give Illinois a permanent 21 member Muslim-American Advisory Council.  The Chicago Tribune describes the uniqueness of the measure by saying, “…Illinois could become the first state with a law on the books that gives Muslims a formal voice in government.” The council would have the following structure:
The 21-member council, whose volunteer members would be appointed by the governor as well as leaders in the House and Senate, would advise the governor and General Assembly on issues affecting Muslim Americans and immigrants, including relations between Illinois and Muslim-majority countries. Through monthly meetings and two public hearings per year, members also would serve as liaisons between state agencies and communities across Illinois.
The act specifies that members would serve two-year terms and should bring expertise in a variety of areas including higher education, business, international trade, law, immigration and health care. Staff from certain state agencies would serve as ex-officio members.
This special status for a religious group is surprising in a country that bars an official state religion.  In the legislation it states, “Muslims are the third largest religious group in the State of Illinois after Roman Catholics and independent Evangelical Christians.”  Yet there are no special advisory councils for those other religious groups.
It would be plausible for there to be.  Christians in the U.S. are often targeted by hostile activist groups like the Human Rights Campaign, which seeks to infringe upon their religious liberties.  Indeed, Christians are one of the most persecuted groups worldwide.  Open Doors estimates that each month 322 Christians are murdered for their faith, 214 churches and properties are ruined, and 772 types of violence occur against Christians.  Why wouldn’t Illinois require a Christian council?
Or how about a Jewish council? According to the FBI, 56.8 percent of anti-religious hate crimes were motivated by an anti-Jewish bias (2014).  Muslim Americans simply are not the biggest victims of religious hate. It sounds more like Illinois lawmakers bought into the ‘Islamophobia’ narrative.
Democrat Sen. Jacqueline Collins, co-sponsor of the legislation (S.B. 574) thinks the Muslim council will essentially separate the radical elements of Islam from the more moderate elements, saying:
“We need to encourage our Muslim Americans to be civically engaged and participate,” Collins said. “If you don’t participate, the fringe elements establish the policy.”
Unfortunately, this ignores the reality that some of the largest and most vocal Muslim activist organizations in America are Muslim Brotherhood affiliated groups.  The Muslim council would formalize the role of these Islamist groups in Illinois’ government affairs.  For example, the Chicago Tribune reveals one such advocate for the legislation, Kareem Irfan, “a Chicago lawyer who led an earlier iteration of the council under Gov. Pat Quinn.” Irfan has also served on the national board of the Muslim Brotherhood affiliated Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and has been involved in a number of other Muslim organizations such as when he served as chairman for the Council of Islamic Organizations of Greater Chicago.  We have already seen how the Brotherhood-linked Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) Chicago branch issued a call-to-action for its constituents to support the bill. Back in 2011, these group’s representatives (CAIR and ISNA) successfully infiltrated the temporary Muslim-American Advisory Council through the appointment of former Illinois Governor Pat Quinn.
We have also seen how Islamist organizations and their sympathizers have hindered federal officials from countering the threat of radical Islam by pressuring federal agencies to purge information from training manuals that could be deemed “offensive” by Muslims. That was the case when Muslim Advocates’ Farhana Y. Khera wrote a letter to the FBI, shortly after the anniversary of 9/11 in 2011, demanding they alter what he described as “grossly inaccurate, inflammatory, and highly offensive” counter-terror training materials.
Another example is in the June 2016 U.S. Department of Homeland Security report by a Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) Subcommittee, thatrecommends changing the department’s “lexicon” to mask the role of Islam.  “Reject religiously-charged terminology and problematic positioning by using plain meaning American English,” they advised.  Just advice to speak plainly?   No, they were more specific, suggesting “…using American English instead of religious, legal and cultural terms like ‘jihad,’ ‘sharia,’ ‘takfir’ or ‘umma.’”  The core concept is to make it harder for Federal agents to think about the role of radical Islamic ideology in terror, by making it forbidden for them to speak of it.
Just as CAIR and other Brotherhood-linked activist groups weaken the functioning of our government, so too would the Muslim-American Advisory Council in Illinois.  It is more important than ever to pass legislation designating the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization.  Sign the petition in support of the Muslim Brotherhood Terrorist Designation Act of 2015 to urge Congress to act.  Likewise, it’s time for Governor Rauner to take a stand for the people of Illinois and veto this bill.


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

While the Obama administration continues to allow the Muslim Brotherhood to direct American foreign policy and, therefore, to implement “strategies” that render America defenseless in the face of Jihad and stealth Jihad, there are some alternative strategies that have the potential to turn this catastrophic situation around completely in America’s favor.
Below are 9 concrete steps that, if implemented by a future American administration, would make a big difference in preserving our civilization and in defending Americans from terrorism:
1. Label the Enemy and Make a Threat Assessment.
The Obama administration continues to refuse to label our enemy and, therefore, it continues to enable our defeat in the terror war. It is urgent that we name our enemy (i.e. Islamic Jihad) and definitively identify what ideology inspires our enemy (i.e. Islamic law).
2. Scrap “Countering Violent Extremism.”
“Countering Violent Extremism” is the pathetic and destructive focus of the Obama administrationin allegedly fighting the terror war. On the one hand, this “focus” is vague to the point of being meaningless and completely incapacitates us. On the other hand, this focus allows the administration to perpetuate the destructive fantasy that there are other types of “extremists” — who just happen to be the Left’s political opponents — that pose a great threat to the country.
For example, as Stephen Coughlin has revealed, the “violent extremists” the administration is clearly worried about are the “right-wing Islamophobes” whom the administration obviously considers to be the real threat to American security.
The “Countering Violent Extremism” is trash and needs to be thrown in the garbage.
3. Stop “Partnering” With Muslim Brotherhood Front Groups.
The government needs to stop cooperating with, and listening to, Muslim Brotherhood front groups such as CAIR and ISNA immediately. The Muslim Brotherhood document, the Explanatory Memorandum, has made it clear that the Brotherhood’s objective is to destroy our civilization from within by our own hands with the influence of these groups. Moreover, as Robert Spencer advises, there needs to be legislation that will bar all such groups and affiliated individuals from advising the government or receiving any grants from it.
4. Implement a Concrete “Countering-Jihad” Strategy.
After discarding the “Countering Violent Extremism” absurdity, a concrete Counter-Jihad strategy must become an official policy. It must specifically register that Jihadists are the enemies and that Islamic law (Sharia) is what specifically motivates them.
Most importantly, as Sebastian Gorka urges in Defeating Jihad: The Winnable War, the government needs to lay down a vision, an actual “threat doctrine analysis” in a thorough document, just like George Kennan’s Long Telegram and NSC-68 did in laying out the strategic foundation to fighting communism in the Cold War. It is absolutely mind-boggling that nothing of this sort exists today in our terror war — and it is a reflection of the Left being in charge and of the destructive defeat that it is sowing.
4. Launch Our Own Counter-propaganda Campaign.
The Left and Islamists engage in propaganda 24/7. What does our propaganda war entail? Zilch.
Sebastian Gorka is crucially correct, therefore, when he recommends a national counter-propaganda campaign that involves a two-part approach: the first being the bolstering of efforts to define our enemy (Steps #1 and #4 above) and, second, the strengthening of our allies and partners in their own counter-propaganda efforts – which must include our empowering of Muslims who are trying to form an anti-Jihadist version of Islam.
Consequently, educational programs have to be set up everywhere, from public schools to universities to workplaces, in businesses and numerous other institutions. These programs must crystallize what exactly Islamic Law is and how it inspires and sanctions violence against unbelievers. This has to also involve, as Gorka urges, “a nationwide program of education that includes the armed services as well as federal, state, and local police forces and the intelligence community.”
The education campaign must also focus on the second part of Gorka’s counter-propaganda campaign, which is to help strengthen Muslims who seek to seize Islam from the jihadists’ hands.
6. Affirm Sharia’s Assault on the U.S. Constitution as Seditious.
Once the truth is accepted that jihadis are inspired and sanctioned by their Islamic texts, it must logically become required that mosques, Islamic schools and groups have to immediately curtail any teaching that motivates sedition, violence, and hatred of unbelievers (i.e. remember how CAIR advised Muslims not to talk to the FBI). Indeed, once the government discerns and labels the elements of Islamic law that threaten the American Constitution, any preaching and spreading of those elements in America must be labelled as seditious.
7. Put Pressure on Mosques, Islamic Groups and Schools.
Authorities have to start subjecting mosques and other Islamic institutions to surveillance — and discard the suicidal leftist notion that it is “racist” and Islamophobic to do so. Islamic institutions have to be made to buffer their lip-service against terror with actually doing something about it. As Robert Spencer counsels, this has to involve introducing programs that teach against jihadists’ understanding of Islam — and these programs have to be regularly monitored by the government. (This will be a part of Gorka’s suggested counter-propaganda campaign discussed in Step #5).
Spencer rightly stresses that the paradigm has to become that Muslim communities have to win the “trust” of intelligence and law enforcement agents, rather than the other way around, which is, absurdly and tragically, the case right now.
8. Bring Counter-Jihadists into the Government.
Instead of having Muslim Brotherhood sympathizers like Mohamed Elibiary serving on the U.S. Homeland Security Advisory Council (he “resigned” in Sept. 2014 under mysterious circumstances), and Muslim Brotherhood-linked individuals like Huma Abedin serving as the right-hand woman of Hillary Clinton, we need to bring in people who actually love America and want to protect it. We all know who these noble and courageous individuals are – and some of them are referenced in this article. The government must also bring in brave Muslim individuals who genuinely reject Jihad and empower them in propagating their anti-jihadist vision for Islam.
(P.S. Yes, there is an argument to be made that Islam cannot be Islam without Jihad. But the debate over this belongs in another forum. And whatever the answer, it does not mean that the effort to empower Muslims who want to make the anti-jihadist Islamic vision possible should not be made.)
9. Ridicule the Enemy.
Ridicule is a vicious and potent weapon. There is a baffling and shameful silence in our culture’s sphere of comedy, especially in Hollywood and our media, with regard to the myriad ingredients of Sharia and Jihad that merit at least a million hilarious satirical sketches.
Bill Maher, for whatever unappealing drawbacks he has in conservatives’ eyes, has set a bold standard in this respect in his Burka Fashion Show skit. American comedians need to start writing scripts that follow in Maher’s footsteps and Americans need to encourage and equip them to do so – and to also vigorously defend them from the attacks and slanders they will inevitably receive from totalitarian leftist and Islamic forces.
We must never underestimate the crippling effect of comedy on the totalitarian Mullahs of the world. Indeed, the contemptuous, snickering and roaring laughter of people, as they gaze at the pathetic rules and lives of Sharia’s gatekeepers, poses a danger to tyrants like no other.
Jamie Glazov is the editor of He holds a Ph.D. in History with a specialty in Russian, U.S. and Canadian foreign policy. He is the author of United in Hate, the host of the web-TV showThe Glazov Gangand he can be reached at
Reprinted from


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

WASHINGTON — In what is being called the most pro-life platform to date, the Republican Party’s platform committee agreed on Tuesday to adopt language calling for a constitutional amendment protecting children in the womb, as well as the defunding of the abortion giant Planned Parenthood.
“The Constitution’s guarantee that no one can be deprived of life, liberty, or property deliberately echoes the Declaration of Independence’s proclamation that ‘all’ are ‘endowed by their Creator’ with the right to life,” it reads. “Accordingly, we assert the sanctity of human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental right to life which cannot be infringed.”
“We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to children before birth,” the platform continues. “We oppose the use of public funds to perform or promote abortion or to fund organizations, like Planned Parenthood, that perform or advocate it and will not fund or subsidize health care which includes abortion coverage.”
Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins is among those who are sitting in the committee this year. He told reporters that he believes delegates will “come away with one of the most conservative platforms the party’s ever had.”
The text must still be approved officially at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, Ohio next week.
The abortion giant Planned Parenthood, however, decried the language and asserted that Republicans seek to keep women from obtaining health care.
“The Republican Party leadership is once again showing that they will stop at nothing—no matter how many women’s lives they put in danger, no matter how much violent rhetoric they embrace, and no matter how much the public disagrees with them—to prevent women from accessing critical reproductive health care like cancer screenings and STD tests,” Dawn Laguens, executive vice president of the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, said in a statement.
The pro-life advocacy group Created Equal flew a banner over the city of Cleveland on Wednesday that read “Rescue Unborn Children” and featured an image of a 15-week aborted baby. Created Equal plans to do the same at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia, but with a banner that reads “Defend Unborn Children.”
“We seek to expose the injustice of abortion to the light of human conscience and air of national opinion because our society has advanced the lie that the preborn are not human,” Executive Director Mark Harrington told the Philadelphia Voice. “Words alone are inadequate to describe the brutal deaths preborn babies experience every day.”
As previously reported, the Democratic Party unashamedly announced last week that it was including unprecedented language in its platform in support of Planned Parenthood and abortion in general.
“We believe unequivocally that every woman should have access to quality reproductive health care services, including safe and legal abortion—regardless of where she lives, how much money she makes, or how she is insured,” the text reads in part.
“We believe that reproductive health is core to women’s, men’s, and young people’s health and well-being. We will continue to stand up to Republican efforts to defund Planned Parenthood health centers, which provide critical health services to millions of people,” it says.


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

The censorship and discrimination against voices of freedom, along with consistent failure to act against jihad advocates and recruiters, on increasingly important social media platforms has gone on long enough. We’re suing. Pamela Geller weighs in here. AFDI press release here.
“Federal Government Authorizes Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube to Censor ‘Anti-Islam’ Speech; Lawsuit Filed,” American Freedom Law Center, July 13, 2016:
Today, the American Freedom Law Center (AFLC) filed a federal lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, challenging Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) under the First Amendment.
Section 230 provides immunity from lawsuits to Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, thereby permitting these social media giants to engage in government-sanctioned censorship and discriminatory business practices free from legal challenge.
The lawsuit was brought on behalf of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer, and Jihad Watch.
As alleged in the lawsuit, Geller and Spencer, along with the organizations they run, are often subject to censorship and discrimination by Facebook, Twitter and YouTube because of Geller’s and Spencer’s beliefs and views, which Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube consider expression that is offensive to Muslims.
Such discrimination, which is largely religion-based in that these California businesses are favoring adherents of Islam over those who are not, is prohibited in many states, but particularly in California by the state’s anti-discrimination law, which is broadly construed to prohibit all forms of discrimination.  However, because of the immunity granted by the federal government, Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube are free to engage in their otherwise unlawful, discriminatory practices.
As set forth in the lawsuit, Section 230 of the CDA immunizes businesses such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube from civil liability for any action taken to “restrict access to or availability of material that” that they “consider[] to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected.”
Robert Muise, AFLC co-founder and senior counsel, issued the following statement:
“Section 230 of the CDA confers broad powers of censorship upon Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube officials, who can silence constitutionally protected speech and engage in discriminatory business practices with impunity by virtue of this power conferred by the federal government in violation of the First Amendment.”
Muise went on to explain:
“Section 230 is a federal statute that alters the legal relations between our clients and Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, resulting in the withdrawal from our clients of legal protections against private acts.  Consequently, per U.S. Supreme Court precedent, state action lies in our clients’ challenge under the First Amendment.”
David Yerushalmi, AFLC co-founder and senior counsel, added:
“Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube have notoriously censored speech that they deem critical of Islam, thereby effectively enforcing blasphemy laws here in the United States with the assistance of the federal government.”
Yerushalmi concluded:
“It has been the top agenda item of Islamic supremacists to impose such standards on the West.  Its leading proponents are the Muslim Brotherhood’s network of Islamist activist groups in the West and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), which co-sponsored, with support from Obama and then-Secretary of State Clinton, a U.N. resolution which called on all nations to ban speech that could promote mere hostility to Islam.  Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube are falling in line, and we seek to stop this assault on our First Amendment freedoms.”
AFLC Co-Founders and Senior Counsel Robert J. Muise and David Yerushalmi, along with the plaintiffs in this case, Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer, will hold a Press Call from 2:00-2:30 p.m. on Wednesday, July 13.  To access this press conference call, dial (641) 715-3655 and enter code 111815.


Rep Trey Gowdy: There is STILL the Appearance of "Dual-Track" Justice!

Rep Judge Gomert (TX): BLASTS Attorney General Lynch! 


Rep Jim Jordan: Corners Attorney General Lynch / Admits Clinton Case Was DIFFERENT!

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

BY: NWV Senior Political News Writer, Jim Kouri
Despite the FBI and Justice Departments refusal to pursue criminal charges against presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton, a number of military leaders who specialize in intelligence gathering and analysis believe Mrs. Clinton is unfit to command the nation's entire military and public safety services.
“Clinton is a malignant narcissist who believes she knows best and therefore whatever she does is legal and correct including misconduct if it furthers her globalist agenda,” said political strategist Michael Baker. “The best generals – those opposed to the New World Order philosophy – fear that Hillary Clinton acting as the U.S. Commander in Chief will be another step down towards Third-World status,” said Baker.
Appearing on a decidedly progressive television news program, formerDirector of Central Intelligence Michael Hayden told the show’s audience that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s use of an unsecured email server while conducting highly sensitive government business shows a leader who is dangerous to the republic and state secrets.
Hayden served in the United States Air Force for 41 years attaining the rank of four-star general. He was appointed as the Director of the National Security Agency and then as the Director for the CIA. Although widely respected by political leaders in both parties — he worked for both Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush — he has openly battled with those who opposed the tactics used by the CIA and NSA in the war on Islamic terrorism.
During his appearance on MSNBC, a news organization thought to be unfriendly to conservatives especially those working in the military, law enforcement and the intelligence community, the discussion about the alleged security breaches turned to Hillary Clinton’s now famous email and her personal email server that she used instead of the one given to her by the U.S. State Department.
While as a rule MSNBC is biased in favor of Democrats, especially leaders such as President Barack Obama, former President Bill Clinton and now Hillary Clinton, Hayden did not mince words in discussing the latest Clinton scandal. Hayden said, “Number one, put legality aside for a second, [what Clinton did] was stupid and dangerous.
“Dangerous to whom?” asked host Joe Scarborough. “Dangerous to her. And [dangerous] to the republic and to American secrets. But I don’t even think it was legal. That has to be against policy. I’m stunned that her staff allowed her to do that in 2009 given the unhappy outcome that this [server snafu] guaranteed once [she] started doing that,” Hayden said.
Another top intelligence expert, who served under President Barack Obama, has similar beliefs as Gen. Hayden. Former Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn told Fox News Channel that the probability that Hillary Clinton’s emails were hacked is very high. Flynn, who ran the Defense Intelligence Agency after serving at the Pentagon and recently retired, said it was likely Clinton’s emails — and those sent to her by her staff such as Huma Abedin and Cheryl Miller — were hacked, he told Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly. [YouTube Link]
Although Clinton and her minions are calling any allegations against her a "right-wing conspiracy," Rep. Trey Gowdy, the Republican chairman of the House Select Committee on Benghazi, was correct in saying he and the other Republicans have nothing to do with the FBI’s investigation. The case was referred to the FBI by two Obama administration inspectors general: one from the intelligence community and the other from the Department of State. Both men are Democratic appointees.
Retired U.S. Army Maj. Gen. Paul Vallely, who serves as a contributor to several news organizations, also chimed in about Mrs. Clinton: “We have witnessed this same behavior before, even Hillary Clinton in Bosnia, sensationalizing [her] experience to look and appear like a hero in a dangerous environment.”
During a speech she gave before a crowd of African American voters, Democratic Party presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton likened American police officers with Muslim terrorists, causing one of the nation's most popular and articulate lawmen to blast her as being a racist and a liar. It was no surprise that Mrs. Clinton's admirers in the news media chose to overlook her words and few Americans actually saw the video footage of her anti-cop vitriol.
“Yes, I believe there are all kinds of underground movements and efforts in our country that try to use violence or assert beliefs that I find often lead to violence,” Clinton said before she outright accused police officers of being terrorists. “I think that when you have police violence that terrorized communities, that doesn’t show the respect that you’re supposed to have from respecting people in your authority, that can feel, also, terrorizing,” said Mrs. Clinton, who fared well in her criminal investigation thanks to corrupt a FBI director, a bought-and-paid-for attorney general and a President as guilty as Clinton.
According to African American Sheriff David Clarke of Milwaukee County in Wisconsin, for years the Left has smeared law enforcement officers as racists by claiming that black and other minority crime suspects are more likely to be shot by police. To hear many liberals tell it, police cruise around looking for minority kids to gun down for sport, according to the well-known sheriff who has been angry with the treatment of law enforcement by the likes of politicians and leftists.
Ironically, reports have surfaced that allege Clinton and her former boss, Barack Hussein Obama, are credited with the creation of ISIS and that they trained and armed that Islamist army in the hope that they would help push Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad out of power.
But now science has shown this leftist narrative to be a lie. A study was conducted at Washington State University using active duty police and highly realistic simulators that mimic dangerous scenarios officers encounter in the line of duty. The result? Police are significantly less likely to mistakenly shoot minority suspects, and took significantly longer to fire at armed black suspects than armed white suspects, according to Milwaukee, Wisconsin, County Sheriff David Clarke.
‘While I’m happy to see my fellow law enforcement officers vindicated against this persistent liberal smear, there’s also something very troubling about the results of this study. There are only two factors an officer should take into account when deciding whether to use their weapon against an armed suspect: his or her own safety and the safety of nearby civilians,” Clarke explained.


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

Historically, Roman Catholicism has been considered by Protestants and Evangelicals to be an expression of faith that distorts the Biblical gospel of Jesus Christ. While Protestants hold to a soteriological belief of “grace alone through faith alone,” in contrast, Roman Catholics, and Orthodox Christians hold to an unbiblical view of salvation by faith plus works. For them, the sacraments are a requirement for grace, and salvation cannot be attained apart from them. For this reason, bible-believing Christians have always held to the belief that Roman Catholics are unsaved, because they trust in their own works, as opposed to the finished work of Christ on the cross, for their salvation.
For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. – Ephesians 2:8-9
Sadly, during this modern time of ecumenical “unity,” many professing bible-believing Christians have compromised on this. For them, it has become a matter of “individual faith,” and regardless of your religious affiliation, anyone who has that “personal relationship” with Christ can be saved. But there are several errors in this line of reasoning, and it is extremely reckless to assume that Catholics or Orthodox Christians are truly saved. Here’s why.
Denominational Affiliation is an Expression of Beliefs
As stated above, Roman Catholics officially hold to unbiblical doctrines that are opposed to the true Gospel of Jesus Christ. In fact, they are designed in such a manner to forbidyou from believing the true Gospel. One can only assume that a Roman Catholic is a Roman Catholic because he or she believes the Roman Catholic system to be true. While it is possible that a practicing Roman Catholic can be saved, as God can save anybody he pleases, the likelihood of them remaining in the Catholic Church long term is slim. Upon justification, the Holy Spirit begins sanctification in the new believer, and will ultimately lead the believer to truth, and out of the false church. “For God is not a God of confusion but of peace,” (1 Corinthians 14:33). It is of utmost importance for bible-believing Christians to call all who are caught up in this false system to repent and leave the Roman Catholic or Orthodox church.
For if someone comes and proclaims another Jesus than the one we proclaimed, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or if you accept a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it readily enough. – 2 Corinthians 11:4
Roman Catholics and Orthodox Christians Practice Idolatry
Through aberrant doctrines such as transubstantiation, Roman Catholics, and many Orthodox sects, believe that the bread and wine of the Eucharist are the true body and blood of Jesus Christ and that it is worthy of worship. This is a regular practice in the daily Mass. Further, prayers and worship are regularly offered to Mary and the canonized saints, and relics of past saints and popes are regularly idolized in the church. In every altar in a Roman Catholic church, there will be placed a relic (i.e. bone, vile of blood, or some body part) of a martyr or canonized saint. This practice of idolatry cannot be overlooked when considering someone to be a brother or sister in Christ. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 clearly states that those who practice idolatry will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven.
Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. – 1 Corinthians 6:9-10
Roman Catholics and Orthodox Christians Reject Biblical Authority
Roman Catholics and Orthodox Christians do not hold to a belief in the final authority of Scripture, rather, Catholics’ authority is in the hierarchical system of priests with the Roman Pontiff at the head, and the Orthodox Church’s authority comes from the seven ecumenical councils. A rejection of biblical authority is a rejection of Christ himself, for the Scriptures say that Jesus is the Word of God made flesh.
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.He was in the beginning with God….And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. – John 1:1-2,14
We cannot compromise the Gospel by assuming that a Roman Catholic or Orthodox Christian who professes to be saved is truly saved. Counterfeit systems of Christianity are very good at distorting their identity. They often speak the same language as believers, yet mean something completely different. They are often agreeable with the believer and are experts at practicing cunning.
Even if a Catholic is truly born again, if they refuse to leave their false church, we must treat them as though they are not. By their own profession, confession, and expression of faith, they continue in sin by practicing idolatry and rejecting Christ. We must not allow them to speak in our pulpits or join with them in any spiritual enterprise. We are to avoid them, treat them like unbelievers, and call them to repent.
But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one. – 1 Corinthians 5:11


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

I want to start by stating how tragic the recent shooting in Dallas was, as well as others who have lost their lives during encounters with police officers. It is not my intent to try or convict any person on either side of the aisle without due process, and I believe it to be highly irresponsible for others to do so. At the heart of the matter is sin, and the only answer to sin is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The families of the individuals who have lost their lives, in Dallas, and elsewhere, are in my prayers. I pray that through the sin of man, and the consequences thereof, that Christ will be made known, and God will be glorified.
What is often overlooked, especially in the Christian church, are the after effects of our response to these tragedies. While it seems admirable that people from all walks of life would come together to mourn the tragic loss of life, many times when Christians participate in an event like this, the unintended consequence is a total disregard for God’s commandments. Proverbs 14:12 says, “There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way to death.”
An interfaith prayer gathering is being held in Dallas where President Obama is expected to speak, and choirs from multiple religions and faith backgrounds will be singing together. It will be followed by an interfaith prayer with Christians, Muslims, and Jews. Interfaith prayer leaders include Rev. Dr. Sheron C. Patterson, The United Methodist Church of North Texas, Imam Omar Suleiman, resident scholar of Valley Ranch Islamic Center and founding member of Faith Forward Dallas Rabbi Andrew Marc Paley, senior rabbi of Temple Shalom Dallas.
In promotion of this event, Russell Moore, president of the Southern Baptist Ethics and Religious Liberties Commission tweeted the following:
The image linked in the tweet can be found here.
I’m having an extremely difficult time trying to figure out what the biblical motivation is for his promotion of this event. What possible good does Moore believe will come from gathering God haters with believers in unholy unity for a prayer service to multiple dieties?
I can understand the human nature to grieve over the tragic loss of life, but as Christians, we use the opportunity to promote Jesus Christ. What seems right in the eyes of man is unfruitful, shameful, and brings death (Romans 6:21). Will God even be at this event? Scripture says,
But your iniquities have separated you from your God; And your sins have hidden His face from you, So that He will not hear. -Isaiah 59:2 
Now we know that God does not hear sinners; but if anyone is a worshiper of God and does His will, He hears him. -John 9:31
Unless you believe that Muslims and Jews are worshipers of God–that is, the true God of the Bible–then you must logically conclude that God is not going to hear their prayers. Scripture is replete with passages that teach that God does not hear the prayers of unbelievers (Proverbs 1:24-28Jeremiah 14:10-12Isaiah 59:2John 9:31, etc.).
Further, the Scriptures clearly command believers not to partake in any spiritual enterprise with unbelievers.
Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? – 2 Corinthians 6:14
God is truth, and truth has no timing. The truth is, the majority of these people are lost (Matthew 7:13-14). The majority of residents in Dallas are lost, and in need of a savior. Many of the family members of the officers lost in Dallas do not know Jesus Christ. The natural inclination of man’s wicked heart (Jeremiah 17:9) is to be quiet, join hands, and try our best not to offend anyone who is mourning, but Scriptures teach we are to preach the Gospel in and out of season, and correct those who are mourning, and looking for answers outside of Christ (2 Timothy 4:2). Scripture teaches that those who are in Christ that mourn will be comforted (Matthew 5:4). It is only Christ that can bring comfort–not an interfaith, Christ-denying service that downplays the Gospel (John 14:6). We as Christians need to be leading the charge for the advancement of the Gospel–the Gospel that saves, comforts, and reconciles–in the face of a grieving, lost world.
I’m not saying that we should beat these mourning people over the head with a bible, per se, but they should not only be able to see the joy that is in us, through Christ, even during a time of mourning, but they should also be able to see our strength and resolve in Christ, by not compromising the word of truth, by holding hands and praying with those why deny our God, and hate our savior, Jesus Christ.
Stand apart (2 Corinthians 6:17), and be salt and light.
“You are the salt of the earth, but if salt has lost its taste, how shall its saltiness be restored? It is no longer good for anything except to be thrown out and trampled under people’s feet. You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden. Nor do people light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on a stand, and it gives light to all in the house. In the same way, let your light shine before others, so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven.” –Matthew 5:13-16