PDA

View Full Version : Roberts' Confirmation Will be a Christian Victory


rcdavis
14th September 2005, 05:13
To: National Desk

Contact: Brannon Howse, President of Worldview Weekend, 573-216-9400

NEWS ADVISORY, Sept. 14 /Christian Wire Service/ -- Author of One Nation Under Man? The Worldview War Between Christians and the Secular Left, talk-show host, Brannon Howse is available for comment. Brannon's book is endorsed by: Fred Barnes, Ed Meese, Michael Reagan, U.S. Congressman Jim Ryun, David Barton, D. James Kennedy, Tim LaHaye, Josh McDowell and David Limbaugh. Details and media kit at: http://www.worldviewweekend.com/onum/

Brannon Howse releases the following statement:

If Judge Roberts will "apply" the law and not "make law" then Christians that voted for President Bush will have won a huge battle in the worldview war.

Christians are preparing to undue the damage done by the secular left. For instance, Benjamin Cardozo, appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court in 1932, proudly proclaimed a belief in his right to usurp powers of the U.S. Congress and to violate the check-and-balance separations of the U.S. Constitution: "I take judge-made law as one of the existing realities of life."

In 1907, Charles Evans Hughes, who would later become chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, declared, "We are under a Constitution, but the Constitution is what the judges say it is."

Secular humanism and its penchant for moral relativism, along with misapplied Darwinism, has now become the postmodern foundation on which America's courts and law schools are built. The secular left believes that morals and society evolve and so should the Constitution.

Earl Warren Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1958 case, Trop vs. Dulles, declared the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution could not have the same meaning now as it did at the time written. Chief Justice Warren stated, "the Amendment must draw its meaning from the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society."

In the 1992 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Planned Parenthood vs. Casey, Justices Sandra Day O'Connor, Souter, and Kennedy stated in the majority opinion, "At the heart of liberty is the right to define one's own concept of existence, of meaning of the universe and the mystery of human life."

We must stop the free willing and illegal "Constitutional Conventions" the judges are holding with every decision that is not based on the founder's original intent but on their intent to apply their Secular Humanist worldview to the law. Judge John Roberts is a threat to the agenda of the secular left.

exmarine
15th September 2005, 09:59
... Judge John Roberts is a threat to the agenda of the secular left.

You won't find many people agreeing with you in the Constitution Party, and I doubt you will find many in the AV either.

Roberts' statements before the Committee as well as his past statements indicate to me and many other discerning individuals that Roberts is no constructionist and he is not pro-life. He called Roe "settled precedent" that deserves "respect". Huh? A ruling (notice I didn't say law) that sanctions murder deserves "respect"?? No pro-life person could possibly take such a view.

And no constructionist could possibly place so much emphasis on stare decisis (precedent) while ignoring the fact that a law is UNCONSTITUTIONAL and therefore unlawful.

And I find it quite odd that so-called conservatives are virtually ignoring that fact that Roberts was involved in the Romer vs. Evans case which was a big victory for special rights for homosexuals. Would a Christian involve himself in such a case?

Many Christians need to stop listening to the talking heads like Rush and Hannity and Robertson, and start reading the Constitution and reading the bible.

GovernmentIsDangerous
15th September 2005, 04:51
Roberts will be a pro-globalist puppet, just like the man that appointed him.

bsheck
15th September 2005, 06:08
Maybe if you're an Episcopalian it'll be a victory.

rcdavis
29th September 2005, 06:45
You won't find many people agreeing with you in the Constitution Party, and I doubt you will find many in the AV either.


Hey ExM,

I should have noted that the opinions expressed by Brannon are not mine. I would hold the majority opinion in the CP and AV that this press release is shameful and banal.

I posted it to provide our most excellent radio hosts more cannon fodder. I just love how JLof takes down "vain imaginations" with the speed and devistation of a Bruce Lee attack. :)


-Ricardo4TCP

LAmama
2nd October 2005, 03:52
Oh, okay, I think I see. So this thread was intended to be an "Arghh! from the Abyss?"

I read the rule that states this forum is not a place to personally blog, but am hoping that it would be within reason to submit within this current thread what I wrote about Madeleine Cosman who I would like to see replace Sandra Day O'Connor. I so appreciate the refreshing take that The Constitution party or the administrators of this board have taken regarding the Roberts confirmation. Yours is a voice of sanity and reason in a land gone lunatic.

I wrote the following about Madeleine Cosman, the woman I would like to see replace Sandra Day O'Connor:

Madeleine to Replace Sandra Day
Sept. 15, 2005
http://americanawakening.blogspot.com/

I only found out about Madeleine Cosman a few weeks ago but am convinced she would be a brilliant choice to replace Sandra Day O'Connor. Madeleine appears to be a real, live conservative whose background is MEDICAL law! Imagine, with the current debate over medicine, how relevant a real conservative on the bench would be, whose specialty is Medical law!

Madeleine is also staunchly against lawlessness, including the rampant lawlessness assaulting our country via the handling of illegal immigration by our elected officials. Her biography is intriguing, her speaking ability superb. Madeleine seems to be a fascinating woman, particularly in that she is not a mainstream figure at this point. Mysteriously elegant is how I would describe Madeleine Cosman based in part on some of the books she has written.

Unlike Judge Roberts, Madeleine Cosman would be a justice that we could learn and understand a great deal about before seating her. Professionally and perhaps even personally -where she's coming from, where she stands on the issues and who she is can be studied and read about on-line. We seem to find something in Madeleine so lacking in the world of politics, the judiciary and even religious circles today - a clear note and a certain sound.

Conservatives could rest easy knowing that beyond shadow of doubt, the President they voted into office appointed at least one, genuine conservative. Madeleine Cosman, being a woman, would be the perfect replacement to Sandra Day O'Connor!

Eaglet
7th October 2005, 12:01
Many Christians need to stop listening to the talking heads like Rush and Hannity and Robertson, and start reading the Constitution and reading the bible.

I wholeheartedly agree.

LAmama
7th October 2005, 12:04
AMEN! I'm hoping at some point our family can be involved with or possibly even host a local, bible & the constitution study group.