Ending Christian Education—Step One

By Al Benson Jr.

According to http://personalliberty.com “Barack Obama’s G8 Speech ‘An Alarming Call For An End to Catholic Education’.” The author of the article wrote: “At least he was smart enough to test the waters on foreign soil before introducing this particular facet of his agenda in the United States.”

Obama spoke in Belfast, Northern Ireland and lamented the “divisions” caused by Catholic and Protestant schools and how “we can’t see ourselves in one another” if we have separate religious schools.

Although he gave this speech in Ireland you have to know that his comments are really pointed at this country. He sees religious schools as an “impediment” to “world peace” and I am sure his One World solution for this impediment would be to eliminate all Christian Education in this country if he could get by with it and make sure that no American children had access to any education except what they can receive in “common core” public brain laundries. If religious schools are so bad why has he not also commented on Muslim schools and the divisive influence they might have in the community? You know the answer to that as well as I do—in Obama’s convoluted thinking it’s those nasty Christian schools, Catholic or Protestant, that are really the source of all the country’s divisions, while Muslim schools, with their promotion of Sharia law will “bring us all together.”

Most Christians have sat it out while this Marxist administration has attacked veterans, home schoolers, Tea Party members and various other groups this administration assures us are just filled with “low-level terrorists.” Recent revelations of gross misconduct on the part of the IRS and the NSA have been mostly met with yawns and comments about “the Lord’s in control so I don’t gotta do anything” from lazy Christians who just don’t want to be bothered to get up off their spiritual beds of ease to resist tyranny.

One wonders what the Christian reaction will be when Comrade Obama is finally given the go-ahead by his CFR/Trilateral handlers to start to put pressure on Christian schools to either begin to follow the party line or suffer the repercussions. Will most public school-oriented Christians feel it just doesn’t make any difference and will therefore do nothing as they have for generations?

I am a Reformed Protestant and so, naturally, I am in support of Christian schools that take that approach and promote that worldview. That doesn’t mean that I feel Catholic schools should be put out of business. I think all Christian denominations should make a serious effort to have their own schools and to promote Christian education—which I feel is the only genuine education there is anyway. I can see that statement ticking lots of folks off. How narrow minded, how provincial, right? Sorry, I disagree. The Scripture mandates that we bring our children up “in the nurture and admonition of the Lord” and you can’t do that by turning your kids over to the local public brain laundry for prime time five days every week.
So Obama will seek to begin to subtly call for an end to private Christian education because it is “divisive.” His Marxist agenda is divisive too but I notice he has no plans to end that. He will go after the Catholics now because he feels most Protestants will not stick up for them. If he manages to put a major dent in Catholic education he will go after the Protestants. Either way, he wants Christian education gone—there is potential opposition there that he’d like to do away with if he can.

Christian education needs to be upheld and supported, not done away with, leaving little Johnny or Mary with nothing but the public school alternative, which educationally, is no alternative at all. I am sure this is what he and his bosses want and his friends in the teachers unions will laugh all the way to the bank!

Any efforts to shut down or to minimize Christian education should be opposed and exposed and Mr. Obama should be informed that it is none of his business how we educate our kids. Due to his Marxist mentality it won’t make any difference to him, but he needs to know that the Christians will oppose his efforts because they fly in the face of Scripture.

I realize there are some warm, fuzzy “evangelicals out there that will inform us that we are just not “loving” enough if we fail to go along with all that Obama wants to do. Suffice it to say that their definition of love is at variance with Scripture. Scriptural love does not entail caving into to everything some Marxist regime wants to do. There is a difference and Christians who wish to preserve and defend their culture had better learn the difference.


“It’s for the children”—Right? Wrong!

By Al Benson Jr.
“We’re doing it for the children” shout the One World politicians as they seek to further their political (and religious) agendas which do nothing for the children except remove the God-given liberties they and their parents hope to enjoy.

The “shooting incident” in Connecticut at the end of last year was a prime example. I doubt that we will ever really know what happened at Sandy Hook last December, but in the name of “protecting the children” our Marxist president eagerly sought to completely derail the Second Amendment (and probably also sought to derail any potential resistance that might be out there to his leftist program). His “concern for the children” theme rings a little hollow when you consider that he has no problem with abortion which has murdered millions of unborn babies. His much-touted “concern for the children” only seems to rise to the fore if the children he is concerned about can be used to make political hay for him and his handlers.

He is a typical example of the (One) world mentality, which really hates children except where they can be used as fodder for his agenda.
Last week someone forwarded me a video presentation dealing with the population situation in both Europe and North America, which, in spite of all the lies about a “population explosion” is really dire. None of the European countries at present are reproducing their native populations and by 2050, according to this video, most churches in Europe will have been replaced with mosques as the real population surge in Europe is among the Muslims, while native population growth is in wild retreat. It’s no different here. The anti-Christian feminist movement, many of whose original leaders were over on the far left theologically and politically, has taught women in America to hate children. The so-called “me generation” is so busy enjoying themselves they have no time, no inclination to have and raise children—too messy and time-consuming. They have become lovers of themselves more than lovers of God and so they all want to do their own thing—and besides, kids just get in the way.

They don’t want to be bothered taking care of kids now. Who do they think will take care of them when they get to be 75? It sure won’t be the federal government, regardless of all the golden promises these political liars make. But they are too busy “amusing themselves to death” right now to even begin to think about something as trenchant as who will care for them in their declining years—and it sure won’t be all the babies they’ve aborted. They’ve killed off their caregivers by the millions.

Pastor Steve Wilkins of Auburn Ave. Presbyterian Church in Monroe, Louisiana has observed: “We hate babies because we think there’s no room for them. Most people believe that the world is experiencing a population explosion. But, in fact, the opposite is true. We are facing a population implosion. We don’t have too many people. We have too few people—and we are facing the terrible specter of under-population worldwide. Europe is expected to lose almost 300 million people by the end of the century. European governments are offering monetary incentives to couples who will have children. The situation is so bad that the only hope for Europe is to import large numbers of immigrants (and most of the immigrants will come from Muslim countries.” Or as one man said several years ago “Ninety percent of the people live on ten percent of the land and they call that a population explosion.” Needless to say, most people today, thanks to their public school “educations” have bought into all the government-produced problems, from population explosion to global warming to weapons of mass destruction to the planned destruction of our liberties in the name of “fighting terrorism.” What the public has yet to realize is that this administration considers average Americans to be terrorists—and the real terrorists who maim and kill people—we finance them.

Pastor Wilkins also noted: “We hate babies because we no longer believe the Bible. Children are not optional to marriage but integral to God’s for the world. This is why Satan sought to subvert Adam and Eve in the beginning. He was seeking to prevent the birth of the seed. And he has continued to seek the same thing ever since. But God’s purpose from the beginning was that Man fill the earth with offspring (Genesis 1:22). Ruling over the creation is impossible if there is no filling. Thus, throughout the Bible, increasing population is a sign of God’s blessing upon a culture.”
According to Pastor Wilkins “The world hates babies and abortion is only one indication of this hatred. Not only do we kill babies, we don’t want to have them…And Christians have been affected by the pervasive hatred of babies. Even most Christians view babies more as burdens than as blessings. And consequently we are facing a terrible judgment. Unbelief is present-oriented and suicidal and nowhere is this more clearly manifest than in the refusal to bear children. Without children the society reverts to primitivism and barbarism. Expect to see euthanasia laws passed throughout Europe and elsewhere in the West—the unbelieving children of unbelieving parents are not going to be more generous than their parents. Those who promoted feminism and abortion in the 60s and 70s will begin to receive the same mercy they have shown to the children they killed because they were ‘inconvenient.’ We may well indeed be shown new and shocking examples of how “the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel.”

Pastor Wilkins feels that if Christians will repent of their hatred of babies and begin having more of them then Christians could be in the majority by the middle of the century. That means the Christians have got to quit believing the drivel that the (One) World keeps shoveling in their faces and start to do some thinking on their own. Pastor Wilkins states that: “Having babies is central in the outworking of Jesus’ victory over Satan.” That being the case, do you now wonder why our Marxist president is so much in favor of sodomite and lesbian “marriages”? Not only do these openly flout God’s Law, which this administration loves to do, but they produce zero children.

If you have ever read any of the United Nations or Agenda 21 material you will note that they play on the population explosion myth and call for massive reduction in population—which means that they don’t seek God’s glory—they seek their own. That tells you where they are coming from. We either believe God’s admonition to “be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth and subdue it…” or we believe the falsehoods of the leftists who lobby for population reduction. It’s easier for them to control people if there are less of them you know. It all comes down to choosing which God to follow—the God of Holy Scripture or the “god” of this (One) World.

The Real Coup Was in 1861

By Al Benson Jr.

According to an article on http://www.theblaze.com for June 7th Rush Limbugh has stated that Barack Obama and his administration are leading a “coup d’ etat’ to take over the United States. Limbaugh said this on his radio show on Friday, June 7th. Limbaugh noted the recently-discovered National Security Agency domestic surveillance (spying) programs being carried on against millions of Americans, all in the name of “fighting terrorism.” Of course the supposed “terrorists” that this Marxist administration are fighting are those patriotic Americans that oppose its Marxist agenda. After all, doesn’t opposing any form of Marxism automatically qualify you as a “terrorist?” According to this administration it does.

I can somewhat agree with Limbaugh’s rationale except that his timing is off by 150 years. The real (and ongoing coup) took place in 1861, during the early days of the Lincoln administration. All Obama is trying to do is to mop up the residual resistance that still lingers, and this is what his puppet-masters put him in office for.

Professor Thomas DiLorenzo, in a recent article on http://www.lewrockwell.com  on 6/3 noted that: “He (Lincoln) illegally suspended Habeas Corpus and imprisoned tens of thousands of Northern political critics without due process; shut down over 300 opposition newspapers; committed treason by invading the Southern states (Article 3, Section 3 of the Constitution defines treason as ‘only levying war upon the states’ or ‘giving aid and comfort to their enemies’ which is, of course exactly what Lincoln did). He enforced military conscription with the murder of hundreds of New York City draft protesters in 1863 and with the mass execution of deserters from his army;…confiscated firearms and issued an arrest warrant for the Chief Justice (Roger Taney) when the jurist issued an opinion that only Congress could legally suspend Habeas Corpus…” Lincoln’s coup basically changed the form of government to one where Washington decided everything and the State governments became little more than vassals to an all powerful national government. They kept the forms but ate out the real substance and that was enough to fool most people.

Sounds as if Obama has been taking lessons from “Honest Abe.” No wonder they call him “Honest Abama.” After this coup, Lincoln was duly accorded the position of deity by the Republican Party and both parties have continued to promote that falsehood until this day. The point here is that, no matter what Obama is now doing, Lincoln already did it, in some form or other, and since he got by with it and it has now been legitimized in the “history” books, you have to consider that Abraham Lincoln’s coup was successful. It has never been repudiated or reversed. Indeed, it has been affirmed. Indeed, with their wholehearted Lincoln worship, Limbaugh and many other patriotic types have routinely affirmed it and continue to do do.

In the early 1900s Lincoln’s “the federal government should control it all” attitude was picked up by groups like the Council on Foreign Relations, which, since its inception, has labored to make darn sure the federal government controlled it all and that they controlled the federal government.

If you want to do a little research sometime, check out how many CFR members have been in most presidential cabinets since Woodrow Wilson, or how many have been in the armed forces, or the media, or the “educational” field. Their numbers will shock you. These are the One World government boys, the ones that put Obama in office and handed him his agenda (which really is not all that much different than Lincoln’s was).
I can sympathize with Limbaugh’s opposition to what Obama is doing. Honest folks should oppose it, but because most of them do not know or understand accurate history what they end up doing is opposing what Obama is now doing while endorsing the same policies when Lincoln practiced them.

James 1:8 in the New Testament states that: “A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.” That’s a lot of our problem today—it’s bad if Obama does it but just fine if Lincoln did it. The coup actually took place 150 years ago—and we don’t know the difference. May God help us!

Good Intentions, Historically Ignorant

By Al Benson Jr.

The advent of the Marxist regime of Barry Sotero or Barack Obama, or whatever his real name is,  awakened many in this country to the menace of a Soviet-style government and some started to realize how perilously close we are to that. Most of these folks had no idea that we were anywhere close to that while the Republicans were in office. We were and have been, but the Republicans were much better at concealing their collectivist actions with a little conservative rhetoric and that seemed to fool most people. The Democrats’ Marxist agenda was and is an in-your-face agenda that doesn’t kid anybody as to the real intent of its perpetrators.

Unfortunately, there are many recently awakened folks that seem to feel that the best way to deal with Obama’s Marxism is to just get rid of the Democrats and re-elect Republicans. These folks need to hang around long enough to learn that just getting rid of our current Marxist-in-Chief and his czarist henchmen will not be enough to solve our problems. Our problems today have to do with both parties and the fact that they are really separate in name only, not in ideology. I once told someone who had implicit faith in the Republicans that they were nothing more than “slow Democrats.” They are headed for the same place but they are content to get there a little slower. That fools more people.

I have been  barraged daily with email messages from all manner of well-meaning and sincere conservative and patriotic folks who, somehow, had  the idea that 2010, or 2014, or 2016 will be the dawn of socialism in America. They feel that, up to this point, this country has been a bastion of free enterprise where someone who was willing to work hard could make it and enjoy the fruits of his labour. They realize what Obama/Sotero is all about and they don’t like it. I surely can’t fault them for that. I don’t like it either. What they need to do, though, is to learn enough history to realize that the problems we have now didn’t start with Obama, or even with George Bush or Slick Willie–they started with Abraham Lincoln.

This country didn’t go socialist in 2008 or 2010 or 2012. It had already gotten far down the road of socialism and it started in 1861 with the election of Mr. Lincoln, the consummate 19th century collectivist and centralizer. Lincoln’s program of “internal improvements” and tariffs was socialist. During the War of Northern Aggression he enacted several programs that were identical to those listed in Karl Marx’s infamous ten points in the Communist Manifesto.

Our patriotic folks, the Tea Party and the rest, have got to take the trouble and make the effort to learn some real history and not to depend on the drivel they were taught in public schools. At this point many of them confuse patriotism with nationalism. How many of them would be genuinely shocked if they learned the real roots of the Pledge of Allegiance? Most I’ll bet. They have no concept of where this socialist pledge came from. They just mindlessly spout it at meetings, never having done any homework about it. I took the trouble to find out where it came from. Once I knew that I never said it again anywhere.

Patriotic and conservative intentions are great, but if they are not backed up with accurate history many of the patriotic folks just end up supporting what they should be opposed to and they never know the difference.

Take the trouble to find out when socialism really started in America–and it was a lot earlier than you have been led to believe.

Floyd Is a Girl and Freda Is a Boy

By Al Benson Jr.

World Net Daily posted an interesting article a few days ago. The headline for it was “Official Cross-Dressing Day for Kids Sparks Outrage.” As you can probably tell, we are back to the “gender-bender” thing again (as if we had really ever left it). I did an article on my old and now defunct web site http://www.albensonjr.com several years ago about this. Back then it was new. It has since become more and more prolific.

This time it occurred at Tippecanoe School in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. According to Terrence Falks who is on the school board this activity should be defended. In fact he noted that his own son-in-law recalled similar events years ago in a church school. If that is accurate it means that people have to keep their eyes on even the church schools. You can’t just put your kid in an institution that calls itself a Christian school and then forget about it.

One parent, Sam Ward, said all this does is to teach the kids the wrong lesson about gender. Of course it does. That’s what it’s intended to do. Supposedly this even was “voluntary” but with the peer pressure being what it is in government schools you know how that works.

The World Net Daily article observed: “There is a long history of introducing and teaching highly charged sexual material to children in America’s public schools. Probably the biggest promoter of such concerns is the public school industry in California.” That doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen in other places. Look at this school in Milwaukee. I’d be willing to bet that folks who follow this sort of public school activity could point out dozens of places it has happened around the country.

But, what will be the result of all this? Parents will gripe and moan and may even keep their kids home from school for a day because of it. Big deal! Do you honestly think because you keep little Johnny home today his friends won’t talk to him about what happened tomorrow?

And what about the kinky propaganda he gets the rest of the year—prime time five days every week? This kind of thing is increasing more and more and public schools are defending it and “putting up” with it in spite of parental protests because it’s all part of the agenda.

Do some of you folks get it yet? These aberrations are part of the public school agenda. This is what they want to do to your kids—destroy the sexual distinctions until they no longer exist and it’s all unisex. If the boys are not quite sure whether they are boys or not how will they ever be if they get in the armed forces and are forced to defend the country? Will your national defense depend on whether or not Johnny feels like Johnny today or whether this is his/her day to be JoAnne and therefore he/she can’t fight today. That may sound like a far out example but it’s all headed in that direction.

There is only one way to avoid this and other related aberrations. That is to get your kids out of the public school system and either teach them at home or find solid, dependable, Christian school to put them in. Most people won’t even think about this. They have been raised, and educated, to depend on the public schools for their kids’ “education” and so no other options are available in their thinking. Therefore no matter how bad the local school gets all they can do is to complain, protest, and then make the best of a lousy situation.

Somehow, we have to find a way to break through a mindset that runs in this narrow groove. Our children’s future depends on it.

The same people who have intentionally created the mess we now have in Washington are the ones running the public school system. Folks, connect those two dots.

I have written articles on the history of public education in this country for this blog spot on and off for the past couple years. I would invite you to go back through the monthly files and check some of them out.

Once you begin to see the problems that have always existed with public schools in this country (and others) you may begin to grasp the idea that maybe your kids belong elsewhere to really get an education. And if your conclusions lead you to remove them from public schools and find a solid Christian alternative, then my rantings will not have been wasted.