CHOOSE LIFE!

October 14, 2016 | Author: Elijah

God’s Holy Bible teaches to make the best of the situations we get into (Luke 16; the book of Esther), and to choose life (Deuteronomy 30:19), and to choose the best (least evil) viable option we have (2 Kings 7; 1 Chronicles 21:9-15). It is blatantly obvious that Donald J. Trump is the best viable choice:

-Donald Trump is pro-life, and has committed to appointing pro-life judges to SCOTUS positions (which the Left has said, “…would likely overturn Roe v. Wade if given the chance”).
-Trump is for keeping American sovereignty alive; and he is against the United Nations one-world-government movement.
-Trump wants to keep American Judeo-Christian culture alive by strictly controlling immigration.
-Trump is pro-Israel: he wants Israel to live.
-Trump is pro-Christianity.
-Trump is pro-freedom of speech, and wants to revive freedom of speech for pastors by repealing the Johnson Amendment to the IRS code, which threatens punishment to pastors who speak out on political issues.
-Trump is for law and order.
-Trump believes in putting America first, and has similar tax and economic ideas as President Ronald Reagan did.

All of those things are good from a biblical standpoint and from a constitutional standpoint. CHOOSE LIFE! (Deuteronomy 30:19)

This article is actually a condensed version of another article by L.A. Turk which goes into much more depth, covering also why it is wrong to not vote or to vote third party, and other things as well. For more detail into each point, links to sources to prove each point, and more Bible verses as well, click here to read the original article.

Ted Cruz’s Sodomite Ties

September 22, 2016 | Author: Elijah

A while back I did a lot of research into Senator Ted Cruz, but was hindered from posting this article, and then was hoping it wasn’t even needed considering that Sen. Ted Cruz suspended his campaign. I knew Cruz promised (and even SIGNED a pledge) to endorse the Republican nominee whoever it may be. I knew that when asked about it, Cruz said, “…I pledged at the outset I will support the Republican nominee, whoever it is…I’m a very simple man and when I give my word for something, I follow through and do what I said.” However, Cruz flew with President Obama on Air Force One just 8 days before his speech at the RNC (I wonder what they discussed during their flight). [Here’s a better image of them getting of the plane.] After his airplane visit with Obama, Cruz’s gave a deceptively clever call to his supporters to “vote your conscience” (which, to anyone following his campaign, was obvious code for “vote for someone outside of your party” to help Hillary Clinton—and she promptly capitalized on it too). Some die-hard Cruz supporters are still pushing the #NeverTrump movement with some even going so far as to say that anyone who votes for Trump is not a Christian, or is hurting the cause of Christ, because (some of them say) supporting Trump for US President is just like supporting Trump’s personal sins. It’s very popular among some to quote, “Of two evils, choose neither”, and then to tag on at the end “vote your conscience.” Well, just how holy is Ted Cruz?

I should note now that I liked Sen. Cruz at first because I thought he stood for Christian principles (at least somewhat) and I thought he was for the Constitution (as he claims), and it also appeared to me at the time that he was fighting for what is right in the US Senate (because he deceived me). As I researched him (because I was actually considering voting for him), I realized more and more just how phony he is, and how cleverly deceptive. The main part of this article is going to focus on Ted Cruz’s ties with sodomy. Many other people have well exposed the many other problems of Cruz, like (just to name some) his deceptive non-stand on illegal immigration and amnesty; his vital support for the TPP (Obama-Trade) and that he voted to fast track it (you can thank Ted Cruz for Obama getting what he wanted…again); that he is a globalist (new world order, one world government) establishment guy (and here is a good video about that); that he is not a natural born citizen of the USA, and therefore directly rebelled against the US Constitution by even running for US President; that he doesn’t tithe, and he smokes, drinks, he aspired to be in a “teen tit film” (his words, not mine), and got a matching temporary tattoo of Churchill with a woman on his staff (not his wife). Do you buy his illogical stuttering reason for not having his coat the same day as that same woman was wearing a coat that looked like his?

Ted Cruz has strong sodomite ties—some of his biggest, longtime donors are filthy rich sodomites. Here is a summary of what this article goes into detail about: Ted Cruz, as the Solicitor General of Texas in 2003, refused to defend the great state of Texas from the federal SCOTUS when Texas was being sued for its laws on “homosexual sex” in Lawrence v. Texas. Cruz refused to do his job; he did not fight for Texas, but instead allowed Texas to be defeated in court and now “homosexual sex” is no longer illegal. His refusal to defend Texas’ law shows that not only is he not the Christian fighter he boasts himself to be, but he’s also not the “states rights” guy that he boasts himself to be—he’s just a deceptive politician (as his own VP pick said herself). Cruz later, as a Texas Senator, recommended a sodomite for a lifetime federal judge position. So Texas got its first sodomite federal judge because of Ted Cruz. And Cruzers have the audacity to question whether Trump will pick conservative judges or not?! As my brother says, They’re Cruzin’ for a bruzin’. Ted Cruz is NOT showing the “face of God”! He was NOT “divinely anointed” like King David! He is NOT the messiah that many Cruz supporters try to make him out to be. He’s NOT the great Christian fighter, or even Constitutionalist that he portrays himself to be. He’s a wicked, lying, deceptive, and hypocritical politician.

Deceptively Pro-Sodomite Ted Cruz

“The final victory for gay rights was foreshadowed…” “…one of the biggest setbacks for the American family in over thirty years…”

It used to be illegal to commit “homosexual sex” in the state of Texas. In 2003 (during the time Ted Cruz was Solicitor General of Texas) the federal US Supreme Court took Texas to court to try to force Texas to do away with those laws (the case called “Lawrence v. Texas”). Ted Cruz refused to defend Texas even though he was Solicitor General of Texas. It was his JOB and he wouldn’t do it. Why not? I thought he was pro-traditional marriage and pro-states rights! Didn’t you? Yet by refusing to defend Texas and its righteous laws against the federal government, he essentially allowed the federal government to bully Texas to enable sodomy to grow its roots into the USA—not just Texas. “The Court struck down the sodomy law in Texas and, by extension, invalidated sodomy laws in 13 other states, making same-sex sexual activity legal in every U.S. state and territory” (Wikipedia). It was a tremendous victory for sodomy, and a huge defeat to traditional marriage and biblical Christian principles. As Walter Dellinger put it, “The final victory for gay rights was foreshadowed when the court decided Lawrence v Texas.” A good article written April 29, 2015 about this: Ted Cruz: Anti-Gay Marriage Crusader? Not Always . Another great article written January 31, 2016 here which asks the important question, “Where was Cruz…?” Here is an excerpt of an important statement that Eugene Delgaudio made regarding that case:

Today’s decision by the Supreme Court will likely prove to be one of the biggest setbacks for the American family in over thirty years. The court has once again violated their constitutional mandate by legislating instead of interpreting and striking down Texas’ sodomy laws meant to put families above politics.

Ted Cruz’s sodomite financial backing

Ted Cruz’s political career has been very greatly funded by sodomites—open and very politically active sodomites. One of his greatest and longtime financial supporters is Peter Thiel, a sodomite who actively supports same-sex marriage (and marijuana legalization, and is a member of the Bilderberg group). See the July 3, 2012 article by The Texas Tribune: Cruz Mega-Donor is Gay, Pro-Pot Billionaire. Thiel “…gave Cruz $251,000 in 2009 for his aborted run for attorney general. The money represented 19 percent of the total raised for that campaign…” Thiel “…kept up the support since Cruz launched his U.S. Senate bid. He has given Cruz $5,000 combined for the Senate primary and for Cruz’s July 31 runoff against Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, the maximum amount allowed. And Thiel was the largest single donor to the most generous outside group backing Cruz…” giving 1 MILLION dollars!

“It’s hypocritical and deceitful for Ted Cruz to claim to be a Tea Party Republican when his largest donor spends millions of dollars pushing the opposite side of conservative issues important to Republicans.” (Mark Miner)

That is not his only filthy rich sodomite donor either. He courted some New York sodomite businessmen on April 20, 2015 for his presidential bid. In that article: “Mr. Cruz also told the group that Peter Thiel, an openly gay investor, is a close friend of his, Mr. Sporn said. Mr. Thiel has been a generous contributor to Mr. Cruz’s campaigns.” Another article pointed out Ted Cruz’s hypocrisy right in the title: “Ted Cruz Hates ‘New York Values’ Unless He’s Raising Money From Gay Donors in Manhattan” And, of course, there’s the time he was unknowingly being recorded in a back room courting a sodomite donor in December 2015, and made it perfectly clear that “fighting gay marriage” is not a priority to him. He also clung to his wicked idea that moral right and wrong may be decided by government instead of God, as Cruz said: “People of New York may well resolve the marriage question differently than the people of Florida or Texas or Ohio.” [NOTE: watch the videos at the bottom of this article where Sen. Santorum explains why marriage cannot be a state decided issue—just like abortion, polygamy, bestiality, etc.] Ted Cruz being funded by sodomites shouldn’t be too surprising when you realize all the aid he’s given them since he was the Solicitor General of Texas, and especially after he became a US Senator.

Ted Cruz recommended an open sodomite for a lifetime federal judge position, giving Texas its first one

Helping defeat Texas’ law by refusing to defend it as solicitor general wasn’t enough for Cruz and his supporters; so he got the funding from his sodomite friends and ran for Senator—he needed to be more actively involved. As a US Senator from Texas in 2014, he more directly helped the sodomites make history in Texas. The Huffington Post (June 27, 2014) reports of Sen. Cruz and Sen. Cornyn with the title: “Texas Senators Pick Gay Judicial Nominee For Federal Court Seat.” Before we go on, it’s important to know a bit about how things work for appointing federal district judges. ushistory.org explains it well:

A special, very powerful tradition for recommending district judges is called senatorial courtesy. According to this practice, the senators from the state in which the vacancy occurs actually make the decision. A senator of the same political party as the President sends a nomination to the president, who almost always follows the recommendation. To ignore it would be a great affront to the senator, as well as an invitation for conflict between the president and the Senate.

In other words, Ted Cruz was NOT forced to recommend a sodomite for a federal judge position, but did it because he wanted to—it was his decision.

afj.org (September, 2014) reports on Cruz recommending an open sodomite to Obama for a federal judge position:

In June, President Obama nominated…U.S. Attorney Robert Pitman to the Western District, based on the recommendations of Texas Senators John Cornyn and Ted Cruz. On Tuesday, Cornyn and Cruz, both members of the Judiciary Committee, attended the hearing and affirmed their support for the three nominees. Cruz lauded the nominees’ “impressive professional credentials and long careers demonstrating the fidelity to law that we expect from our federal judges.” …Pitman’s nomination also has historical significance for the diversity of our courts: Cruz and Cornyn are the first pair of Republican Senators to recommend an openly gay judicial nominee. Once confirmed, Pitman will be the first openly gay federal judge to serve in Texas.

Did you catch that? Ted Cruz and John Cornyn have made history by being the FIRST pair of Republican Senators to recommend an OPEN sodomite judicial nominee! Those were not the only Obama nominees that were to be confirmed by Congress either—there were many. The problem (for Obama and the liberals) was that there might not be enough time to get all of them confirmed before the new senators took office in January 2015 (most of which were Republicans). The fear was that if they were not confirmed before the new senators took office and the Republicans held the majority, then many Obama nominees may not be confirmed. So what happened? Well, especially considering Cruz’s history of talking like he’s conservative while actually helping the liberals (like when he refused to defend Texas’ law, his non-stance on illegal immigration, and his championing fast-track for Obama-Trade), it is obvious that (whether inadvertently or deliberately) Cruz certainly helped Obama and the Democrats out again! The San Antonio Current (Dec 24, 2014) reports:

Last night, the U.S. Senate confirmed three Texas lifetime judicial appointments, and in doing so, confirmed the state’s first openly gay federal judge. All three judges were nominated by President Obama in June and were recommended by Senators John Cornyn and Ted Cruz. Both Texas senators sit on the Judiciary Committee. It was unclear if any of the three would be confirmed before Republicans take over the Senate on January 6. The current Senate was to go home last Friday for the holidays, but a move by Cruz, who is upset over Obama’s recent executive action on immigration, forced the legislative body to convene over the weekend, allowing Majority Leader Harry Reid to gather the votes to confirm a number of presidential appointments.

In summary up to this point: Ted Cruz has been talking against sodomy while deceptively helping sodomy. By refusing to defend the states rights of Texas in the Lawrence vs Texas case, he afforded the sodomites their greatest victory in the USA and greatest defeat for traditional family in over 30 years! He’s been buddy-buddy with sodomite supporters for most of his political career. And he made history by giving Texas its first open sodomite, federal judge.

Ted Cruz is the same as Barrack Obama on the sodomite issue

Just watch the video.

Here is another good video (similar to the one above, but has some other good points as well):

I know I’ve said this already, but it’s very important: notice that Ted Cruz claims that he’s for states rights and that the states should decide on the issue of marriage. But remember that Ted Cruz didn’t defend Texas against the federal government on this issue when it was his job to do so. Obviously he is not for states rights on this issue—he is flat out FOR sodomy, as his actions have shown.

Now what should we do? Vote based on biblical principles—CHOOSE LIFE!

How to vote your conscience

August 16, 2016 | Author: L.A. Turk

Conscience is the inner sense of what is right or wrong in one’s conduct or motives, impelling one toward right actions. One’s conscience is only as good as what has formed it. One’s conscience can be “seared with a hot iron” (1 Tim. 4:2). For instance, a person taught from childhood that it is his religious duty to murder Jews will feel guilty if he lets Jews live. On the other hand, a normal conscience can be kept healthy and strong by meditating in God’s word, the Bible. The conscience of a true Christian will be based on Bible teachings, not on human reasoning or on the desire to please friends—on Bible facts, not on emotion. A Christian keeps his conscience clear by doing what the Bible says to do, and by refusing to do what the Bible says not to do.

Will you have a clear conscience after the presidential election in November? I will because I am going to vote the way God’s word says to vote: for life.

God commands:

I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live. (Deut. 30:19)

Jehovah our God spoke those words, so we had better listen and obey. Note in particular that God COMMANDED to CHOOSE. He did not give the option of not choosing. We must choose, and our choice must be life. To not vote for life is to choose death for both us and our children.

It is wrong to choose a dead choice

At this time we have only two viable choices for president. Viable means capable of living and coming to birth; or, in the present context, having any chance of becoming president. During the beginning of the primary, I supported Ted Cruz until additional research revealed his deceptions on major issues (listed below), at which point I switched to Mike Huckabee. I still think Mike Huckabee was the most righteous candidate. But both Cruz and Huckabee lost in the primary. So they are no longer viable choices for president. Therefore all hope of them becoming president in November is dead.

God commands us to choose life.

The Constitution Party

By the way, this is also why it is wrong at this time to vote for the Constitution Party candidate. The Constitution Party platform is excellent. However, “As of April 21, 2016, the [Constitution] party has not achieved access to enough electoral college votes to have the party’s nominee win the election. The requirement is to have 270 electoral votes and the party has only 150.” The situation is unlikely to have improved much. In 2012 the Constitution Party candidate received only 122,388 votes, and zero electoral votes. As of August 3, 2016, Darrell Castle, the present Constitution Party presidential candidate is on the ballot in only 22 states. He is, therefore, not a viable candidate; he has zero chance of winning. So, a vote for him is a vote against the best viable candidate, and a vote for the worst viable candidate. Such a vote is choosing death instead of life.

Choose life.

The Libertarian Party

The Libertarian Party candidate, Gary Johnson, is also a dead choice. But, even if he were a viable choice, libertarianism opposes basic Christian principles; so no Christian can with a clear conscience vote libertarian. Libertarianism places the authority of individuals over the authority of God, and places man-made laws over God-made laws. True conservatives believe that what God defines as right or wrong cannot be changed by men—or by governments (which are composed of fallible, sinful men). Libertarians believe that men can redefine right and wrong. Libertarians, therefore, very wrongly think that licentiousness—unrestrained sin—is freedom and liberty. Libertarian liberty is therefore phony. Sin enslaves; it does not free.

Here is how Jesus defines true freedom:

Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; and ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free. They answered him, We be Abraham’s seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free? Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin. And the servant abideth not in the house for ever: but the Son abideth ever. If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed. (John 8:30-36)

True freedom is based on the truths found in God’s word. The rejection of God’s laws is not freedom, but is sin that results in bondage.

Libertarianism is for all practical purposes atheism. Anarchists, and socialists, including communists, worldwide call themselves libertarians. In the USA the Democrat Party is libertarian. The party that calls itself the Libertarian Party in the USA tends to be somewhat conservative on economic issues, but libertarian on social issues. For example, the platform of Libertarian Party for 2016 states the following anti-Biblical positions:

That abortion should be legalized.
That sodomy and same-sex marriage should be legalized.
That the use of [narcotic] drugs for recreational use should be legalized.
That the application of the death penalty by the state should be outlawed.

Once a nation accepts libertarianism, there is no end to how wicked that nation can become. Consider this: abortion is murder. So, if it is OK to murder unwanted unborn babies, then there is no reason why unwanted adults—retarded, handicapped, elderly, chronically ill, those of different political persuasions— can’t also be murdered. If government (federal or state) can decide that sodomy is OK, then can’t the government also decide that rape, stealing, fornication, adultery, prostitution, pornography, polygamy, incest, and bestiality are OK? This is already happening, which is why the USA is in rapid decline.

A web search reveals that many atheists support Gary Johnson because, “he is quoted as saying that he doesn’t have any churchgoing friends and doesn’t ‘seek the counsel of God.'” Even atheists that realize he has no chance of becoming president like him; as one atheist explained:

While he will fall short of winning a state, winning something in the region of 5% of the votes is a possibility if he is lucky and things go his way. The greatest impact Johnson could have is as a Trump spoiler by taking votes from him and giving Clinton an electoral college landslide. For that reason alone, his campaign excites me.

So, not only is the Libertarian candidate a dead choice, but he is a pro-abortion, pro-sodomy, pro-narcotics, pro-death-to-Christianity choice.

Choose life.

God Commands that we choose life

At this time the only two viable candidates for president are Donald J. Trump and Hillary R. Clinton. So, let’s see which of these two choices is for life:

On abortion

Trump is pro-life. A chart detailing Trump’s stand on the various issues of abortion can be seen here.

Clinton is radically pro-abortion, even supporting partial-birth abortion.

Choose life.

On the Supreme Court

Trump has committed to appointing only conservative, pro-life judges to the Supreme Court. Trump’s list of potential United States Supreme Court justices can be read here.

Clinton has committed to appointing only liberal, pro-abortion judges to the Supreme Court. This is an extremely serious difference, especially considering that the next president may appoint as many as five Supreme Court judges to lifetime terms. Plus, he or she will appoint many more lower level federal judges. Do we really want every one of the Ten Commandments to be outlawed by liberal, atheist, Democrat judges?

Choose life, or else our way of life will die a painful death.

On American sovereignty

Trump is for keeping American sovereignty alive; and he is against the United Nations one-world-government movement. “The United Nations is not a friend of democracy,” Trump said. “It’s not a friend even to the United States of America where, as you know, it has its home, and it surely is not a friend to Israel.”

Bill and Hillary Clinton are whole-heartily for the United Nations one-world-government (which will eventually give rise to the Antichrist after it has killed American sovereignty). Bill Clinton even aspires to be Secretary-General of the United Nations.

Choose life.

On American culture

Trump wants to keep American Judeo-Christian culture alive by strictly controlling immigration.

Clinton wants to kill American culture by bringing in as many foreign criminals and radical Islamists as possible to vote Democrat. One of the sayings of radical Islamists is: “We love death more than you [Christians] love life.” We Christians had better choose life, else the last things are eyes may see before we are decapitated is our young sons being castrated to be made slaves, and our wives and daughters impregnated with radical Muslims’ babies by rape. This is happening in many parts of the world right now. So, don’t think it can’t happen in the USA; rapes and murders by muslims in the USA are already common. America is on her way to becoming another Sweden. Any man not concerned for his family’s future after seeing the violent advance of Islam in the news every day since 911 is extremely naive and foolish.

Choose life.

On Israel

Trump is pro-Israel: he wants Israel to live. Trump has three grandchildren by a Jewish son-in-law. Trump realizes the vital importance of protecting Israel in the Middle East.

Clinton is pro-Arab: she is supported by and supports Arab countries that want Israel to die. Huma Abedin, Clinton’s chief assistant, is a Muslim who was raised and educated in Saudi Arabia, and whose whole family is involved in Islamic terrorism. In just about every way possible Clinton stands for destruction and death.

Choose life.

On religion

Trump is for letting Christianity live.

Clinton has been working her whole life to kill Christianity because Christianity is the major obstacle to her atheist, humanist agenda. Trump has committed some serious sins, just as did Moses and David. But Trump realizes that without Christianity the USA will be dead. And he wants Christianity and the USA to live. Do you?

Choose life.

On freedom of speech

Trump wants to revive freedom of speech for pastors by repealing the Johnson Amendment to the IRS code, which threatens punishment to pastors who speak out on political issues.

Clinton wants to kill our freedom of speech completely because to the Democrat party all Christian teaching is hate speech and must be banned. So, do we want freedom of speech or not? Not choosing death by not voting is actually choosing death.

God COMMANDS that we CHOOSE—life.

On law and order

Trump believes that all lives matter no matter what their gender, color or status in life. He recognizes that the local police protect good people from bad people. Without police, people—perhaps our own loved ones—would be murdered right and left. Without local police our lives would be turned into a hell on earth—a living death.

Clinton says “Black lives matter,” implying that other lives don’t. But in reality even black lives don’t matter to her, as she supports the slaughter of thousands of black lives by abortion every year. And the murder of blacks by other blacks don’t even rate being mentioned by her.

Choose life, not death.

On the economy

Obama’s international socialist economic policies—especially high taxes and unfair international trade deals—are a cancer that’s threatening to kill the US economy. He gives billions in foreign aide to countries that hate the US, and wage terrorism against us.

Trump believes in putting America first, and his position on taxes can be summed up in the following edited quotes:

If you are single and earn less than $25,000, or married and jointly earn less than $50,000, you will not owe any income tax…All other Americans will get a simpler tax code with four brackets – 0%, 10%, 20% and 25% – instead of the current seven. This new tax code eliminates the marriage penalty and the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) while providing the lowest tax rate since before World War II…No business of any size…will pay more than 15% of their business income in taxes…No family will have to pay the death tax.

This is very similar to Ronald Reagan’s tax reform that thrust the USA into renewed prosperity in the 1980s.

In contrast, Hillary Clinton plans to extend Obama’s disastrous socialist economic policies even further by increasing taxes one trillion dollars per year! Read a detailed breakdown of these tax increases here and here. Her socialist plan will kill American prosperity.

Choose life, not death.

Trump’s position on international trade is very sensible:

Under the Trump administration trade will flourish. However, for free trade to bring prosperity to America, it must also be fair trade. Our goal is not protectionism but accountability. America fully opened its markets to China but China has not reciprocated. Its Great Wall of Protectionism uses unlawful tariff and non-tariff barriers to keep American companies out of China and to tilt the playing field in their favor.

If you give American workers a level playing field, they will win. At its heart, this plan is a negotiating strategy to bring fairness to our trade with China. The results will be huge for American businesses and workers. Jobs and factories will stop moving offshore and instead stay here at home. The economy will boom. [Color emphasis added.]

Read the details here. Note that Trump is not against free trade as some of his enemies are falsely accusing. He wants free trade to live, but recognizes that trade is not really free if other countries can sell their products to us, but won’t allow us to sell our products to them.

On the other hand, Hillary Clinton is the wife of Bill Clinton, the man that made the unfair deals in China’s favor in the first place. These unfair trade deals are made by corrupt government officials who receive huge sums of money under the table for selling their country down the river. Read The Clinton Foundation received millions from uranium investors as Putin took over 20% of US uranium reserves to see how Bill and Hillary Clinton arranged the deal that enabled Russia to obtain the uranium they need to make nuclear bombs to use against us. These corrupt business deals made the Clintons filthy rich, but greatly harm the US economy.

Hillary Clinton is also for the TPP. If she is elected president we can expect the economy to rapidly sink. Many more Christian people will lose their jobs. With no income their tithes and offerings will be $0.00. Pastors salaries will therefore shrink, and Christian missionary work will be starved for funds. Is this what Christians want? If not, then they had better make sure that Hillary does not become president.

Choose life.

SUMMARY: Trump’s critics like to bring up his past liberal politics, refusing to accept that—like Ronald Reagan—he may have developed more conservative views as he matured with age (he is after all now 70 years old). But the fact is, it is undeniable that Trump is now advocating many very important Christian principles. In spite of his sins, he is clearly pro-life, and has chosen a long-time pro-life advocate for his vice-presidential running mate. Read Mike Pense’s pro-life voting record. Clinton is radically pro-death, and has chosen Tim Kaine—a deceptive hypocrite on abortion—as her running mate. Trump is not Jesus, but neither are you. There never has been, and never will be a sinless presidential candidate who is right on every issue. There is no perfect candidate in the race, just two sinners. But some sinners are far more wicked and destructive than others. We must decide which of these two sinners is going to do the most good and least harm to our country.

Will Christians cut their own throats by believing a false doctrine?

Sadly, there is a very dangerous error spreading through Christian circles today that threatens to assure that Christians seal their own doom. This anti-Biblical error is the idea that it is wrong to choose the lesser of two evils, since—its advocates wrongly claim—to choose any evil is sin. THIS IDEA IS DECEPTIVE, ANTI-BIBLICAL, HYPOCRITICAL, AND REBELLION AGAINST GOD’S COMMAND TO CHOOSE. Let’s see why:

The “it is wrong to choose the lesser of two evils” idea is deceptive because it ignores the fact that the word “evil” does not always mean immoral, sinful, or wicked

Depending on the context, the word evil sometimes means: “Producing or threatening sorrow, distress, injury, or calamity; unpropitious; calamitous; as, evil tidings; evil arrows; evil days” (Webster’s Dictionary [1913]). Exodus 32:14 states: “And the LORD repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people.” Obviously, that verse does NOT mean that the LORD intended to sin against the Israelites, but decided to repent of that sin. Rather it means that He intended to bring sorrow, distress, and calamity upon them because of their sins, but decided not to do so because of Moses’ intercession. Likewise, to choose the lesser of two evils does not mean to choose between two sins. Rather it means to choose the candidate that will best protect life, and thereby bring the least sorrow, distress, and calamity upon us.

The “it is wrong to choose the lesser of two evils” idea is anti-Biblical because the Bible clearly shows the wisdom of choosing the lesser of two evils

Esther was confronted with only evil choices when wicked Haman convinced King Ahasuerus to authorize the mass murder of all the Jews in his kingdom (Esther 3:8-15). She could do nothing and die. She could ask help from a more righteous man than King Ahasuerus and die. She could ask help from King Ahasuerus, and perhaps die—but maybe live. King Ahasuerus was an unrighteous man. He was vain, and liked to throw big parties to display his power and wealth (Esther 1:1-9). He had divorced and remarried (Esther 1:13-2:20). He had many concubines (Esther 2:14). And he was the man that had authorized wicked Haman to kill all the Jews in the first place. Furthermore, it was against the law to approach the king without being called. Esther told Mordecai, her uncle:

All the king’s servants, and the people of the king’s provinces, do know, that whosoever, whether man or woman, shall come unto the king into the inner court, who is not called, there is one law of his to put him to death, except such to whom the king shall hold out the golden sceptre, that he may live: but I have not been called to come in unto the king these thirty days (Esther 4:11).

So, very much like our situation in this election, Esther had to choose between: (1) certain death by doing nothing; (2) certain death by appealing to someone who had no power to help; or (3) possible death by appealing to sinful King Ahasuerus.

And they told to Mordecai Esther’s words. Then Mordecai commanded to answer Esther, Think not with thyself that thou shalt escape in the king’s house, more than all the Jews. For if thou altogether holdest thy peace at this time, then shall there enlargement and deliverance arise to the Jews from another place; but thou and thy father’s house shall be destroyed: and who knoweth whether thou art come to the kingdom for such a time as this? (Esther 4:12-14)

All of Esther’s choices were evil. But Esther wisely choose the lesser evil by appealing to sinful King Ahasuerus, and by doing so saved her people and herself from certain death. And remember this: had Esther considered herself too holy and righteous to appeal to this unrighteous, sinful king, and had insisted on appealing to a some righteous but powerless person instead, then she and all of her people would have been slaughtered—and it would have been her fault. Likewise, you and I are voters at such a time as this. We are responsible for what happens to our people. So, we had better have the courage to vote for life.

The “it is wrong to choose the lesser of two evils” idea is also anti-Biblical because it ignores the basic Bible teaching that without exception all men are sinners.

Note these verses:

For there is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not, (Ecclesiastes 7:20)

But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away. (Isaiah 64:6)

For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God. (Romans 3:23)

Every human being on this earth is a sinner. So, if it is wrong to vote for a sinful presidential candidate, then it is wrong to vote for anybody. The wise voter will vote for the viable candidate whose sins will do the least harm to the country.

The “it is wrong to choose the lesser of two evils” idea is hypocritical because the holier-than-thou never-Trump people, who so hate Trump and refuse to forgive his sins, have every one to a man also sinned, and are even now still sinning in some aspect of their lives

If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. (1 John 1:8)

The “it is wrong to choose the lesser of two evils” idea is also hypocritical because the never-Trump people downplay the many sins of Ted Cruz

Let’s list some of Cruz’s sins: as a youth he used drugs, and wanted to star in a “teen tit” film; he currently smokes cigars, drinks alcohol, uses profanity, and got matching tatoos with a woman he was accused of committing adultery with—she shows off hers while wearing what appears to be his suit coat—on the same day he shows his without his suit coat. Watch him squirm trying to explain why he isn’t wearing his suit coat here.

Even more damning, he repeatedly lies like the clever lawyer he is. Let’s list just a few of his many lies:

Cruz falsely claimed Ben Carson had dropped out of the race in order to steal Carson’s votes. The Bible says, “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour” (Exodus 20:16).

If a false witness rise up against any man to testify against him that which is wrong; then both the men, between whom the controversy is, shall stand before the LORD, before the priests and the judges, which shall be in those days; and the judges shall make diligent inquisition: and, behold, if the witness be a false witness, and hath testified falsely against his brother; then shall ye do unto him, as he had thought to have done unto his brother: so shalt thou put the evil away from among you. And those which remain shall hear, and fear, and shall henceforth commit no more any such evil among you. And thine eye shall not pity; but life shall go for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot. (Deuteronomy 16-21)

Cruz claims to be a dedicated Christian, but doesn’t tithe. He is a God robber.

Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings. Ye are cursed with a curse: for ye have robbed me, even this whole nation. Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it. (Malachi 3:8-10)

Cruz claims to be a Constitutionalist, but doesn’t honour the Constitution’s must be “a natural born citizen” POTUS qualification. Cruz was born in Canada, not in the USA. And like Obama,

All citizenship records for Ted Cruz are sealed unless and until Ted Cruz agrees to allow any such records to be released by either U.S. or Canadian agencies.

As a result, there remains no authentic evidence to support the claims that Ted Cruz is either a “natural born” or “naturalized” citizen of the United States.

Without any form of U.S. Citizenship documentation, and proof of Canadian citizenship at birth in 1970 and holding that legal status until May 2014 when he renounced his birth citizenship to Canada, there is no way for Ted Cruz to prove that he is either “natural born” and eligible for the Oval Office, or “naturalized” prior to 2012, when he sought and accepted a seat in the U.S. Senate as a legal citizen of Canada.

On the basis of all available evidence today, Ted Cruz is in fact holding a seat in the U.S. Senate illegally, with no documented proof of legal U.S. citizenship whatsoever, and proof of Canadian citizenship between the years of birth in 1970 and May 2014.

Cruz claims to be a champion of the Christian family, but has been supported—and therefore controlled—for most of his career by homosexual donor Peter Thiel. As the Texas attorney general, Cruz refused to defend Texas’ anti-sodomy laws, resulting in them being declared unConstitutional. As a US senator, Cruz endorsed and recommended an openly homosexual judge, resulting to his being installed as a federal judge.

Cruz claims to be a conservative (conservatives believe that governments are not allowed to change God’s definition of right and wrong), but practices libertarianism (libertarians believe that governments can redefine right and wrong): when Cruz says that the States should decide the gay-marriage issue he advocates the libertarian position, not the conservative or States rights position—redefining marriage and morality is not a right reserved to the States. No Christian can conscientiously vote libertarian.

Cruz claims to be anti-establishment, but, when faced with the prospect of losing, called upon his establishment friends to help him out—and they did.

Cruz claims to be anti-globalism, but both he and his wife, Heidi, have ties to the Council on Foreign Relations, the North American Union, NAFTA, J.P. Morgan, and Goldman Sachs. Cruz claims to be against the TPA, but in truth co-authored with his establishment friend Paul Ryan an article promoting the TPA. To see just how deceitful and treasonous this article was read, Ted Cruz joins the establishment, in which it is revealed that:

These treaties [promoted by Ryan and Cruz] are in fact far more about “politics” than economics or trade. These treaties are world governance infrastructure; they are big steps away from the Constitution, national sovereignty and independence. All the trade talk, all the blather about jobs and the confusing stream of questionable statistics are designed to cover the real thrust of these treaties: the expansion of international and globalist interests.

Cruz claimed he would support the nominee whoever he be, but did not keep his word. If you want to see just how completely one Cruz supporter disregards the Bible in favor of the “higher laws” of athiest-humanist situation ethics, read In refusing to endorse Trump, Cruz had higher laws in mind by Dr. Gregory Tomlin. According to Tomlin it is OK to break your word: (1) if someone else threatens to break his word; (2) if someone has insulted your wife; (3) if someone has insulted your father; or (4) if you are being to your own self true. Tomlin closes his article by saying, “perhaps it is time to plow the fields of Scripture anew.” So, let’s plow. Here are some verses Cruz needs to heed and obey:

Excellent speech becometh not a fool: much less do lying lips a prince (Proverbs 17:7).

The desire of a man is his kindness: and a poor man is better than a liar (Proverbs 19:22).

Who is a wise man and endued with knowledge among you? let him shew out of a good conversation his works with meekness of wisdom. But if ye have bitter envying and strife in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the truth. This wisdom descendeth not from above, but is earthly, sensual, devilish. For where envying and strife is, there is confusion and every evil work. But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy. And the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace of them that make peace (James 3:13-18).

Cruz claims to love America, but, by placing himself and his aspirations for political power above the welfare of the USA, he glaringly demonstrated why we should never choose someone who is not a natural born citizen to be our president. His lack of love for the USA is beyond belief. In all 69 years of my life, Ted Cruz is the most dishonest, deceptive, and hypocritical Republican candidate for president I have ever researched.

The “it is wrong to choose the lesser of two evils” idea is rebellion against God, because it is attempting to make people feel guilty for doing what God clearly commanded them to do: CHOOSE. Choose LIFE.

God’s word says, “We ought to obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29). So, obey God. Go to the voting booth and choose the candidate that will bring the least evil upon us, and who most clearly stands for life. Now that there are only two viable candidates left standing, Trump and Clinton, the conscientious choice Christians should make is glaringly obvious: Trump.

Why delegates at the Republican convention booed Cruz off the stage

Did delegates at the Republican convention boo Cruz off the stage because they were opposed to voting their conscience? No, they did not. They booed him off the stage because they were aware that the saying “vote your conscience” was being promoted by Ted Cruz’s team to mean “vote for anyone but Trump.” They realized Cruz is a liar and was not going to keep his word. They realized that instead he was going to spit on the Bible principles he claimed to believe, and was going to be a spiteful and sore loser. They realized that he was going to divide the Republican Party to attempt to cause its defeat. They realized that he is so self-centred that he was actually going to try to divide the US electorate in order to help Clinton win. They realized that “Vote your conscience” actually meant “Vote for Hillary.” At that point, even a large percent of those who had voted for Cruz in the primary began booing because they realized that they could never ever again vote for Cruz with a clear conscience. Hillary Clinton and her supporters are already—with glee—displaying “‘Vote your conscience’ — Ted Cruz” signs in support of Hillary.

The extreme danger we face

Never in the history of our country have we been in such danger of losing everything: our freedoms, our culture, our prosperity; and even our very lives. There is no way the USA can survive another corrupt, one-world-government, open-borders, law-breaking, anti-Christian administration. We are in a win now or lose all situation.

“Choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live.”

Ted Cruz’s Aspirations

August 16, 2016 | Author: Elijah

Aspirations… Is that like sweat on my butt? No, no, oh, I see, wha-wha-what you want me to d…what I wanna do in life. Well, my aspiration is to uh… Oh, I don’t know. Be in a tit teen tit film like that guy who played Heratio. You know, he was in Malibu Bikini Beach Shop. Well, other than that uhhh… Take over the world. World domination. Ya know? Rule everything. Rich. Powerful. That sort of stuff.

THE LESSER OF TWO EVILS: A BIBLICAL PRINCIPAL (HILLARY CLINTON / DONALD TRUMP)

July 28, 2016 | Author: Elijah

[NOTE from the editor: Pastor Joshua Turk has given permission to republish this article. He dives right into the topic, assuming the reader already knows what “evil” means. But just to be sure you don’t misunderstand, let me explain.

I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and CREATE EVIL: I the LORD do all these things. (Isaiah 45:7)

Not sin, but evil—there’s a difference. Evil does not always mean sinful or wicked. God never creates sin, but he does sometimes create evil. Evil often means something that is harmful, hurtful, bad (not in a sinful way). God gave David three evils to choose from in 2 Samuel 24:12-15 as punishment for his sin, God did not give David three sins to choose from. David was wise enough to choose a lesser evil. Now, on to the main article!]

THE LESSER OF TWO EVILS: A BIBLICAL PRINCIPAL (HILLARY CLINTON / DONALD TRUMP)

Choose the lesser of two evils—it’s a Biblical principal. Those who say that they are through with the “lesser of two evils” argument are showing that they are being unreasonable.

Would you rather be in debt $5 or $10? Choose the $5, you’ll be better off.

Would you rather have one eye poked out or two? Choose one, you’ll be better off.

People are faced with “choosing the lesser of two evils” all the time in their lives. We don’t always have the choices that we want so pick the lesser of two evils. It’s a sensible thing to do.

Consider the four lepers of Samaria when the Syrians besieged the city. They were faced with 3 evil choices.

And there were four leprous men at the entering in of the gate: and they said one to another, Why sit we here until we die? If we say, We will enter into the city, then the famine is in the city, and we shall die there: and if we sit still here, we die also. Now therefore come, and let us fall unto the host of the Syrians: if they save us alive, we shall live; and if they kill us, we shall but die. (2 Kings 7:3-4)

THEY CONSIDERED THE OPTIONS THAT THEY HAD, NOT THE ONES THAT THEY WANTED.

Enter the city = death
Do nothing = death
Go to the Syrians = possible death but a chance for life (the lesser evil).

They made the choice BASED ON THE OPTIONS THAT THEY HAD that gave them a chance to live. They were sensible. They picked option #3 and that choice brought them life!

God always directs everyone to be logical and sensible. Choosing the lesser of two evils is correct and legitimate logic.

You only have two viable candidates (Hillary Clinton / Donald Trump). Pick the lesser of the two evils. If you don’t, you get the greater evil… you will be worse off.

Simple logic.

I VOTED FOR TED CRUZ IN THE PRIMARIES. HOWEVER, HE IS NO LONGER AN OPTION. I got over it and moved on. Continuously pointing out the faults of Donald Trump is pointless; I don’t need to be convinced—I know. However, HE IS THE OPTION THAT WE HAVE. If you were being reasonable you would LOOK AT THE OPTIONS THAT YOU HAVE (Hillary/Donald) and pick the one that is the less evil.

Ted Cruz is no longer a candidate, he dropped out, the people didn’t choose him. If you don’t vote for Donald Trump then you are likely to get Hillary Clinton. Which will be worse for your future?

Consider a person that gets gangrene in one of their limbs and the doctors diagnosis is to amputate, no other option. You either amputate the hand/foot or your future gets worse, you have to amputate the arm/leg. And then, if you don’t amputate the arm/leg you just die.

Life is full of tough choices, choose the lesser of the two evils, amputate the hand/foot (Donald Trump) or loose an arm/leg (Hillary Clinton).

I always vote for the lesser of two evils because I don’t ever want the greater of two evils. Are you willing for the greater of two evils (Hillary Clinton / lose a arm/leg) to win because you don’t like the lesser of two evils (Donald Trump / lose a hand/foot).

Imagine a parent of two children at the beginning of a car accident. The parent can save one child or lose both. What should the parent do? If you can’t save both at least save one.

If you were really going to vote your conscience you would see that Hillary Clinton is a much greater evil than Donald Trump and you would vote for Donald Trump to stop the greater evil, Hillary Clinton.

[NOTE from the editor: It is NOT SIN to vote for Trump—a lesser evil than Clinton. It’s NOT a vote or support for his passed sins, but a vote and support for his promised policies. In fact, it’s the wisest thing to do in the situation we’re in, as Pastor Joshua Turk pointed out. America has sunk into sin and godlessness, and I agree with many who say we’re now being judged. We have a choice for our punishment though, and to not try to get the lesser punishment is not wise.]

Chuck Norris: This man should be the next U.S. president

January 31, 2016 | Author: L.A. Turk

This man should be the next U.S. president

By Chuck Norris

First of all, the next president of the United States should not be Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders. Hillary will send us down the same path of destruction as Obama, and Bernie will send us down an even worse path – if worse is even possible!

Every adult American needs to see the movie “13 Hours,” then ask yourself: “Where was Hillary during the Benghazi attacks and does her type of AWOL leadership demonstrate what we need as commander in chief, especially with ISIS and al-Nusra on the hunt for Americans here and abroad?”

To me, any one of the GOP candidates would make a good president. Some of them could even be great. All of them would be far superior to Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders.

Of course, my personal favorite is Mike Huckabee. Most know my wife, Gena, and I were on the campaign trail with Mike for five months in 2008. During that time, we clearly saw his vision and concern for our country as well as his executive experience to unite and lead our country forward. Mike had, and continues to have, a message that resonates with the American people and is a man of great authentic character.

Advertisement: Chuck Norris provides real solutions to our county’s problems and a way to reawaken the American dream in his best-seller, “Black Belt Patriotism.”

Mike’s qualifications include:

He has supreme executive leadership experience as governor of Arkansas from 1996 to 2007.

He has already run against the Clinton machine multiple times throughout his years as governor of Arkansas.

He is pro-Israel, pro-military and knows the Middle East better than any candidate.

He has already won the Iowa caucus (2008).

He’s been fighting [for] conservative causes his entire adult life. The 22 conservative leaders cited in the National Review could never make a case against Huckabee as a principled consistent conservative.

He’s rallied millions of citizens for years behind various fights for freedom, family and faith via his Fox News “Huckabee” show.

In 2008, very few people knew who Mike Huckabee was, but because of the “Huckabee” show, over the last six years Mike has become very well known and has his own notoriety to draw crowds to hear his message.

What most people seem to have forgotten is that Mike came in second place behind John McCain in the 2008 GOP primaries. In fact, when the totals came in, Mike had “more than 20 percent of all the votes cast nationwide.” He not only won Iowa, but swept many of the southern states on Super Tuesday.

I believe Mike would have won the nomination if Sen. Fred Thompson had not jumped in the race at the last minute to siphon off votes in South Carolina. It appeared to be a strategy implemented by the GOP establishment.

Historian Dr. Timothy Stanley agreed. He cited Aaron Blake from the Washington Post, who explained how Huckabee “had a tremendous potential that went unrealized in ’08. Huckabee quit early due to a shortage of cash, so we never got to see how well he could run in a great number of states. Moreover, his early performances were hindered by the candidacy of Fred Thompson – a dour, sour old stick who only seemed to be in the race to hurt Huckabee. It’s fair to say that Thompson denied Huckabee a win in South Carolina and thus the momentum he needed to go the distance.”

And to the person who might say, “But Mike is presently trailing in the polls,” I’d ask: “Since when have polls hijacked the American voter before he or she even votes?”

Just because the media have tried to narrow down the choices doesn’t mean the voters have to. We all want to be on a winning team, but we should never hand over our convictions and votes because media or pundits tell us there are only two or three viable candidates.

Mike may not be the “flavor of the day” to the temperamental media or cause a media frenzy like certain candidates do. However, highlighting hype is no substitute for substance, and substance is what we need more than ever in the Oval Office. We already know what voting for smoke and mirrors can get us: Obama.

One of the things I repeatedly tell people is: Vote your conviction even if it’s not what’s most popular, and rest assure that America’s founders and God Himself back you because you’re being true to who you are and what you believe.

I’ve wondered if Ronald Reagan himself could be elected in today’s political environment. I would propose that Huckabee is actually more like Reagan than any other candidate, and I’m not alone.

In his article, “Is Huckabee the Next Reagan?,” historian Dr. Timothy Stanley summarized Mike’s uniqueness among the presidential candidates: “But none of these men has Huckabee’s unique ability to speak through the television cameras and straight to the viewer at home. And, aside from Santorum, none of them has run for the nomination before. Republicans are typically cautious voters who encourage a candidate to run twice, or even thrice, before nominating them: … George H.W. Bush and Reagan were veterans of the presidential primaries. As such, Huckabee enters this race with a key asset: He’s a conservative statesman. His history alone ought to guarantee him top-tier status.”

Few knew Ronald Reagan better than Ed Rollins, who served in the administrations of Presidents Nixon, Ford and Reagan, including serving two tours of duty at the highest level of the White House as assistant to the president and White House political director. Rollins also served as the national campaign director to Ronald Reagan in the 1984 presidential election in which Reagan won 49 states.

Rollins described Huckabee in this way: “Gov. Huckabee has probably inspired me as much as Ronald Reagan … he can connect with ordinary voters. I was with the old Reagan and I can promise you this man comes as close as anyone to filling those shoes.”

Mike truly is a first-class patriot and a renowned man of integrity. Our country can use his caliber of character in the White House, not only to help restore the Oval Office but also our nation.

In the end, whoever the American voters decide will be their choice for the Republican candidacy, I will certainly support and encourage others to do the same. Like I said, any of them will be good for our country. And it is only by rallying around that single GOP candidate that we are going to ensure the presidential win and restoration of our country.

Sign the Petition to Put Mike Huckabee on the Main Stage for the January 28 GOP Debate

January 13, 2016 | Author: Elijah

The media has been cherry picking polls to make sure Gov. Mike Huckabee is not in the main debates. It’s time for it to end! Please sign the petition and ask others to do so as well. Share the link for the petition on Facebook, Twitter, and whatever other social media you have.

https://www.change.org/p/fox-news-put-mike-huckabee-on-main-stage-january-28th?recruiter=465700114&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink

EVANGELICAL LEADERS PERSONALLY ASKED HUCKABEE TO RUN, BUT THEN BETRAYED HIM AND CHRISTIAN VALUES FOR BETTER FUNDED CANDIDATE

January 13, 2016 | Author: Elijah

youtu.be/Q6xRI9YR8f0

“…I felt disappointed… Because there were people who came to my home, Greg, and urged me to run; said they would support me. There were people who have made commitments and promises that they didn’t keep. I mean, there’s a lot of things that we don’t have time to go into, but the big point was this: that are we going to support people based on making sure that, that person is the best funded? or is it the person who actually shares their convictions? Because if candidates get their same money from the corporatist contributors and donors that support the other candidates, then I guarantee you candidates answer to the ones who are throwing the dollars at their campaign. It always works like that, and anybody who thinks that it doesn’t, they’re the ones who’re delusional.”—Mike Huckabee

Huckabee said that he didn’t feel betrayed, but that he felt disappointed, and that’s fine as a candidate running for President. However, as true Christians, we feel betrayed by those deceptive, compromising, unfaithful, lying, carnal, money-and-popularity-first, “evangelical” leaders. Some have even had the gall to quote 2 Chronicles 7:14, but then did not seek God’s face (by reading the Bible and following it) and support the candidate who most believes and adheres to Christian values, but instead chose to support another candidate because he is better funded and (according to polls, which are often dishonest) more popular. Let’s look at that verse:

“If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.”—2 Chronicles 7:14

Now look at this passage of Scripture:

“I said unto the fools, Deal not foolishly: and to the wicked, Lift not up the horn: Lift not up your horn on high: speak not with a stiff neck.

For promotion cometh neither from the east, nor from the west, nor from the south. But God is the judge: he putteth down one, and setteth up another.“—Psalms 75:4-7

Fools may look at money and popularity to make their decisions, but true Christians look to God! Let us humble ourselves, pray, and truly seek God’s face (by reading the Bible and following it), and turn from our wicked ways. Let us support the candidate who is doing the same, who truly believes in God, who is steadfast in his values, convictions, and positions; a candidate whose faith and convictions don’t change with the wind of popularity and waves of convenience, or for promises of support and filthy lucre (money). Gov. Mike Huckabee is that candidate, and that is one of the reasons I support him and pray he will be the next President of the United States of America.

Who is the true Constitutionalist? Cruz or Huckabee?

January 7, 2016 | Author: L.A. Turk

Jesus declared: “If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; and ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free….Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin….He that is of God hearth God’s words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.” (John 8:31,32, 34). Interpretation: freedom results from obeying God’s words. To the degree people reject God’s words, they lose freedom, being enslaved by sins.

To conservatives freedom is being able to live in submission to God’s words without restrictions or punishment. To libertarians freedom is being able to live in violation of God’s words without restrictions or punishment.

To conservatives God is the final authority to determine right from wrong. To libertarians human government is the final authority.

To conservatives human-made laws which oppose God’s laws are invalid and must not be obeyed. To libertarians God-made laws which oppose men’s laws are invalid and need not be obeyed.

Conservatives believe that the Constitution was founded upon, and is subordinate to, the Bible (the Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights support this fact). Libertarians believe the Constitution to be neither founded upon, nor subordinate to the Bible, but rather superior to it.

To conservatives all men are “…endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,” and God alone defines those rights. To libertarians rights are man-endowed, removable by man, and re-definable by man.

Conservatives believe vital moral issues, such as slavery, marriage, and abortion, are eternally decreed by God’s word; and that to be blessed of God America must submit to God’s decrees as “one nation, under God, indivisible.” Libertarians divide the nation by falsely claiming that either federal or state government can nullify God’s decrees. Beware how you vote, for “Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation” (Matthew 12:25).

Ted Cruz claims, “I’m a constitutionalist and marriage is a question for the states….I personally believe in traditional marriage between one man and one woman, but if you want to change the marriage laws, the way to do it constitutionally is convince your fellow citizens, go to your state legislature, and change it.” That is the bogus, libertarian view of the Constitution, not the conservative view. Therefore, Cruz admits that same-sex marriage—the main issue undermining religious freedom in the US—will NOT be among his “top-three” priorities! His libertarian belief thus overrides his professed personal Christian belief. Evangelical leaders endorsing Cruz betray God, country, and family.

Were Cruz a true constitutionalist he wouldn’t be running for president, as he is not constitutionally qualified, being born in Canada to a father not an American citizen at the time.

The true conservative constitutionalist is Mike Huckabee, who is unquestionably constitutionally qualified, has the most governing experience, and has the most God-honoring policies.

UPDATED: An open letter to Shane Vander Hart concerning David Shedlock and Ted Cruz

December 28, 2015 | Author: L.A. Turk

[UPDATE: Apparently, while I was writing this article, David Shedlock had already caved to the heat his article had generated, and was writing an apology! In typical Republican fashion he put his head down, put his tail between his legs, and admitted to being wrong even though he wasn’t. Now he owes Mike Huckabee, the American people, and God an apology. Cruz’s “record” of pro-life legislation was never in question. But his “position” on state’s rights undermines that legislation, and so is in practice a “pro-abortion” position. That is the truth. There will be no retreat from what I have written in this article.]

Dear Editor Hart,

I read your article, Is Ted Cruz Being Inconsistent on Marriage? I Don’t Think So. I also read David Shedlock’s article, Everybody’s Wrong: Cruz & Huckabee Are on Opposite Sides of the Ball.” Then I read your article in response, Clarifying Ted Cruz’s Pro-Life Record. Too much is at stake not to respond.

The foundational issue is, Will American Christians obey God’s word in the voting booth this time, or will they once again forget God. It is obvious to me that America has been driven off a cliff morally, economically, and militarily. We are now plunging to the bottom, and only God can save us from crashing into total destruction. No politician can save us. We had better humble ourselves before God before it is too late.

Being very impressed with Cruz’s courage to oppose the RINOs in Congress, I started out this campaign cycle supporting Cruz, with both words and money. But the more I learned about his policies, the more alarmed I became. Finally, it became obvious to me that Cruz’s position on the vital moral issues dividing the US today is both deceptive and dangerous.

I hope it was not intentional, but your article in response to Shedlock’s is also deceptive. You accused Shedlock of saying something he didn’t say, then proved that what he didn’t actually say is wrong. Please note carefully that Shedlock’s article did not criticise Cruz’s “record,” but only his “position.” Shedlock very correctly pointed out that Cruz is actually a libertarian, not a social conservative; and that, just like Ron Paul, Cruz’s “position” will not stop abortions. Here is what Shedlock actually said:

The ‘state’s rights position‘ is totally unworkable on marriage, for previous laws have always required that states accept every other state’s standards. The Cruz position is actually a step backwards for the pro-life movement, as well. Morally, abortion is a national sin. Cruz can say he has done all he can to stop abortion. But Ron Paul’s pro-abortion supporters knew that his position would not stop abortions at all. He could brag all he wanted about proposing laws that would outlaw abortion nationally, but he knew they would never see the light of day.

That is a completely true statement. Shedlock said, “He,” that is Ron Paul, “could brag all he wanted about proposing laws that would outlaw abortion nationally [his “record”], but he knew they would never see the light of day.” The exact same thing is true about Cruz. His “position” undermines his good “record.”

Now, back to your first article about Cruz being consistent on marriage. From the research I have done, it seems to be true that Cruz has consistently stated that his policy on marriage is that “marriage is a question for the states.” That is exactly why he is a dangerous man whom I not only cannot support, but must, and will, oppose for the sake of my children and grandchildren. As the family goes, so goes the nation. Sodomy destroys the family. No nation has ever survived sodomy. And Cruz’s policy on marriage will allow the sodomite movement to prevail and grow in state after state until our country is totally corrupt: “Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump? Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened” (1 Cor. 5:6).

But, and this is very important, if Cruz is consistent in saying that marriage is an issue for the states to decide, how then can he honestly say that abortion is not? Cruz says that issues not specifically mentioned in the Constitution must be settled by the states. The Constitution says nothing about abortion, so if Cruz is going to be consistent, he will leave abortion to be decided by the states also. That position will not stop abortions, and so in practice is equivalent to a pro-choice position, which is exactly what Shedlock pointed out.

Also, if Cruz is truly a pure Constitutionalist as he claims, is he being consistent in even running for president? As many conservatives have already pointed out, it is highly questionable that Cruz is Constitutionally qualified for the office of president; some say that it is certain that Cruz is not qualified. Cruz says the voters will decide if he is qualified or not. I don’t think so. Do a web search. Liberals are already planning to challenge his qualifications all the way to the Supreme Court if necessary should he win the general election. What do you think our liberal majority Supreme Court will decide? And once the Supreme Court has declared Cruz unqualified, what are you going to do then?

The IRS is another issue in which Cruz is being deceptive. He claims he will do away with the IRS, but actually all he is planning to do is impose a flat tax on “income.” That will not do away with the IRS, but will instead assure that the IRS—that criminal agency that so hates churches and other conservative organizations—lives on to continue to oppose and oppress us. Cruz could have, and should have, chosen to advocate the FairTax, which is a flat tax on “consumption” that would really and truly do away with the IRS, but he didn’t. Why is that? Could it be because the super-rich donors supporting him don’t want the unfair advantage the IRS gives them over small businesses to be eliminated? The FairTax already has 80 co-sponsors in Congress (last time I checked), so it’s not like it would be an impossible bill to pass given leadership from a conservative president.

True conservatives believe that the US Constitution was founded upon—and is subordinate to—the Christian Bible. Liberals and libertarians subvert the Constitution by rejecting the Constitution’s Bible foundation. The libertarians’ claim that the Constitution leaves vital moral issues (such as slavery, marriage and abortion) up to each state to decide for itself is bogus and wicked. God alone decides such things—not the states. And God has permanently recorded his decisions in the Bible, and they will never change. Government—state or federal—cannot through legislation change sin into righteousness or licentiousness into freedom. Government can only obey or disobey God, and to disobey is fatal. Remember this warning: “The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God” (Psalms 9:17). The God of the Bible “giveth thee power to get wealth…And it shall be, if thou do at all forget the LORD thy God, and walk after other gods, and serve them, and worship them, I testify against you this day that ye shall surely perish” (Deut. 8:18-19).

The evangelical leaders who have endorsed Cruz have made a libertarian decision, not a conservative one: a carnal decision, not a spiritual, Bible-based one. Endorsing a libertarian over a proven conservative based on the libertarian’s fund-raising expertise, and rank in liberal-controlled polls, is stupid, foolish, and shameful. They have let the liberal media make their choice for them. That is unbelievably dumb. They should repent immediately, before the damage they are causing to their reputations is irreparable. Being a libertarian, Cruz cannot unite the conservative base, as they claim, but is dividing it. Historically, libertarians have always claimed to be conservative, because they know that no Bible-believing Christian will knowingly vote for a libertarian.

John Quincy Adams gave good advise: “Always vote on principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.”

I think you owe Shedlock an apology, and that you should also reconsider your support of Cruz. We should hold all writers to account, but we shouldn’t distort a writer’s words in order to lift up our candidate of choice. Remember that your children and grandchildren also are going to be affected by this election.

Sincerely,
L.A. Turk, editor
hourlybreakingnews.com
freedomtruth.us

Deceptively Pro-Sodomite Ted Cruz

“The final victory for gay rights was foreshadowed…” “…one of the biggest setbacks for the American family in over thirty years…”

Ted Cruz’s sodomite financial backing

Ted Cruz recommended an open sodomite for a lifetime federal judge position, giving Texas its first one

Ted Cruz is the same as Barrack Obama on the sodomite issue

It is wrong to choose a dead choice

The Constitution Party

The Libertarian Party

God Commands that we choose life

On abortion

On the Supreme Court

On American sovereignty

On American culture

On Israel

On religion

On freedom of speech

On law and order

On the economy

Will Christians cut their own throats by believing a false doctrine?

The “it is wrong to choose the lesser of two evils” idea is deceptive because it ignores the fact that the word “evil” does not always mean immoral, sinful, or wicked

The “it is wrong to choose the lesser of two evils” idea is anti-Biblical because the Bible clearly shows the wisdom of choosing the lesser of two evils

The “it is wrong to choose the lesser of two evils” idea is also anti-Biblical because it ignores the basic Bible teaching that without exception all men are sinners.

The “it is wrong to choose the lesser of two evils” idea is hypocritical because the holier-than-thou never-Trump people, who so hate Trump and refuse to forgive his sins, have every one to a man also sinned, and are even now still sinning in some aspect of their lives

The “it is wrong to choose the lesser of two evils” idea is also hypocritical because the never-Trump people downplay the many sins of Ted Cruz

The “it is wrong to choose the lesser of two evils” idea is rebellion against God, because it is attempting to make people feel guilty for doing what God clearly commanded them to do: CHOOSE. Choose LIFE.

Why delegates at the Republican convention booed Cruz off the stage

The extreme danger we face

THE LESSER OF TWO EVILS: A BIBLICAL PRINCIPAL (HILLARY CLINTON / DONALD TRUMP)

THEY CONSIDERED THE OPTIONS THAT THEY HAD, NOT THE ONES THAT THEY WANTED.

This man should be the next U.S. president

Advertisement: Chuck Norris provides real solutions to our county’s problems and a way to reawaken the American dream in his best-seller, “Black Belt Patriotism.”

Visit the best news site on the web:

FairTax: the way back to a strong economy

The most important post on this website:

A vitally important book!

Pages

Tags

Archives

Tags