Racism, bias, charity makes some rich and famous and they do not want it to end.

Evil will always be present until the end of time because of mankind’s thirst for power, wealth and fame.  Jesus Christ said the poor will always be among you and they will because it is advantage for many in society, especially the wealthiest of the wealthy.  There will always be some in the middle class that will take satisfaction in knowing there are some in society worse off than them. Do not kid yourself there are those at the upper rung of poverty that delight in others being poorer than them.  It all revolves back to their position in society.  If someone is worse off than you then you automatically have a higher position in society. 

It matters not how much money is spent by governments under the pretense of eliminating poverty or other social issues they will never be solved.  The reason being CORRUPTION within government and NGO’S.  Those at the top of these organizations have more interest in their getting more than they are in the ‘HAVE NOTS’ getting more.

God’s Kingdom will never be on earth before Christ returns again due to mankind’s inability to LOVE as God has instructed us to do.  If only we could LOVE as God called us to there would be peace, there would not be starvation, there would be equality, discrimination would not exist, crime would end and paradise would return.  LOVE a simple word and that could be accomplished, but difficult for mankind to do because of our desire for greed, fame and wealth.

It is true  racism is very much alive in America in all sectors of society and it runs rampant among influential black Americans.  It was very much on display in 2013 at the Lincoln Memorial where prominent black activists gathered a few days ahead of the 50th anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr's historic "I have a dream" speech in order to advance their careers by pretending to care about the state of race relations in the nation today. 

Instead of simply using the opportunity to honor the work of his father in a dignified way, King's son, Martin Luther King III, cheapened it by attempting to stir up racial hatred. He said, “The vision preached by my father a half-century ago was that his four little children would no longer live in a nation where they would judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.  However, sadly, the tears of Trayvon Martin’s mother and father remind us that, the color of one’s skin remains a license to profile, to arrest and to even murder with no regard for the content of one’s character,” He used the occasion to pitch for repeal “stand your ground” self-defense laws, which had no bearing on the Martin case.  I believe both of the young thugs were guilty of crimes and brought the disaster upon themselves.  I believe Trayvon Martin was a trouble maker and I believe George Zimmerman was a trouble maker and both deserved long prison terms.

It is my opinion that it is important to note that Martin Luther King Junior’s four little children did grow up to live a life of advantage.  The only real problems they had in life were the ones they created for themselves by fighting over their father estate – GREED!

These black civil rights leaders have become rich and famous by vilifying white people and the American system, claiming blacks are persecuted and discriminated against, and asserting that there is an invisible conspiracy of white supremacists preventing black people from becoming successful. Not everything they do or say is actually racist in any meaningful sense, but they routinely say things that conservatives would be pilloried for had they said them about people of a different race.  The one thing they always neglect to say is that you have a difficult time making it not only in America, but anywhere in the world if you do not know who your father is or where he is.  They do not talk much about the importance of staying in school and the importance of education.  They become irate when you speak of drug dealing and the high number of black men in prison for crime largely due to illegal drugs. 

Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are largely race industry profiteers and poverty pimps and are not sincere. They rally against evils that no longer exist and they ignore the evils that do exist.

These leaders for justice and equality quickly forget and never speak of the black-on-white violence that has become increasingly commonplace in recent years, despite the best efforts of the media, politicians, and left-wing activists to ignore it or deny its existence. America's major urban centers, cities like Chicago and Philadelphia, have been plagued by black race riots in recent years. Few people know about these often deadly melees because they rarely get reported.  The black leaders justify blacks killing policemen because of black thugs having pent up frustration over things in history that happen over 100 years ago.

Where is the outrage from the black leaders for 88-year-old World War II veteran Delbert Belton who was  beaten to death by blacks in Spokane or 23-year-old Australian college student Chris Lane who was shot to death in Oklahoma allegedly by young black males out of boredom or the blacks that killed nurse David Santucci in Memphis or the blacks in Minnesota who beat Ray Widstrand so brutally that he suffered permanent brain damage or the blacks in Missouri that hit a hot dog vendor in the head with a hammer or the two young black men in Georgia who killed 13-month-old Antonio West in front of his mother during an attempted robbery .  Two thugs Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman make the news for years following their incident and still yearly celebrations are held for Trayvon Martin, because the Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson’s of the world keep it in the news in order to keep themselves prominent and wealthy.

Members of  today's civil rights establishment aren't interested in solving or even acknowledging the problems of the black community because they profit so handsomely from them. They see turmoil in black neighborhoods as opportunities to promote change and raise funds. Theses same members of civil rights groups seem blissfully ignorant of the fact that America has come a long way since 1963 when Democratic President John F. Kennedy and congressional Democrats worked together to block civil rights legislation. 

It is as if the civil rights revolution never happened and Jim Crow is still making the lives of black Americans miserable. The unspoken premise of all these self-serving rants is that America somehow owes blacks for past injustices even though most black Americans today weren't even alive in 1963. 

These are the top race baiters in order to advance their personal careers in my opinion and could really care less about the black community:  Al Sharpton, Barack Obama, Michelle Obama, Eric Holder, Oprah Winfrey, James Cone, Martin Luther King III, Cornel West, Louis Farrakhan, Alice Walker, Hillary Clinton and Jesse Jackson.  These public figures for the most part do not suffer any consequences for their racism or their cynical use of race for political purposes. If Martin Luther King were alive today, would he defend these people and everything they do?

Do not get me wrong BIAS is a human condition, and American history is rife with prejudice against groups and individuals because of their race, religion, disability, sexual orientation or other differences. The 20th century saw major progress in outlawing discrimination, and most Americans today support integrated schools and neighborhoods. But stereotypes and unequal treatment persist and are often exploited by hate groups –Black, Latino and White hate groups.  In recent years, the FBI has reported between 7,000 and 8,000 hate crime incidents per year in the United States and many more go unreported. 

All over the country people are fighting hate, standing up to promote tolerance and inclusion.  There are still good people in the United States and the world.  One person, acting from conscience and love, is able to neutralize bigotry. Imagine, what an entire community, working together, could do. Decent people must take action; if we don’t, hate persists.  Sitting home with your virtue does no good.  Apathy will be interpreted as acceptance. 

Hate tears society along racial, ethnic, gender and religious lines. The U.S. Department of Justice warns that hate crimes, more than any other crime, can trigger larger community conflict, civil disturbances and even riots. For all their “patriotic” rhetoric, hate groups are really trying to divide us; their views are fundamentally anti-democratic. True patriots fight hate.  Hate escalates when not addressed and do not kid yourself the Obama, Sharpton’s, Jackson's, Winfrey's, etc., profit from hate and division of the races.  

When hate happens, we are faced with two choices: Do nothing, and let hate go unchallenged. Or do something — rise up, speak up and stand up against hate.  When it happens in your community  call the circle around you, including family, neighbors, co-workers, people in your church, synagogue or civic club. Meet informally and discuss the problem – make it known that you want the Jesse Jacksons and Al Sharpton to stay away.  It is a community problem and can be solved better in the community without outside interference. 

call on local law enforcement officials. Work to create a healthy relationship with local police.  Law enforcement officials can track early warning signs of hate brewing in a community, allowing for a rapid and unified response.  The police are not our enemy as race baiters want us to believe.

Support hate-crime victim in your community, show support.  Let victims know you care.  Surround them with comfort and protection.   Victims of hate crimes feel terribly alone and afraid.  They have been attacked simply for being who they are — their skin color, their ethnicity, their sexual orientation.  Silence amplifies their isolation; it also tacitly condones the act of hate.  Victims need a strong, quick message that they are valued.  Small acts of kindness — a phone call, a letter – can help.

Every act of hatred should be met with an act of love and unity.  Hate must be exposed and denounced.  Denounce hate groups and hate crimes and spread the truth about hate’s threat to a pluralistic society. An informed and unified community is the best defense against hate. Hate purveyors are cowards.  Take hate crimes seriously.

We all grow up with prejudices. Acknowledging them – and working through them  can be a scary and difficult process. It’s also one of the most important steps toward breaking down the walls of silence that allow intolerance to grow. Luckily, we all possess the power to overcome our ignorance and fear, and to influence our children, peers and communities.

Euthanasia - Abortion

I do not understand why society believes abortion and euthanasia is such a dichotomy. Both, involve taking a life.  One is taking your own life and the other is taking the life of another. It seems to me that abortion (taking the life of another) is far worse than voluntary euthanasia, the ending of your own life, when you no longer want to contend with constant physical suffering and your life quality is zero.  Yet, people vote to make abortion legal, the Supreme Court of the United States upholds abortion laws making it legal and society will flock to the streets in masses if legal abortion is ever in danger of being overturned. 

Abortion is taking the life of an innocent person that has no say in the matter.  Voluntary euthanasia is taking your own life and you make the choice.  Yes, I concede non-voluntary euthanasia is wrong just as I believe abortion is wrong.   

People argue voluntary euthanasia will lead to non-voluntary euthanasia.  Abortion of babies in the mother’s womb has not led to killing children outside the womb.  So, how can one argue on that basis one is wrong and the other is okay.  If one is morally or ethically wrong then both are.  I do not hold that it is an issue of morality or ethics when speaking of voluntary euthanasia. 

People who are "pro-life" are generally opposed to anyone taking any life - even their own - for any reason.

But, what is life without quality?  I have diabetes, in the final stage of heart failure, kidney failure, and COPD (lungs failing).  I am in constant pain, I cannot walk five steps without breathing spasms and basically confined to sitting.  To me that is not life!   I have been told by all my doctors my condition cannot be cured, it will never get better, it will get worse and all they can to is try to SLOW the progression.  That is not very comforting to me and I do not know anyone in their right mind that would applaud a doctors effort to prolong their suffering.  Now, I can stop the seventeen plus medications and suffer even more to achieve a solution – I guess.  If it is God’s will I believe I would live with or without the medication. 

Am I a coward, of course I am.  I want to end my life quickly and not have it drag on for days, weeks, months or even years before it happens by removing medication.  I really see no honor in being afraid to die and choosing to be a burden on those around me.  I have cared for two people that suffered for years, my mother and my uncle.  I could not have possibly loved my mother more than I did and I have no regrets for taking care of her, but was it extremely difficult – yes it was!  Did I ever have thoughts that I wished her suffering would end – yes I did and then I would feel guilt for weeks for having such a thought.

I believe before any act of euthanasia may be committed the suffering person must make some kind of assessment of the value of their life with the assistance of medical professionals, mental professionals and legal professionals.  There should be a waiting period involved to guarantee that someone does not wake up one day and decide this is a good day to die.

 The practice of euthanasia is Biblically wrong because it violates the principle that life is given by God. God does not approve of “hands that shed innocent blood” (Proverbs 6:16-17). Life comes from God. It is God’s decision to give life and to take it away (Ecclesiastes 12:7; Job 1:21). In the Bible, shedding innocent blood is called murder (1 John 3:15; Genesis 9:6).  I do not need ten thousand replies telling me what the Bible says about the subject. 

The death of King Saul an example of euthanasia or suicide? (1 Samuel 31:1-6). Saul did not want the Philistines to find him alive, because he knew they would torture him. He asked his armor bearer to kill him. When the armor bearer refused, Saul fell on his own sword and died. Saul committed suicide, but he did it in order to avoid suffering at the hands of his enemy. He murdered himself to prevent suffering prior to it happening and therefore was guilty of sin in my eyes. (Exodus 20:13). 

I have a difficult time relating killing yourself because you do not want to be taken by your enemy and suffering from a physical disease without any hope of ever getting better.  You may say that I am greedy, but I have worked and saved all my life and I have no desire to give all my money to doctors and hospitals and pharmaceutical companies when before I die I could give it to the poor. 

My father worked hard all his life and saved for his retirement and my education .  The last eleven days of his life he beg my mother and I to let him die and stop giving everything he had planned on my mother and I having to doctors when we all knew it was hopeless.  Of course we could not or would not end treatment and in the end we went from being a high middle class family to poverty.  His final hospital bill was 275,000 dollars, a lot of money in 1958.  The experiments like inserting a pigs valve in his heart did not help him and it has not help me now that I suffer as he did.

I know some Christians are thinking not all suffering is bad.  Even though we may not always understand why we suffer, some good can come from it.  The apostle Paul understood this (2 Corinthians 12:7-10). He had a “thorn in the flesh” which he asked God to remove, but he was made to realize it was for his good. Job is also an excellent example of this point (James 5:11).  I would be lying if I said I have not learned from my suffering for I have.  That does not mean I want to continue to suffer.

Do not tell me I do not respect human life.  I have been told when people understand and respect the sanctity of human life, they will not vote to end it.  You want to end it if you respect the life of your loved ones that are also suffering because of you.

I view euthanasia as the end of suffering when there is no hope of ever recovering from the illness and you are in need of life support (mechanical or medicinal) in order to barely hang on to life, it would be beneficial for both the patient and his/her family members to just let them go.  By allowing them to die peacefully, painlessly and quickly.  They will die on their own terms, rather than forcing them to live and let the disease slowly kill them.

I recognize the negatives of euthanasia and that is it could be abused by physicians and others who have the power to use this method of ending life. And more importantly, though the chances of recovery from certain diseases may be minimal, it is a known fact that some overcome this mountainous feat.  That is why I feel strongly only the suffering victim should be able to make the choice.  My niece was advised to remove all life support from my sister because she only had days to live, but my niece refused.  She continued to live three years most of it spent in a hospital and suffering.

Don’t insult me as one person did by saying a teenager that flunks a test or fails to make the football team may be suffering as much as I am and ask me would I say he has the right to end his life because he is suffering.  I will tell you as I told the person who said that to me – “You are a fool”.

I feel obligated to tell Catholic what our church says about euthanasia - So-called “mercy killing” and the efforts of the Hemlock Society and the late Dr. Jack Kevorkian to make euthanasia socially acceptable are condemned by the Church.

God alone should decide when someone leaves this earth — not the patient, doctor, or caretaker. Keeping the dying patient pain-free, comfortable, clean, nourished, and hydrated — and just allowing the natural death process to take its course — is how human beings die with dignity.  In other words if you die a miserable death you die with dignity and God is well pleased – I guess that is how they feel.  Our church always thought it was good for people to suffer. 

When death is thought imminent; the ordinary care owed to a sick person cannot be legitimately interrupted. The use of painkillers to alleviate the sufferings of the dying, even at the risk of shortening their days, can be morally in conformity with human dignity if death is not willed as either an end or a means, but only foreseen and tolerated as inevitable.

In closing, It is always unfair to directly kill an unborn child; the unborn have no say in what happens to them, and whatever interests are placed above theirs are done so in a biased and self-serving way. But this is not true in most cases of physician assisted suicide and voluntary euthanasia: in some cases death really is what the patients desire and what they ask for.  This does not mean that they are right in desiring and asking, nor that it would be right to comply; but it does indicate that the wrongness of euthanasia cannot exclusively be the wrong of unfairness to the person killed. This is a decision I should be able to make for myself – not you make for me.

Judicial justice or vigilante justice - you decide.

The criminal justice system doesn’t always gets things right, and wouldn’t even if all those running it were honest and fair and sometimes it seems few of them are, but the alternative is far worse. Vigilante justice in which the citizens and police officers acts as judge, jury and executioner without given the accused a day in court is dangerous to all of society. You are foolish if you think because you are a law abiding citizens it has nothing to do with you. Road rage is vigilante justice! Today vigilante justice may seem justified by many in society when it comes to drugs, child abuse, elderly abuse, pedophiles and rape, but who is to say vigilante justice will stop with just those illegal acts.

If you think everyone ever accused of a crime is guilty I again say you are foolish. Innocent people can be targeted. Lisa-Jayne Samuels was given a 20 month sentence for making a false rape allegation against Terry Brown. Lisa-Jayne Samuels was a serial rape liar, but initially the police took her claim seriously. Mr. Brown was attacked by a vigilante mob who stabbed him. Even worse, his pregnant fiancée tripped and fell during a confrontation and suffered a miscarriage. The man was innocent and eventually Lisa-Jayne Samuels was charged for filing false charges and convicted.

American vigilantism originally came about as a frontier response to the threat and reality of crime. The first settlers who moved to the Deep South and the Old West were not protected by a criminal justice system. There were no law enforcement agencies, no regularly scheduled court sessions, no nearby jails or prisons, and there was a vast open spaces to which offenders could escape from their victims. In the absence of any legal system victims and their allies felt compelled to track down and round up outlaws and "take the law into their own hands.”  That is not the case today.

People claim that the justice system today is only for the wealthy. Those people who claim that and support vigilantism need to study history and see who the vigilantes punished and even killed. They did not go after the wealthy they went after the lower class people and marginalized people.  

Vigilantism usually is the results of the government not doing its job and the citizens becoming frustrated. Instead of correcting the problems in government it is easier for some in society to go after the one they deem the ‘criminal’. Anyone and I mean anyone who supports vigilantism is breaking the law.

To legitimize their lawless deeds, vigilantes argued that their ends justified their means. They claim they are trying to preserve traditions, enforce moral codes, and further respect for authority. Their biggest claim is that they are trying to protect law-abiding citizens from internal and external evil forces.

More concerned with suppressing disruptive behavior than with respecting due process some elected officials approve of vigilantism.  It is simple, direct, swift, certain and those that are looking for a so called quick fix will support vigilantism. They will turn a blind eye to all the evils of vigilantism.

The Ku Klux Klan in the United States was a vigilante group. Originally they went after husbands that were abusive or neglecting their families, but they then started going after Black people, Jews, Catholics and those that were said not to have paid a debt.  Black Life’s Matter Organization in the United States is a vigilante group.

If you support vigilantism then why do you not support revenge killings, drive-by shootings, turf battles between rival drug-selling groups, and mob hits among warring syndicates. These are all a type of vigilantism. Teenagers act as vigilantes when they attack homeless vagrants and drive them away or set them on fire. Police Officers themselves engage in police vigilantism if they beat a suspect on the street, during the ride to the police station, or in its basement, in order to make sure the perpetrator is punished before being released with a mere "slap on the wrist" by the "revolving door" of an lenient justice system. When society ignores vigilantism police officers feel more empowered to carry out their street justice (vigilantism).

 Some in The right-to-life movement—convinced that abortion constitutes murder—assassinated doctors who legally terminated pregnancies or bombed the clinics where these medical procedures are performed (vigilantism). White supremacist Neo-Nazi groups randomly attacked complete strangers because of their race or religion because they are seeking vigilante justice. Militia groups are vigilantes. They set up their own "common law courts."

Support any type of vigilantism and I will venture to say one day it will come back to haunt you. You will find yourself on the other side of the fence and then you will oppose curb justice or vigilantism.  When you have a government that is endorsing vigilantism there is nothing that will stop it and while you fight drug addicts and pusher today in a few years you will be fighting vigilantes. This should be of grave concern for those that feared the regime of Marcos in the Philippines.

The Philippines in 1915 earned the dubious distinction of having the worst record of 87 countries in bringing wrongdoers to justice, according to a study of countries plagued by impunity. Is this the drug pusher or drug addicts fault? I do not think corruption in the Philippines is the cause of impunity, but it is the results of impunity. If you believe you are not going to be caught or punished for a crime you are more likely to commit a crime. Yes, corruption contributes to impunity, but it is not the cause. A failed justice system is the root cause of impunity. I believe  countries that do not provide opportunities for economic development also fail to reduce the unequal access to security and justice for their citizens.

Most courts in the Philippines have over one thousand cases on their dockets – an impossible task. Is that the fault of drug users and drug pushers? The Justice Department claims there are not enough courts. Is that the fault of drug users and drug pushers? A lot of the courts that are established do not have judges to staff them. Is that the drug users and drug pushers fault? judges appointed to cases take longer than the time limitation of three months fixed by the Constitution for them to decide a case some cases go on for years. Is that the drug user or drug pushers fault? Do the cases move at a snail pace because there are no jury system in the Philippines and all cases are decided by a judge? If that is the case is that the fault of a drug user or drug pusher?  Maybe vigilantism looks good now, but will it really solve the problems that plagues Philippine justice?   I do not think so.

As of August 3, 2016 Police figures show that 402 drug SUSPECTS have been killed since the end of June. That figure does not include those slain by suspected vigilantes. Two hundred eleven more men are known to have been killed by vigilantes. These being killed are not rich people they are the poor in Philippine society. They are not the wealthy Drug Lords - many of them are a part of government. 565,805 have turned themselves in and promised to straighten out their lives and released. Drug addiction is not something you can cure with a promise and the Philippine government does not have the facilities or the funds to provide rehabilitation for these men. What has happen when these men turned themselves in they put a target on their backs to be killed by vigilantes.

Innocent until proven guilty - justice – equal treatment for all - moral legitimacy are the rights guaranteed to the people living under a democratic government and without those rights they might as well be living under a dictator or monarch.  Freedom is a slippery hill to climb and when you start sliding backwards you do not usually stop until you have lost all your freedom. 

Not everything happens for a reason!

God has given human beings “dominion” on earth.  We have the capacity to make our own decisions. The biblical story is in many ways the story of us misusing our freedom, turning away from God, practicing the very things God has told us not to and then God working to redeem, restore and heal the mess we’ve made of things.

If everything happens for a reason as some Christian leaders teach and a lot of Christians believe then we must assume that God is responsible for Muslim Islamic Terrorism in order to accomplish some purpose.  The terrorist certainly believe they have God’s blessings.  But our attempts to defeat them make it clear that we believe they are evil and must be stopped. We certainly do not believe God has blessed them or is using them for His purpose.

When we make God responsible for every bad decision, every act of wrongdoing, every disease, every inhumane thing we humans do to one another we remove the responsibility from ourselves and put it on God. If you believe everything that happens has a reason then you must believe God is responsible for every bad thing that happens on earth. You have removed the possibility of our ‘free will’ which scripture makes clear God gave us.

I have not only heard Christians tell others, but I have had them tell me, God must have a reason for inflicting suffering on you. I did not find that very comforting and I am sure other suffering people did either. If that is true then how are we supposed to pray to a God for help if you believe the same God caused your problem?

I do not think God is the originator of pain and problems. I really think God is saddened by the wrong decision we make and when we choose to hurt others.

On April 15, 2013, James Costello was cheering on a friend near the finish line at the Boston Marathon when the bombs exploded, severely burning his arms and legs and sending shrapnel into his flesh. During the months of surgery and rehabilitation that followed, Mr. Costello developed a relationship with one of his nurses, Krista D’Agostino, and they soon became engaged. Mr. Costello posted a picture of the ring on Facebook. “I now realize why I was involved in the tragedy,” he wrote. “It was to meet my best friend, and the love of my life.” What about those that lost their lives and their families that only felt grieve after? I think they would have a hard time accepting God had a reason for inflicting such pain on them and their loved one. The only reason for the Boston bombing was evil men made evil decisions. It is wonderful if something great came as the result of it to some people, but God did not have a hand in the bombing.

I guess we associate God having a purpose for all things because we believe in a God that plans for us, sends us messages, rewards the good and punishes the bad. Christians may be surprised that atheists also believe things happen for a reason because they believe in ‘fate’.  They believe there is an order to life that determines how events turn out.

I think people in general have a need to find meaning in life, particular bad things that happen to them. Some people find it reassuring to think that there really are no accidents to the things that happen to us, including the most terrible of events.  We have a need to make sense of events and situations. It helps us figure out why people behave as they do and respond appropriately. But it can lead us into error when we try to find purpose to everything that happens to us. Things on earth just don’t naturally work out so that all people get what they deserve. Some things just happen. There’s no rhyme or reason to them. They just happen.

But, wait a minute somethings do happen for a reason! When you got that new job you were hoping for, that happened for a reason — you applied for it, you interviewed well, and the company thought you were the best candidate for the job. When you failed that test you needed to pass in order to maintain your G.P.A. and keep your scholarship, that too happened for a reason — you spent too much time on Facebook, going out with friends and catching up on your favorite shows when you should have been studying. The time that house on the news got hit by lightning and burned to the ground that happened for a reason — the roof of the house was the closest contact point for the bolt of lightning, and the massive charge of electricity caused the wood the house was built with to catch on fire. When that young mother and her child were hit by a drunk driver and died tragically in a car accident, that also happened for a reason — someone had too much to drink, and without concern for anyone else’s well-being, they got behind the wheel of their car, wherein their impaired judgment and slowed response time resulted in them running a red light and taking the life of a mother and her child. They happened, and there was a reason but that reason was not God.

If you think everything happens for a reason and it is divine then you must believe God delights in causing our suffering. You are saying that God is the sort of god who sends drunk drivers to kill, who burns down people’s homes and afflicts random people with horrendous diseases, like cancer. If God had a hand in intentionally causing these things to occur, then God is not the God of the Gospels.

God does enact judgment, but God is not to be blame for every terrible thing that happens in life. The truth is we live in a broken world and terrible, meaningless things happen. Not because God wants them to happen, but because our decisions have consequences and because nature cannot be tamed. God is not a villain.

Stop putting your friends through hell every time they suffer by tormenting them with the words “Everything happens for a reason.” there will come a day when every tear will be wiped away and there will be no more death or crying or mourning or pain. But it is not going to happen on this earth before Christ comes again.

But until that day comes, our testimony to that future reality is not found in trying to attach meaning to the meaningless. Our testimony, and our gift of grace to those to suffer, will be found in our willingness to suffer with them, to walk with them through the valley of the shadow of death so that they know they are not alone. 

Obama persecutes Christians with his rhetoric and actions!

Obama persecutes Christians with his rhetoric and actions

If you do not think Obama persecutes Christians then consider the following items. In a legal argument formally presented in federal court in the case of Hobby Lobby v. Kathleen Sebelius, the Obama administration claimed that the First Amendment—which expressly denies the government the authority to prohibit the “free exercise” of religion—nonetheless allows it to force Christians to directly violate their religious beliefs even on a matter that involves the life and death of innocent human beings. President Barack Obama commented at the Easter Prayer Breakfast that some Christians are acting "less-than-loving". He cannot say the words “Islamic Terrorist”, but he has no problem being critical of Christianity. Obama at the National Prayer Breakfast compared Islamic terrorism to the Christian Crusades, but fail to mention that Muslims had their own crusades in history. Obama has failed to bring attention to Christian persecution at the hands of the Islamic State. Last year, 2015, was the worse year in modern history for the persecution of Christians. In 2015 over 7000 Christians were murdered simply because they were Christians at the hands of terrorist who share the same Islamic faith. In 2015 over 2400 churches were destroyed simply because they were Christian Churches at the hands of terrorist who share the same Islamic faith.

It is obvious that Obama has been more critical of Christians than Muslims. Why is Obama afraid of Christianity? Is Obama Muslim, Christian or neither? His actions and words lead me to think he is definitely more Muslim than Christian. If he was truly Christian he could accept people who follow the Islamic faith, pray for them, love them, help them, but like me decry in a loud voice those within the Islamic faith that practice horrible, horrendous deeds in the name of God and Islam.  He could call them for what they really are “Islamic Terrorist”.

Obama has a very strange definition of freedom of religion. His definition is not only strange to me it is foreign to me. He believes in freedom of religion as long as you agree with him, but if you disagree with him then he wants to bring all the powers of government against you. Persecution of Christians in the Middle East has gotten worse and spread within America because Obama is sympathetic to Islamic terrorist.

Obama’s views in my opinion are the results of having spent time in Indonesia growing up under the influence of his father and stepfather, both of whom were Muslim. His Christian belief came only because it made it easier for him to advance in the American society and the arena of American politics. His frame of reference is shaped by Islam not Christianity because of his youth. I must be honest and state I personally do not believe Obama believes in anything, but himself.

What do you call it when 12 Christian men are drowned at sea by Muslim men for praying to Jesus? I call it religious persecution, but Obama and Renzi (Italy) say it was not a problem or a clash between religious people of different religion it was just a onetime event that happen among angry men." While the prime minister of Italy and Obama plunged their heads into the sand the Italian authorities arrested and charged the Muslim migrants with "multiple aggravated murders motivated by religious hate.” Obama stood next to Reni and did not appear to be outraged at all by the incident. Obama’s mumblings about the atrocities visited upon Christians (usually following a public outcry) are few and far between.

You still believe Obama bears no responsibility for Christian persecution around the world - a week and a half after Obama's National Prayer Breakfast speech, 21 Coptic Christians were beheaded for being "people of the cross." They died with dignity as they called out to their God, while the cowardly murderers masked their faces.

Freedom of religion to Muslim Terrorist means - the Christian community convert to Islam or pay a tax for being Christian. Obama needs to talk more about the “Crusades”, but include the modern day “Crusades” of the Muslim Terrorist who all share the same Islamic faith and supposedly follow the same leader “Mohammad”. 

*POLITICAL NOTE: The pendulum of history swings both ways - with Obama it swung to the far left and with President Ted Cruz it will swing to the far right - we need for the pendulum to stay in the middle.

Do not risk committing murder!

Yemen, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, North Korea, Libya, Syria, Tunisia, Saudi Arabia, China, Sudan and the United States have something in common. They are all countries that kill their own people. Every country mentioned currently allows its citizens to be sentenced to death.

I cannot speak for the other countries, but in the United States we say we have the death penalty to deter, and ultimately reduce, crime, but does it really work. There is no evidence suggesting that increasing executions leads to a reduction in crime. In fact, as executions increased in the late '80s, the number of crime rose along with them. Similarly, both the number of crimes and the number of executions have decreased in the past decade. If anything, the evidence concludes that increasing executions might actually correlate with higher crime. It leads you to ask does the death penalty accomplish anything other than death.

Unintended consequences can come with any policy and unintended consequences can come with the death penalty that cannot be undone. Carlos DE Luna, an alleged murderer executed by the state of Texas in 1989 is one of many that were executed only to find out later they were most likely innocent. After his execution substantial evidence was discovered that undermines his conviction.

Texas convicted and executed DE Luna despite the fact that the police and prosecutors knew or should have known that the victim was murdered by a man named Carlos Hernandez, a violent criminal who looked almost exactly like DE Luna. It was common knowledge on the streets of Corpus Christi in 1980 that Carlos Gonzalez Hernandez killed Wanda Lopez and not Carlos DE Luna.

DE Luna had a court appointed attorney that had no criminal experience and not one piece of solid evidence was presented in court against DE Luna. After the execution the local newspaper got a copy of the court transcript and it was discovered that there were ten errors in the trial that would have demanded a new trial. Carlos Gonzalez Hernandez the real murderer died in prison, in 1999, boasting to the end that he had killed Wanda Lopez and allowed another man to take the fall for it.

What happen in the DE Luna trial has happen with other trials and it happens because the criminal justice system decides that the accused criminal is bad enough to be executed without a remotely fair process. The community is fine with the result. The media doesn’t care until it is too late. The DE Luna case and about six others cases that I know of in the United States prove that innocent people have been executed in the United States.

Ex-Governor Rick Perry of Texas criticized the Syrian government for threatening the safety of its own people. The next month, he bragged that he had authorized 234 executions, the most of any governor in history.

At least 4.1% of all defendants sentenced to death in the US in the modern era are thought to have been innocent, according to the first major study to attempt to calculate how often states get it wrong. More than 8000 have been executed in the United States since 1970. Every time we execute someone, there is a risk of executing an innocent person. The risk may be small, but it’s unacceptable.

Some 2,675 people were taken off death row after doubts about their convictions were raised between 1973 and 2004. But, they were then put on new sentences, usually life without parole which means they will almost certainly die in prison. Prosecutors are not anxious to allow new trials even when these errors are pointed out because it is an embarrassment to them to be proved wrong.

You would think when a prisoner is removed from death row that it would be a good thing and in a way it is, but that does not tell the whole story. Once a prisoner is taken off death row and put in general population they no long have the best efforts of the judicial system available to them since that is reserved for prisoners facing execution.

Hundreds of DNA exonerations reveal that murder cases are often riddled with problems: mistaken eyewitnesses, bad lawyers, shoddy forensics, unreliable jailhouse snitches, coerced confessions, and more. DNA evidence exists in only 5-10% of criminal cases.

The FBI announced that experts exaggerated the value of hair analysis in hundreds of cases, 32 of which resulted in a death sentence. Defendants in 9 of those cases have been executed. Finger prints, bite marks, ballistics, and fire pattern analyses have also come under scrutiny.

In cases where DNA evidence is available, courts can block access to testing, even when it could exonerate someone. Furthermore, scientific evidence is only as good as the people testing it. Crime labs from Baltimore to Oklahoma City have come under fire for errors and even fraud in their forensics.

An independent review of the Houston police crime lab found serious problems with DNA and blood-evidence analysis in dozens of criminal cases from 1987 to 2002, including three death penalty cases. 2,700 cases were analyzed by the lab's six forensic departments during that time and 1,100 cases have been reviewed. Nearly 40 percent of the DNA cases and 23 percent of the blood evidence cases were found to have had major problems. The same problem arose in the Houston police Crime lab in 2006.

Ray Krone was sentenced to death in Arizona for rape and murder, even though DNA found on the victim wasn’t his. The state argued against having the DNA submitted to the database since the jury convicted him even without physical evidence. A decade later, a crime lab worker ran the DNA through the database on his own, without a court order, and found the person who actually committed the crime.

The risk of executing an innocent person is not limited to the cases where court appointed lawyers sleep through trials. Despite the best efforts of police, prosecutors, judges, juries, witnesses, and defense attorneys, mistakes can and will happen. In a capital case, even one small mistake can be deadly.

Frank Lee Smith was sentenced to death in Florida on the testimony of a single witness. No physical evidence tied him to the crime. Four years later, the same witness saw a photo of a different man and realized she had made a mistake. DNA tests later confirmed that Smith was innocent, but it was too late. He had died of pancreatic cancer in prison.

Troy Davis was executed in Georgia in 2011 for the murder of police officer Mark Allen McPhail. No physical evidence ever tied him to the crime. His conviction was based on the testimony of nine witnesses – seven of whom later recanted or changed their testimony. Of the two who kept their testimony, one has long been suspected of committing the murder himself.

When a life is on the line, one mistake is one too many. Can we afford the risk? The Death Penalty should be abolished by the Supreme Court in the United States immediately and replaced with life in prison without the possibility of parole. If a mistake is made then it can be corrected.

Hillary Clinton said that while the death penalty needs to be limited and deserves a "hard look," she does not want to abolish capital punishment. Clinton told an audience at St. Anselm College in New Hampshire that the punishment is "too frequently applied and very unfortunately often times in a discriminatory way," but that it should not be gotten rid of altogether. Huma Abedin, Hillary Clinton’s longtime aide said, her boss is “often confused” After hearing her comments on the death penalty I believe it.