Sunday, April 30, 2017


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
The Church of England has called for parents to lose the right to withdraw their children from religious education classes – because some parents are apparently using it to pull their children out of lessons on Islam.
This shocking encroachment upon the rights of parents is being justified by the Church of England’s essentially accusing parents of being ignorant for trying to deny their children exposure to “other faiths” and “world views.” Nonsense. Never before has there been any controversy about parents not wanting their children exposed to “other faiths” until Islamic supremacists burst into Western society with their full-fledged war on infidels and ambitions to conquer the “House of War,” not to mention the routine cursing of Christians and Jews during Friday prayers and the condemnation of the accursed people (Jews) and the astray people (Christians) during the daily repetitions of the Fatiha. Parents have every right to be concerned about the Islamic indoctrination of their children and to fight for their rights against what amounts to a “fatwa” by the Church of England.
Derek Holloway, the head of RE in the Church of England’s education office, has called for that right to be removed from parents and for their children to be taught other world religions regardless of the parents’ views
In America, Islamic indoctrination has also become a worrying issue. The Christian Action Network stated on its website:
The United States Department of Education has developed an Islamic indoctrination program for public schools called, ‘Access Islam.’ The lesson plans are written for grades 5 through 12. They include worksheets and videos to help students perform the 5 Pillars of Islam – prayer, fasting, alms giving, pilgrimage to Mecca and the proclamation of Muslim faith.
In Canada, Islamic indoctrination has also concerned parents, with unvetted sermons allowed by the Peel District School Board.

“Church of England Spokesman: ‘Children Should Be Forced to Learn About Islam’”, by Donna Rachel Edmunds, Breitbart, April 28, 2017:
The Church of England has called for parents to lose the right to withdraw their children from religious education classes – because some parents are apparently using it to pull their children out of lessons on Islam.
Currently parents can choose for their children not to take part in religious education (RE) lessons, and can do so without giving a reason.
But Derek Holloway, the head of RE in the Church of England’s education office, has called for that right to be removed from parents and for their children to be taught other world religions regardless of the parents’ views.
“Seemingly [some parents] do not want their children exposed to other faiths and world views, in particular Islam. We are concerned that this is denying those pupils the opportunity to develop the skills they need to live well together as adults,” he told The Times.
He added: “Anecdotally, there have also been some cases in different parts of the country of parents with fundamentalist religious beliefs also taking a similar course. This is not confined to any one particular religion or area of the country.”
In a blog post on the Church of England’s Facebook page, he insisted that children should be taught about all religions to prepare them for life as global citizens.
“Religions are global in their reach and are global in their organization. The UK is part of a global community and so the time is now right to consider the RE curriculum content balance in global terms rather than in terms of parochial English census data,” he wrote.
The Church of England runs approximately 4,700 schools, of which around 200 are secondary or middle schools. The Church is, therefore, responsible for educating around a million children each year.
However, although Government guidelines stipulate that religious education must reflect that “the religious traditions of Great Britain are in the main Christian”, they continue that it must take “account of the teaching and practices of the other principal religions”.
In his blog, Mr. Holloway supported this principle, writing: “Church schools are not ‘Faith schools for the faithful, they are church schools serving the community’. Therefore, we do not seek to deliver a Religious Education (RE) curriculum suitable only for those from Christian backgrounds but a Religious Education that is an essential component of an education that enables all the pupils we serve from all faiths and none to flourish and be prepared for life in modern Britain.
He added: “The right of withdrawal from RE now gives comfort to those who are breaking the law and seeking to incite religious hatred.”
However, Mr. Holloways’ blog has raised concerns from parents over state interference. Martin Earnest commented: “This is an appalling proposal and crosses the line too far of church interfering in the State and privacy of conscience.
“I will be pulling my child from RE to avoid religious indoctrination via the State.”
Another reader, Eric Norton, accused the church of hypocrisy, taking issue with Mr. Holloways assertion that church schools are not faith schools….”




republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
I have to say, sometimes — MANY TIMES — I feel like Jeremiah, who was known as the “weeping prophet.”  I do not claim to be a prophet, but I know what I know, and I cannot UNknow what I know…  Life would be much easier, I suppose, if I were to simply tune out and live like the rest of the world; focused on sports, worldly entertainment, easy living and comfort.  But I know God’s Word and I see what is coming upon this Earth, and surely, the judgment of God is coming soon, to all those who now live in ignorant bliss.  I feel such an urgency to sound the warning signal and call people to return to God in repentance, seeking Him with all their heart, NOW, while He may still be found.
As we read in 1 Peter 4, “It is time for judgment to begin with God’s household; and if it begins with us, what will the outcome be for those who do not obey the gospel of God?”  Yes, my friends, God’s judgment will BEGIN with those who claim to be a part of His Church…  Jesus said that “Wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it.  But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few ever find it.”  The truth of the matter is, MOST of those who sit with you in church every week will one day by VERY SURPRISED to learn that Jesus never knew them.  I wonder how many professing Christians are, in reality, walking that broad road, all the while believing they are safely and soundly “saved,” because they have been purposely misled by cowardly, people-pleasing preachers.
We live in a day and age of such deception and delusion, the likes of which I have never seen before in all my years.  If we cannot hear the truth of Satan’s lies exposed in our Christian churches, WHERE, I ask you, CAN we?  We are now two, if not three generations past the time when people had even a modicum of Biblical literacy.  Those days are long past.  Moses warned: “Fix these words of mine in your hearts and minds;  tie them as symbols on your hands and bind them on your foreheads.  Teach them to your children, talking about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, while you lie down and when you get up.  Write them on the doorframes of your houses and on your gates…”
The words we were to hold onto so securely — AND TEACH TO OUR CHILDREN — included the knowledge, wisdom and understanding of God’s Holy Word.  I dare say that today, most households in America probably contain numerous copies of the Bible, but they are rarely, if ever, opened.  Most church-goers no longer even bother to go through the motions of carrying them to church.  After all, the Scripture the pastor has chosen, to prove his point,  is placed up there (for our convenience) on the big TV or projection screen.  It seems, in our churches today, there is no more need for the Bible.
Thus we have a generation of people so far removed from the truth of God’s Word we  don’t even know what we don’t know.  A wealth of knowledge and wisdom — all the ancient Holy Scriptures, the very words of GOD HIMSELF — lay there at our fingertips, yet most cannot be bothered to even look, much less study.  We rely on what the “pastor” tells us; and sadly, most of the sermons preached in our modern American churches today PURPOSELY EVADE the whole counsel of God, lest one in the congregation might be offended.
One man recently asked the very serious question:  “Why must I go outside the church in order to get the truth?”  He was referring to the recent Wisconsin Christian News Ministry Expo and Conference in which we featured expert speakers to directly discuss the topics of Islam, Homosexuality, the God-ordained Family, Apostasy in our churches, Biblical Illiteracy, Political Correctness,  and what is required for true salvation in Jesus Christ.  We addressed these most important issues HEAD ON —  to standing-room-only crowds of people — hungry for truth that they will NEVER hear in their churches.  We had people attend our conference from far and wide —  coming from all over Wisconsin, at least 7 other states AND CANADA… yet the local pastors in the area actually BOYCOTTED our event, and would not even announce it to their congregations.
This man asked this question (“Why must I go outside the church in order to get the truth?”)  of his pastor, and his pastor’s pastor, and several men in leadership at his church.  None would answer.  They consider him a trouble-maker because he presses for answers they are not willing to give.   The senior pastor even implied he might be “happier” at another church…. a “polite, non-offensive” way of asking him to leave.  This after years of faithful attendance.
I’m becoming convinced that the seminaries MUST have special training courses to teach new pastors how to evade the hard topics completely, lest someone be offended; how to be “people-pleasers,” how to run a successful money-making business, and how to be popular and well liked.  It seems that’s all they know… but there is such a HUNGER AND THIRST for the WHOLE counsel of God — for the WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH… and people are not getting it in their churches today.
After the terror attacks on 9/11, churches nationwide were packed with people…  they came to find truth and they came to find answers.  They came seeking God, but He wasn’t there….  And so within a month, the churches were emptier than before.  Those who were sincerely seeking God had to go OUTSIDE the churches in order to find Him.  I am sad to say that we have turned Christianity into a mere religious exercise, and our pulpits are mostly filled with “hirelings,” as we read about in John, Chapter 10:  Jesus said, “I am the Good Shepherd.  The Good Shepherd lays down His life for the sheep.  The hireling is not the shepherd who owns the sheep.  So when he sees the wolf coming, he abandons the sheep and runs away.  Then the wolf attacks the flock and scatters it.  The man runs away because he is a hireling and cares nothing for the sheep.”
Am I too harsh?  Sorry, those were Jesus’ words.  Not mine.  Most of today’s pastors love to be praised by the people;  they love to be popular and well liked.  I’ve said it before, but in case you missed it:  PLEASE, show me ONE MAN OF GOD in the Bible who courageously spoke the truth — the whole counsel of God — who was well liked and popular among the people.  Such a one does not exist.
The writer of Hebrews tells us what REAL MEN OF GOD accomplished for their Lord, and what they endured throughout the Scriptures — and what REAL CHRISTIANS should EXPECT to endure even today:  “they conquered kingdoms, administered justice, and gained what was promised;  they shut the mouths of lions, quenched the fury of the flames, and escaped the edge of the sword; whose weakness was turned to strength, and who became powerful in battle and routed foreign armies…. Others were tortured, refusing to be released so that they might gain an even better resurrection.  Some faced jeers and flogging, and even chains and imprisonment.  They were put to death by stoning, they were sawed in two, they were killed by the sword.  They went about in sheepskins and goatskins, destitute, persecuted and mistreated…”  Now I ask you:  how many of US are willing to endure such things in order to follow Christ today?  And perhaps more to the point, how many of our PASTORS would be willing?  Sadly, most today are afraid to even mention the hard things that are deemed “politically incorrect,” for fear of someone taking offense…much less consider enduring any sort of hardship — or fighting for righteousness.
A case in point:  I recently warned a pastor that there were people in his congregation who were embracing and promoting the apostate movie “The Shack,” in which God is portrayed as an African woman, in which Jesus states He does not want people to become “Christians,” but rather, ALL religious paths lead to God’s acceptance and forgiveness;  and the Holy Spirit is portrayed as another woman with a Hindu name.  These regular church-goers said it was by far the best “Christian” movie they’d ever seen and were highly recommending it to others.  I warned their pastor — “You MUST speak on this!  This is apostasy of the highest degree and people in YOUR church are being led astray by this false teaching!”  But the pastor refused to address the issue in any way….  because some might be offended if he attacked the sacred cow of this Hollywood heresy.
Last summer I attended a funeral, where the pastor openly declared from the pulpit that “God needed another angel,” thus the untimely death of the deceased.  SURELY this pastor knows that people are not transformed into angels when they die… yet he purposely led all those people astray, with false doctrine about a false future…  he may as well have said, “every time a bell rings and angel gets its wings!”  That’s about the depth of the theology we are receiving in our modern American churches today.
I am most concerned about our children.  Scripture tells us that there is ENMITY between the seed of the serpent (Satan) and the seed of the woman (our children)…  Satan goes after our kids the hardest, because they are his greatest of trophies.  If he can steal the hearts and minds of our children, he can destroy all of mankind.  I believe we are seeing this come to pass in these last days, right now.  Our kids spend 6-8 hours a day, five days a week in government schools, better described as Liberal, Socialist indoctrination centers.  Then, a scant FEW will spend an hour or two in a church once a week, where they are taught Bible STORIES, as if they were fairy tales.
We have just recently observed the Easter season.  I received at least a dozen sets of photographs from people in various places; images from Easter celebrations at churches where they live.  The pictures showed senior pastors dressed up like clowns, movie characters and of course, the Easter Bunny.  The same thing happens at Christmas, when churches mix Santa Claus in with the birth of Christ.  We’ve turned HISTORY, wisdom and knowledge, found in God’s Word into fairy tales… all to attract kids to our Establishment churches…  and then we rejoice when so many kids show up for the easter egg hunt, the bounce houses, the face painting, the jugglers and clowns….  we measure the success of our Easter “services” by how many kids came out and collected candy-filled eggs, after which they heard a short candy-coated message about a ficticious “Jesus.”  How can we be SO BLIND?!   Look what we are doing to our kids.   If only we could see the millstones we are heaping around our own necks as we deceive our own children.
I’ve heard it said that “Church is not supposed to be a museum for saints, but rather a hospital for sinners.”  I beg to differ.  THE CHURCH, (the one of which the gates of hell will not prevail against), is the BODY OF CHRIST….  unrepentant sinners will NEVER be comfortable there.  Church is SUPPOSED to be the House of God, but we have turned it into a worldly, carnal social club, designed to make everyone feel comfortable and accepted in their sin.  But Church is supposed to be a gathering place for the children of God — and contrary to popular belief, not EVERYONE is a child of God.  If you are not saved by the blood of the Lamb, then you are at ENMITY with God. You’re His ENEMY… you are a child of the devil.  For what fellowship can light have with darkness?  Yet many churches today, LITERALLY entice the unsaved in with darkness and carnality….
Is it any wonder, then, that there is now emerging a REMNANT — those who take the Lord and His Word SERIOUSLY… they are COMING OUT of these carnal social clubs and as Jesus said they would be, they are scattered — sheep without a shepherd — because of the wolves, and the hirelings that refuse to speak the truth.  Church should be a place of discipleship and growth, where shepherds teach their flocks to GO OUT and make disciples, teaching them to OBEY all Jesus commanded.  Not a place of entertainment and indulgence.  Our kids see through the hypocrisy clearly, and want no part of it, if that’s what “Church” is all about.  “Christianity,” they say, does not “work” for them…. thus they choose instead, the false doctrines of demons, if they follow any spiritual path at all.
You see, they’ve been taught that the Christian life is one of peace, prosperity, comfort and ease.  Free candy when they’re kids and comfort and ease when they grow up.  We, as adults, often believe just the same.  We are never challenged to study and dig into the Word of God ourselves.  We’re rarely asked to DO anything at all.   We simply come and sit, and pay our “dues,” and listen to a comforting message that makes us feel good about ourselves.
Contrast this to what Peter spoke of regarding what the REAL Christian life is like:  “Dear friends, do not be surprised at the fiery ordeal that has come on you to test you, as though something strange were happening to you.  But rejoice inasmuch as you participate in the sufferings of Christ…If you are insulted because of the name of Christ, you are blessed, for the Spirit of glory and of God rests on you…If you suffer as a Christian, do not be ashamed, but praise God that you bear that name.  For it is time for judgment to begin with God’s household.”
Jesus does not call us to a life of comfort and ease, indulgence, carnality and acceptance of sin.  He calls us to repent, to go OUT and make disciples, teaching them all He commanded.  That REQUIRES us to be politically incorrect in this world filled with demonic delusions and lies.  Those who follow Christ will NOT be popular or well liked.  But neither will they hear those awful words one day, “Depart from Me, you worker of iniquity… I never knew you.”
Audio CDs and transcripts of this message are available when you call me at Wisconsin Christian News, (715) 486-8066.  Or email and ask for message number 196.


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
It is hard for you to kick against the goads.”  Acts 26:14
NO.  It’s not some new contemporary Christian rock band comprised of Joan Jett divas for Jesus sorts.
And, NO, it’s not intended to be either a subtle or candid way of calling Jory Micah or Sarah Bessey (or any of their cadre of co-antagonistic, ecclesiastic-equality gender crusaders) a cow or an ox.
It’s just that it’s more than obvious to any abide in my word believer that Micah and her “Christian feminist” compatriots are doing nothing short of “kicking against the goads.”  It’s like when a genuine, Scripture-informed believer turns on the evening news and immediately recognizes Scriptural truth being played out in Dolby Hi-Def.  Unless you’re unregenerate and therefore unable to recognize it, God is “giving them up” across the “breaking news now” globe in His active, ongoing, righteous judgment.  You can’t miss it.  Same with Jory and her “we don’t like what the Bible says about women” crowd.  A believer can see that they really are just typical, Scripture-denying, run-of-the-mill goad-kickers.
“They are blots and blemishes, reveling in their deceptions, while they feast with you.” 2 Peter 2:13
Micah made her goad-kicking proclivities very evident in a recent post on her website, which is, btw, tag-lined with the subtitle #BreakingTheGlassSteeple.  Her March 29, 2017, blog entry, Come To Our Table (Luke and I Are Starting A “Church”)” outlines clearly the numerous goads against which Jory is foot jolting in the name of ecclesiastic gender equality, social justice, and the epic quest of self-glory.
The triplicate identifiers on Micah’s site – “Advocate – Writer – Preacher” – give more than an ample clue about her Scripture-denying perspective.  But the article adds a certain clarity to her “look at me, I’m Sandra Dee in Minist-reee” self-descriptors.
If you follow my ministry, you know that I have been like a lost puppy when it comes to finding a church to call home.
“Preacher” Micah has no church home.  Of course, we knew that from her blog’s title.  She and her apparently pants-sharing marital colleague are starting a “church,” duly denoted by Micah in her post in the “scare quotes” format. Whatever Micah starts won’t truly be a church because, whatever Micah claims, she is not truly a “preacher,” unless one counts false teachers in that category. (I do not.)
The reason for “preacher” Micah’s unchurched status isn’t because of fundamental theological motivations.  That is to say, she and hubby have not been unable to find a doctrinally sound church.  They have, rather, been unable to find a church that suitably meets the conditions of Micah’s own pietistically, self-righteous petulant preferences.  Her preeminent personal passions have not been sufficiently shared by potential church candidates.  In other words, Micah has not yet found a church that does what she pleases.
Sucked in by the post-modern, “it’s about me” culture, Micah wrongly believes the church is about her, rather than Christ. Hers is not altogether unlike witnessing a toddler tirade on the cereal aisle where the parental word “No” has just been uttered.   For Micah, the petulant thrashing and shrill shrieking just happen to be in an aisle bordering church pews, well … it would be if she could find a “church home” in which to throw her ecclesiastic fit.  It’s a classic case of Scriptural goad-kicking.
Our hearts burn for social justice in both the Church and in society. I have dedicated my life to ministry and theological academia, while Luke has dedicated his life to working with local governments and political academia.
We have always searched for ways to combine our passions, but we have struggled to find a church home in which we feel our unique combination of gifts are seen and appreciated.
Social justice, of course, isn’t the gospel and is not hinted at as the goal of the church.  Though popular in the contemporary “we are the world” church culture, Micah’s preference for a visibly proactive, social justice focus is absent in her thumbs-up/thumbs-down review of possible congregational suitors. The churches she has assessed with the hope of gracing them with her membership have received the metaphorical, nail-polished “thumbs down.”
“True social justice is outside of reach this side of heaven.  That is not an excuse, but it is the reality of life in a fallen world.  One day, the Lord Jesus will return to establish His kingdom.  Then the earth will experience true justice.  In the meantime, God has not called the church to change the world socially, but rather to turn it upside down with the world-tilting power of the gospel. (Acts 17:6)”  Jesse Johnson, Right Thinking In A Church Gone Astray
Like Johnson says, the church has a mission.  It’s found in the commission. (See Matthew 28:16-20) Social justice is notably absent. The Gospel is the singular feature. Broadcast that Gospel and, it being the “power of God to save,” (Romans 1:16) we can trust that we will find God doing what only God can do – regenerating dead souls with new life. Want to change the world?  Fine. Do it by doing the commission thing and letting God do the change thing.
But it’s not just the lack of a Micah-approved level of social justice consciousness her candidate churches have lacked.  Those churches apparently also grievously offended the pompous Micah duo as the look-at-us limelight was absent.  As she said, they need to be “seen and appreciated.”  It’s hard to be humble, evidently, when you’re a gloriously gifted goad-kicker.
The Damascus road goad-kicker-turned-apostle would be a helpful source for the attention-coveting Micah.  “For am I now seeking the approval of man, or of God?  Or am I trying to please man?  If I were still trying to please man, I would not be a servant of Christ.”  (Galatians 1:10)  Paul, of course, was a legitimate minister with a properly oriented passion – the Gospel.  Micah, who is disqualified by gender – God’s rule, not man’s (See 1 Timothy 3:2 or 1 Timothy 2:11-12, for example) – for the ministerial moniker, has yet disqualified herself further by seeking to please man (perhaps “please people” is more appropriate), receive their due laudations, and, most importantly, do it from a pulpit.  Thus, goad-kicking has identified her as a usurper of Christ in His Word, not a servant of Him by it.
And so we have struggled for years to know where we fit in the world of Christianity. Even if we were to leave evangelicalism, we have wondered where we would go.
Perhaps that is why we have such a heart for those who feel left out: because we know what it is like to have much to offer the Church and world, but to go unnoticed by those with influence and power.
I have often been overlooked in church jobs, and Luke has often been overlooked in local government jobs. We understand what it is like not to have a seat at the table. (Emphasis original)
Last year, Luke and I got involved with planting a church that seemed like it was going to be a great fit, but it turned out that their vision took a turn that was simply different from ours.
Micah and her husband “have much to offer the Church,” but they can’t get “a seat at the table.”  They have been forced to “go unnoticed.”  (Actually, they’re not going unnoticed. They’re just “going.” Sans the successful procurement of a Micah-approved church home, she and hubby have, according to her blog, effectively picked up their toys and gone off to play “church” by themselves.)  How can this happen?  How has the church managed to scrape along for two millennia without this dynamic, ego-driven, gifted duo?  Doesn’t the local bride of Christ know what an opportunity this is?  Why is no church willing to change their entire ecclesiastical structure and ministerial philosophy (and toss Scripture and orthodoxy to the post-modern winds of tolerance) to comply with Micah’s mandates so as to procure the duo as its own limelight glowing congregants?
What this boils down to is something Christ once chided the Jews for doing.  “Do not grumble among yourselves.” (John 6:43)   Micah is grumbling about how the Lord has built His church, and how He has done it sans the dynamic, doctrine-denying, hubristic Micah duo.  What’s worse is that He’s built it with a “Men Only” sign on the pulpit … which, after all, is … His pulpit. Grumbling = goad-kicking.
Of course, that’s the real goad against which Micah kicks … authority … particularly the authority of Christ as Head of his Church and, as a result, the Lord’s direct establishment of male authority in that church.  Micah wants women in the pulpit.  It is the “glass steeple” she aims to shatter.
“Several weeks ago, I went to church with my parents at a local Assembles of God Church. I grew up AG, and I thought I would try returning to my roots, but when I opened the bulletin and saw that all of the elders were men, my heart sank and I knew that I could never again return to any church that claims to empower women in ministry, but does not actually do it.”
“…I pray they would have an awakening and begin to empower women in church leadership.”
“Women ministers are tired of being overlooked in the conservative evangelical church. Often, women ministers end up marrying male ministers who have the same exact training and education as they do; yet, the women stay as “children’s pastors” or “youth pastors,” while they watch their husbands climb the church-ministry career ladder.”
“This is not only hurtful and unloving towards female ministers; it is disrespectful and demeaning.” (Emphasis original)
If you’re a genuine believer and can’t look around at the culture and recognize that gender and sexual persuasion are presently a favorite, powerful tools of the enemy to keep those entrapped in his darkened fortress of wrong, damning beliefs, then you need to spend a bit more time in the Book.   The enemy of God, who has lost the war, is yet winning many battles among those too focused on things below to recognize the spiritual warfare going on.  Go ask the Methodists how they could tolerate lesbian women in the pulpit of Christ’s church and you’ll find out what happens when Scripture isn’t exalted as the church’s sufficient authority. (See Psalm 138:2)  Spiritual warfare points go to the enemy, not to the Methodists.
Whether it’s the LGBTQ-ee-ii-ee-ii-ooh agenda playing on the Romans 1 big screen of culture, or the egalitarian, “I am woman, hear me preach” pursuits of the likes of Micah, to fail to recognize this strategic maneuver of the enemy is to easily fall victim to it. The spiritually dead of the world can’t avoid it, but a real “minister” should.  To suggest, however, that the structure of the church established by the Lord “is disrespectful and demeaning” fails to understand what starts way back in Genesis 1:1In the beginning, GOD.  Jesus hasn’t forgotten that we are the creatures and He the Creator … but obviously, gender-driven goad-kickers have.
Besides her “pride of Micah” malady, her penchant for social justice and ecclesiastic gender equality serve to expose the “preacher’s” serious mishandling of the word of truth.  While Scripture clearly holds no sacred place of authority and sufficiency for her, when she does reference the Word, it is not through the lens of sound doctrine and viable hermeneutics, but through the lens of her own personal passions.

Umm, not exactly there pastrix.  When Micah uses “patriarchy” it carries the intentional tone of “God’s not being fair.” She attributes it as a result of sin, something from which Jesus has now redeemed us.  What she actually misses is that male headship doesn’t start in Genesis 3:16 but is scripturally elucidated in Genesis 2:18.  God made man first.  He then made woman.  Why?  Man needed “a helper fit for him.”  “Helper” does not imply woman’s inferiority, but man’s inadequacy alone.  Paul, the male apostle, elaborates this God established order in 1 Timothy 2:12-13, confirming the order God has established prior to the fall.  (Primogeniture is the technical term for it … priority and greater authority went to firstborn males.  It’s throughout the Old Testament.  Jacob and Esau is a notable example from Genesis 25:29-34.  It’s repeated in places like Genesis 49:3, Exodus 13:2, Numbers 3:13, Numbers 8:17, 1 Chronicles 5:1, 2 Chronicles 21:3.  Christ, of course, is the preeminent example of this divine principle as Colossians 1:15 emphasizes.  Course, this is going by the Book … one that Micah-like crusaders prefer to dismiss.)   
Beyond her miss on the authority structure established by God, Micah’s poor interpretation of Genesis 3:16, even if it were remotely correct, invalidates itself because if Jesus redeemed us from the dysfunction of “patriarchy,” why didn’t He redeem women from “the pain of childbirth,” also noted in that verse?  But from the outset, Micah fails to realize this is God Himself speaking in this verse.  He is issuing the curse.  Jesus redeems, but He does not contradict.  God’s curse was not “patriarchy.”  His curse was judgment.   Plus, if Jesus intended for the judgment to be reversed with regards to God’s established order, He failed to inform Paul who gave quite clear instructions on the matter for both husbands and wives in Ephesians 5:22-25.

So impassioned is Micah’s vitriolic kick against the goad of Christ’s established authority in His church that, in a maneuver not unlike a childish nana-nana-boo-boo taunt more common to a schoolyard battle of slurs, she often refers to the Holy Spirit as a “she.”  This is, of course, in intentional disregard for Scripture’s numerous references to the Spirit as “He,” most notably from our Lord Himself. (The screen clips above also exhibit an array of other erroneous theological presumptions, but are provided merely to show Micah’s intentional derision against the Third Person of the Trinity.)
“Nevertheless, I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you. And when he comes, he will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment”  John 16:7-8
Micah’s demand for gender equality in the pulpit and elsewhere in church and denominational leadership is shared by many others who also share her fundamental disregard for Scripture.  A recent Twitter thread #ThingsOnlyChristianWomenHear initiated by fellow goad-kicker Sarah Bessey served as a grumbling point for women who don’t get their ministerial and ecclesiastic leadership dreams of gender glory satisfied.
Sarah Bessey
The Scripturally irrelevant Relevant Magazine ran an article entitled  #ThingsOnlyChristianWomenHear Puts Church Misogyny On Blast. CBN News carried a similar article about the viral hashtag entitled #ThingsOnlyChristianWomenHear Reveals World of Hurt in the Church, describing it as “as a forum to discuss experiences of discrimination and oppression within the church.” The webzine ChurchLeaders featured a staff-written piece,  The Hashtag #ThingsOnlyChristianWomenHear Is Blowing Up Twitter and Pointing Out Misogyny in the Church, stating that the “experiences women are relating are heartbreaking, and sadly point to a divisive rift in the church.”  The hashtag has been modified to also include #ThingsOnlyBlackChristianWomenHear.
Last week, Jesus Feminist author Sarah Bessey took to Twitter to start a conversation under the #ThingsOnlyChristianWomenHear hashtag, and it turned into a bit of a thing. Women tweeted stories of the misogyny, sexism and patriarchal abuse they’d experienced in the Church.  (Source)
Bessey is the author of the 2013 book “Jesus Feminist: An Invitation To Revisit The Bible’s View of Women.”  The book was endorsed by Brian McClaren, Jen Hatmaker, Shauna Nyquist, and others for whom the Bible is often a really nifty suggestion, but hardly an authoritative resource that should be seriously utilized as a guide for the 21st-century church or “Christian.”  (Oh, and anytime you get an invitation to “revisit” what the Bible says, activate your Berean discernment skills … someone likely wants the “revisit” to result in a “revision” to correspond with their particular preferences.  Eisegesis and narcigesis may well be afoot!)
Like Micah, Bessey is a Christian feminist or a feminist Christian or, perhaps to hear her tell it, a victim of 2,000 years of Christ’s leadership over His church. Here are a few lines from Bessey’s blog. (You’ll find these cited from her entry entitled On Being A Christian And Being A Feminist … And Belonging Nowhere.)
Yet I choose to be a feminist in the way that I believe Jesus would be a feminist.
(Yeah, well, that sounds really idyllic if not for the fact that the premise of Jesus as a 21st century post-modern feminist is not merely Biblically absurd but patently contradictory to how a genuine believer is to think and behave. We are to become like Christ, not remake him in our image to suit our post-modern, gender-interpreted fancy. And Jesus was assuredly NOT a gender-focused feminist, not when He was on mission on earth … nor is He now, in heaven, where there is neither male or female.)
When I decided to become a disciple of Jesus, it meant that I wanted to live my right-now life the way that I believed Jesus would do it.
(Okay, so we’ve got some Joel-ette Osteen “right-now life” nonsense going on.  But the same argument applies from above, with the necessary notation that no one gets to decide to “become a disciple of Jesus.” He picks His disciples, from the original Galilean gang all the way through the last soul just saved on the planet as you read this. But, interestingly enough, we can know who His disciples are because they are the ones who “abide in my word,” per John 8:31.  Abiding, btw, implies obedience, which makes one think Bessey, Micah, and their ilk are falling a bit short on the “abiding” part.  And, if you are one who loves Jesus, you’re also one who obeys Jesus … according to His Word per John 14:23. The result of all this abiding, obedience, and love?  Fruit.  That’s how, according to Jesus, you can tell.  Matthew 7:20)
Because I follow Jesus, I want to see God’s redemptive movement for women arch towards justice.
(I’m not really sure what this even means, but it smacks of gender justice in the church, a reality that – had God wanted it according to Bessey’s egalitarian benchmarks – would assuredly have been established by Jesus when he started building it. Evidently, what Bessey wants to see from “God’s redemptive movement” isn’t in line with that “your will be done” thing from the disciple’s prayer.  Matthew 6:10)
Nevertheless, Bessey’s thread soon filled with bloviating gender-driven angst, orthodox ecclesiology-bashing ardor, and occasionally outright vitriolic attacks by the “Christian feminist” forces, grumbling that conservative churches dare remain obedient to Scripture. A few samples are below. You can peruse the Twitter thread for more at your own discretion.

(Well, if you got up to preach, I’d get up and walk out too.  But that’s going by the Book.  See Titus 1:6-9, 1 Timothy 3:2, 1 Timothy 2:11-14 for why this is Biblically unacceptable.  Goad-kickers get no point on this one.)

(Course, if you take a look at, say, 1 Timothy 2:9-10 and then consider our responsibility to each other as siblings in Christ, as is pointed out in 1 Corinthians 8:9, it seems Biblically obvious that a woman’s immodest attire might indeed cause a “brother to stumble.”  If wearing something immodest gets you called out because it might lead a brother to sin, imagine standing before Christ in that outfit, explaining it to Him.  Of course, Jesus had rather a rather stark warning about those who would cause believers to sin … it was better to be dead.  See Matthew 18:6-10.  Bringing temptation to others is a consequence of a poor – or absent – relationship with Christ.   Another point goes to God’s truth.  Goad-kickers are zero for two.)

(Umm, “patriarchal death grip?”  Really?  So Jesus who is the God-Man has been building His church according to His will but that represents a “patriarchal death grip?”  And Jesus, the head of the church, with His “death grip” is preventing the Spirit – whom Micah identifies as female – from reigning?  This is blasphemous.  Jesus and the Holy Spirit are not in an ecclesiastic power struggle.  Christ rules and reigns in His Church and the Spirit of God … well … HE always, always, ALWAYS points to Christ.  See John 14:26, John 15:26,  &John 16:14, for example.)
#ThingsOnlyChristianWomenHear substantially offers a prideful, self-centered perspective, the same one that has precluded Micah from finding a church home.  It presumes that church, Christianity, Scripture, and God are focused primarily on “me.”  My needs, my wants, my preferences – even noble ones – must take precedence.  “Thy will be done” is fine, so long as it falls within the parameters of “my will being done.”  For the crusading Christo-feminists, their “will” is being defied by an evangelical church that still finds God’s principles in His Word more persuasive than culture’s passions.
While there should be zero tolerance for actual gender-based abuses, vulgarities, disrespect, and misogynistic behavior against women in the church, the notion that such abuse occurs because of the Lord-ordained structure of male leadership in His church is illegitimate.  #ThingsOnlyChristianWomenHear should represent the exact same things that Christian men should hear … the Word of God.  Instead, contemporary church culture has often succumbed to validating victimhood on the basis of worldly standards.  But to shout “victim” at the Biblically obedient church because, as a woman, you are not allowed certain roles and functions doesn’t diminish the truth of God’s standards in His Word, but it does diminish your claim to be an authentic follower of Jesus.  To love Jesus and be His authentic disciple demands obedience to His Word as our fully authoritative and sufficient guide for, in it, “he has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness.”  (2 Peter 1:3)
The evangelical church has absorbed enough of the Western culture to adopt the secular mindset that defines such things as fairness, equality, tolerance, and authority on worldly, not Biblical, terms. Denomination after denomination, church after church, has fallen from their first love of sound biblical doctrine by catering to worldly desires and allowing women to occupy roles forbidden to them by God in his Word.
Like Himself, God’s Word is immutable and eternal.  Those churches and denominations who follow culture’s queues rather than God’s commands should take seriously the words of the Lord to the church of Ephesus: “But I have this against you, that you have abandoned the love you had at first.  Remember therefore from where you have fallen, repent, and do the works you did at first.”  (Revelation 2:4-5)  The failure to abide by this warning, instead following the sirens’ cry of feminism, brings the certain disdain of the Lord, “But I have this against you, that you tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess and is teaching and seducing my servants …”  (Revelation 2:20)  The judgment of the Lord for this sin in Thyatira is severe: “…and those who commit adultery with her I will throw into great tribulation, unless they repent of her works, and I will strike her children dead.  And all the churches will know that I am he who searches mind and heart …”  (Revelation 2:23)  Shall the judgment for disobedience be any less severe for the church today that fails in obedience to the unchanging commands of Scripture?  Culture may change, but His Word does not.
To goad-kick against God’s pre-fall order may establish Micah and Bessey’s worldly claims to victimhood; it may create a groundswell of cultural support; it may even become a viral media topic, but it does not validate their claim to be a child of His.   Prioritizing feminism over Jesus is idolatry and a concept foreign to His prescribed will for women in His Word.  Those who do it should be cautioned to seriously examine themselves, because it just may be that they are not in the faith. (2 Corinthians 13:5)  And those of us who are in the faith … well, we should pray … pray for those who seek to usurp God’s Word and Christ’s authority in His church … and pray that we will obediently “abide in my word.”  (John 8:31)
The serpent is still slithering about … whispering “Hath God said?” … while he looks to collect more goad-kickers, especially those who claim to belong to Christ.
For more on the false teaching, goad-kicking Jory Micah, see Brandon Hines’ review HERE.

Saturday, April 29, 2017



 An assistant principal at Downingtown STEM Academy in Chester County 
has been placed on administrative leave after a video surfaced of him 
yelling at pro-life teenagers last Friday.
The video, posted on YouTube by one of the teens, showed a heated verbal exchange between Dr. Zach Ruffs and a 16-year-old protesting the “holocaust of abortion.”
The argument transpired as students were leaving school for the day. Ruff appeared to be directing traffic away from the school when the incident was recorded.



 Le Pen Campaign Bans Globalist Propaganda Media From Press Pool
 French press outraged at Le Pen, ignore Macron's Russian media ban
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Mainstream media outlets are (even more) furious at Marine Le Pen and her party, Front National, for restricting their access to her campaign, issuing a petition announcing their indignation, while failing to condemn Emmanuel Macron for blocking Russian press.
In an open letter endorsed by more than 30 media outlets on the website for French publication Le Monde, the vicious globalist mouthpieces who have treated Le Pen and her supporters with disdain and dishonesty, accuse Front National of hindering their “freedom to do their job,” and refer to themselves as “victims” of mistreatment.
“On the occasion of the campaign for the second round of the presidential election, the National Front decided to choose the media that are authorized to follow Marine Le Pen,” reads the petition. “Several titles of press thus saw their representative kept away from any information and any possibility of follow-up on the ground with the candidate of the National Front.”

“We protest in the strongest possible way against this hindrance to the freedom to do our job and fulfill our duty to inform.”
“It is not up to any political party to decide on the media empowered to exercise their democratic role in our society,” it concludes.
Meanwhile, Le Pen’s opponent, former Rothschild banker Emmanuel Macron, has chosen to ban RT and Sputnik, both Russian, without backlash from the same journalists whinging about ‘freedom of the press’ in their petition.
“Spreading lies methodically and systematically – that’s a problem,” said a Macron spokesman of the two outlets, accusing them of a “systematic desire to issue fake news and false information.”
RT’s editor-in-chief, Margarita Simoyan, slammed the Macron campaign on social media, writing, “So this is how gracelessly freedom of speech ends in a country which prides itself on its freedoms almost more than it prides itself on its Camembert and brie.”
Even in The Guardian’s coverage on the matter, they propagated the falsehood that Le Pen is a ‘far-right leader’ – deliberately duplicitous terminology intended to paint mainline anti-globalists such as Donald Trump, Nigel Farage, and Le Pen as ‘extremists.’
After securing her spot in the election run-off in Sunday’s first round of voting, Le Pen issued a video thanking her supporters on social media for their “sincere engagement” and for tirelessly battling against media dishonesty.

“You actively participate in the campaign with creativity, energy, humor,” she said. “You intelligently resist the propaganda and the lies spread by the system’s media.”
“Everywhere, every day, on the Internet and in the real world, new patriots are joining us and committing to our side.”
“There are a couple of days of intense mobilization remaining, like before the first found, but perhaps now even more, as the system is going to unleash all its weapons against the patriots: the caricatures, the compromises of truth, maneuvers; nothing will be spared against us,” she continued. “So, it is upon you, therefore, that I count on, on this home stretch, to bring back the truth every time it’s necessary, to convince and show all our compatriots that my project is to protect them.”

The decision by Front National is reminiscent of similar measures taken by Donald Trump’s campaign to exclude outlets, at times, that constantly attack their candidate with lies, propaganda, and deception, such as CNN and the New York Times.
Dan Lyman: Facebook | Twitter



 He just needs to end the insurance company subsidies
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
WASHINGTON, D.C. – President Trump can put an end to Obamacare on his own, without requiring Congress to take any action at all.
How is this possible?
All President Trump must do to “repeal” Obamacare is sign an Executive Order instructing the Solicitor General to withdraw the Obama administration’s appeal in the federal district court case U.S. House of Representatives v. Burwell, (130 F. Supp. 3d 53, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, 2016).
The result will be to immediately defund the low-income insurance company subsidies being paid by the federal government under Section 1402 of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), causing Obamacare to collapse, almost immediately.
The point is Congress never funded any taxpayer funds to pay the low-income insurance subsidies that are at the heart of making the ACA work.

What is at issue is Section 1402 of the ACA – a section written to provide federal subsidies to insurance companies for insurance purchased on state insurance exchanges to cover the difference between the capped maximum a low-income purchaser could be expected to pay and the amount the insurance cost.
Without funds provided by Congress to pay the low-income insurance subsidies under 1402, Obamacare collapses almost immediately.

No insurance company can long afford to provide low-income health insurance at a discount, unless the federal government pays the difference between what the insurance truly costs and the limited amount low-income purchasers can pay.
The problem is that Congress refused to pass an appropriation to fund Section 1402, leaving the Obama administration scrambling to find funds somewhere else in the federal budget that could be diverted to pay the low-income insurance subsidies. has proved through an analysis of the Treasury Department balance sheets that the Obama administration found a solution in August 2012, when the Treasury Department decided that earnings confiscated from the Government-Sponsored Entities (GSEs) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in the “Net Worth Sweep” (NWS), could be diverted to pay the ACA low-income insurance subsidies.
The record contained in the Treasury Department balance sheets shows through 2013 a direct diversion of the NWS into line items used to fund Obamacare.
After 2013, the Obama administration continued the NWS (ultimately confiscating some $260 billion from Fannie and Freddie), but the one-for-one diversion of the Fannie and Freddie funds going into line items used to fund Obamacare is less clear, suggesting Treasury grew more clever after 2013 in hiding the diversion within the Treasury general account used as a slush fund.
The House of Representatives filed a federal district court case against then Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Matthews Burwell to stop the Obamacare from diverting federal funds to pay the ACA low-income subsidies.
On May 12, 2016, U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer, in the case U.S. House of Representatives v. Burwell, ruled against Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Matthews Burwell.
Judge Collyer decided HHS Secretary Burwell had no constitutional authority to divert funds Congress appropriated to one section of the ACA to fund Obamacare subsidy payments to insurers under another section of the ACA, Section 1402 – the clause defining the insurer subsidies – when Congress specifically declined to appropriate any funds to Section 1402 for paying the insurance subsidy.
“Paying out Section 1402 reimbursements without an appropriation thus violates the Constitution,” Judge Collyer concluded.
“Congress authorized reduced cost sharing but did not appropriate monies for it, in the Fiscal Year 2014 budget or since,” she stressed.
The Obama administration appealed the District Court decision in U.S. House of Representatives v. Burwell to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, deciding on its own authority that federal funds could continue to be diverted from other budgetary purposes to continue paying the insurance subsidies as long as the case was under appeal.
The point is that if the Trump administration simply decided to drop the Circuit Court appeal in Burwell, the District Court decision would become established law.
The result would be the Trump administration would be forbidden from diverting federal funds to pay the ACA insurance subsidies, with the result Obama care would implode.
“The Obama administration appealed the decision, but if the Trump administration were to drop that appeal, the subsidies would disappear,” commented Julie Rovner, Kaiser Health News, in an article published on April 9, 2017.
If insurance companies were forced to take a loss by absorbing the cost above what low-income insured could afford to pay for the insurance coverage required under Obamacare, no insurance company could afford to provide health insurance to low-income insureds under the ACA.
Once President Trump withdraws the Obama administration appeal in U.S. House of Representatives v. Burwell, Obamacare becomes history.
To revive Obamacare, Congress would have to pass a resolution funding ACA Section 1402, something even RINOs like Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell might find politically suicidal to do.
UN: Repealing ObamaCare Violates 
“International Law” 
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
The United Nations is again acting as a wannabe global government and perverting the meaning of human rights, warning the Trump administration in a bizarre letter that repealing the unconstitutional ObamaCare takeover of health insurance may violate what the UN likes to call “international law.” However, critics were quick to ridicule the UN and its alleged legal reasoning. Instead of acquiescing, they called for the U.S. government to withdraw from the scandal-plagued, dictator-controlled UN “Human Rights Council” altogether.
The UN's legal "reasoning" was based on a number of unconstitutional international agreements, some of which have never even been ratified by the U.S. government. According to a UN “special rapporteur,” abolishing the so-called Affordable Care Act (ACA) would represent a violation of the UN's “Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” As The New American has documented extensively, the UN document perverts the very meaning of rights and stands in direct contradiction to American notions of God-given, unalienable rights enshrined in America's founding documents.
The UN also pointed to other obscure global agreements, including at least one that the U.S. government never even ratified. And yet, the UN has nonetheless weaponized the unratified scheme to dictate policy to nations around the world, and especially the United States. Despite the UN's bogus claims, however, the U.S. Constitution remains the Supreme Law of the Land in the United States. That means any international agreements that conflict with it are null and void by definition. The authors of the U.S. Constitution and even the U.S. Supreme Court have made that crystal clear.

The threatening UN letter in question, dated February 2, was sent to the U.S. government mission to the UN in Geneva by Dainius Puras (shown), the UN “Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health.” And yes, that is his real title. He serves the almost comically discredited UN “Human Rights Council,” which, in addition to being run by a discredited prince from an Islamic dictatorship, is literally dominated by mass-murdering dictators and brutal autocrats infamous for their human-rights abuses.
In the letter, Puras, a Lithuanian psychiatrist, warns of his “serious concerns” about efforts to repeal ObamaCare. Among other UN instruments he describes falsely as “international law,” Puras points to Article 25 of the UN “human rights” declaration, which purports to mandate government healthcare.  “Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services,” it says, fundamentally perverting the meaning of rights as they have always been understood in the Christian West and the United States in particular.
If Puras had gone down a bit further to Article 29 of that same UN declaration, he would have seen that any of the pseudo-“human rights” the UN purports to bestow on lowly humans can be revoked or limited under virtually any pretext — including, presumably, the phony “right” to take other people's money for whatever purpose. That same Article 29 also makes clear that the UN's pseudo-rights do not extend to opposing the UN's globalist agenda. “These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations,” the declaration says in clear language.
Puras claimed in the letter that the bizarre UN “human rights” document — a massive threat to the U.S. Constitution and the freedoms it protects — has “become a source and expression of international customary law.” He did not explain how or when that happened, or who supposedly gave approval for it on behalf of the American people. Next, the UN “rapporteur” claimed that “all States, including the United States of America, are obliged to protect and guarantee the rights therein.” Of course, in the real world, the U.S. government is explicitly prohibited by the Constitution from doing much of what Puras claims is obligatory. 
Separately, the UN bureaucrat pointed to Article 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESC). While acknowledging that the U.S. government has not ratified that scheme, he claimed the U.S. government is nevertheless “obliged to refrain from acts that would defeat the covenant’s object or purpose.” In other words, even though Americans never agreed to the scheme through their elected officials, in the UN's view, they must comply anyway. Self-government, then, would be a thing of the past if the UN were to get its way.  
Finally, the extremist UN “rapporteur” cited the “International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.” That scheme purportedly requires that national governments and dictatorships “guarantee the right of everyone,” including “the rights to public health, medical care, social security and social services,” without regard to race or color. Of course, the Constitution does not authorize the federal government to provide healthcare to everyone, so without a constitutional amendment delegating such authority to Washington, D.C., that power is reserved to the states or the people. The U.S. government is legally prohibited from expanding its powers using treaties. 
Of course, despite the UN's latest false claims purporting to decree “international laws,” the UN Charter — even assuming it were a legitimate document — specifically prohibits UN interference in domestic issues. “Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state,” Article 2 (7) of the UN Charter explains clearly. If healthcare is not a domestic issue, nothing is.
And yet, Puras claimed not only the authority to meddle, but the duty to do so. “It is my responsibility, under the mandates provided me by the Human Rights Council, to seek to clarify all cases brought to my attention,” he wrote, demanding that the letter be shared with congressional leaders and other U.S. officials. He also demanded more information from the Trump administration, including what policies might be put in place after ObamaCare is repealed, so he could see whether they conform to “international law.”
Finally, the bureaucrat, who was raised under a brutal communist system and so might be forgiven for not understanding liberty, brazenly threatened U.S. officials. Among other threats, he demanded that Trump officials take “all necessary interim measures to prevent the alleged violations” and to “ensure adequate measure [sic] to prevent their occurrence as well as to guarantee the accountability of any person responsible of [sic] the alleged violations.” What sort of “accountability” he had in mind for the alleged perpetrators was not specified.
And in the meantime, the UN rapporteur warned that he would “publicly express” his “concerns” in the “near future.” The Trump administration's response will be presented to the dictator-controlled UN “Human Rights Council” for its “consideration,” Puras concluded. The council is made up of 47 governments, including many of the most savage communist and Islamist dictatorships that have collectively murdered many tens of millions of people.   
UN “High Commissioner for Human Rights” Zeid Ra'ad Al Hussein, an Islamic prince who oversees the UN “Human Rights” apparatus, has long been a lightning rod for criticism and ridicule as well. Last year, for example, he claimed that “international law” supposedly “requires” that “robust gun control” be imposed on the United States, apparently unaware that the U.S. Constitution specifically prohibits that. More recently, during the U.S. election, Hussein viciously attacked then-candidate Donald Trump, warning that he was a “threat” to the world and equating his tactics with those of ISIS.
And that is just the start. Hussein also played a key role in protecting child-raping UN “peace” troops while persecuting the whistleblowers, such as Anders Kompass, who tried to stop it and protect the children. And in February, it emerged that Hussein and other UNHCHR bureaucrats had persecuted a whistleblower who exposed UNHCHR officials identifying dissidents to the Communist Chinese dictatorship, also a member of the UN “Human Rights Council” despite murdering more human beings than any government in human history. Several of those dissidents were kidnapped and killed following the leaks. And Hussein punished the whistleblower, instead.
The UN's legions of discredited “special rapporteurs,” meanwhile, have also developed a reputation for idiocy. In the United Kingdom, for example, a nutty UN special rapporteur infamous for sacrificing an animal to Karl Marx was relentlessly ridiculed for accusing the U.K. government of “human rights violations” because welfare recipients were not being given large enough houses. In Switzerland, the UN bureaucrats attacked stay-at-home mothers as a human-rights violation. In Canada, they claimed supposedly “low” taxes were a “human rights” violation. In Japan, free speech was a violation. In America, virtually everything from gun rights and regulations on killing preborn babies to child discipline, self-defense protections and even the name of a sports team has been called a “human rights” violation by UN officials. Indeed, as The New American has documented in detail, the UN now poses a grave threat to U.S. independence and self-government.
But critics were quick to lambaste the UN's latest meddling in U.S. healthcare. “Not a single taxpayer dollar should be wasted on replying to the questions submitted by the Special Rapporteur,” wrote Joseph Klein, author of Global Deception: The UN’s Stealth Assault on America’s Freedom. “And if he should issue a critical press release, as he has threatened to do, in advance of his presumably critical report to the UN Human Rights Council, this will provide yet another reason for the Trump administration to pull out of the dysfunctional, misnamed Human Rights Council and to withdraw funding.”
Even the far-left Washington Post writer who first broke the story, Dana Milbank, appeared to ridicule the notion that the UN would or could impose its will on America. “None of this, of course, will deter President Trump and congressional Republicans, who are again attempting to get a repeal bill through the House,” he wrote, saying the letter was of “questionable” legal value despite his obvious support for ObamaCare. “They scoff at lectures from U.N. bureaucrats, particularly on domestic affairs, and the world body has no practical way to impose its will on Congress. There’s also a logical question: If repealing Obamacare violates international law, wasn’t the country in violation before Obamacare?”
A better course of action than simply ignoring or ridiculing the UN's outrageous meddling in U.S. affairs, though, would be to have the U.S. government withdraw from the UN entirely in an “Amexit.” Already, legislation to do that, the American Sovereignty Restoration Act (H.R. 193), is sitting the House Foreign Affairs Committee of Congress awaiting action. With sufficient public pressure, lawmakers would have no choice but to pass it — and that pressure is growing stronger every day. If anything, the fact that the UN and its largely dictatorial member regimes oppose the repealing of ObamaCare is yet another excellent reason why Congress must get it done as quickly as possible. The UN is a tool of tyrants and must be evicted from America.

Related articles:
United Nations Exploits Pseudo-“Human Rights” to Attack U.S.
UN “Human Rights” Council Now Officially Controlled by Dictators
After Equating Trump With ISIS, UN Freaks Out Over His Victory
Bill to Get U.S. Out of UN Introduced in New Congress
Governments Now Extending “Human Rights” to Rivers
UN Demands “Robust Gun Control” After Orlando Terror
UN: Jail Parents Who Spank Their Children
UN Human Rights Attack on U.K. Ridiculed as “Marxist Diatribe
UN Human Rights Council: A Dictator's Paradise (Video)
UN Whistleblower: UN Gave Names of Dissidents to Communist China
The United Nations: On the Brink of Becoming a World Government
Citing Officials' “Impunity” on Child Sex Abuse, UN Whistleblower Quits
UN Ridiculed for Attacking Poverty and Demanding Tax Hikes in Canada
UN Human Rights Council: Is Washington "Redskins" Appropriate?
U.S. Independence Attacked as Never Before by UN Interdependence