86-year-old Catholic priest murdered by Islamic State terrorist in northern France

Democrats think that the real threat to America is not radical Islamic terrorism
Democrats think that the real threat to America is not radical Islamic terrorism

The Stream reports on a horrific story from France:

A priest was killed in a hostage situation at a Catholic church in Normandy, France on Tuesday. The terrorist attack, which seriously wounded at least one other person, was done in the name of ISIS, according to French President Francois Hollande.

The two men cut 84-year-old Rev. Jacques Hamel’s throat after shouting “Daesh,” another name for ISIS. The Telegraph reported that five people were taken hostage during morning Mass in the town of Saint-Etienne-du-Rouvray. Two churchgoers and two nuns were taken hostage and one is seriously wounded.

Police shot the two men as they left the building, according to The Wall Street Journal. The Islamic State said the attack was made by two of its “soldiers.” Daily Express reported that one of the attackers was a convicted terrorist known to French authorities. The man was required to wear an electronic bracelet.

Hollande called the attack a “cowardly assassination,” CNN reported. “Daesh has declared war on us,” Hollande said. “We have to win that war.”

What is interesting about this is that it is following a continuous stream of attacks by Islamic terrorists and refugees in various countries. The Democrat National Convention is going on right now, maybe they are talking about the threat of radical Islam?

The Daily Wire can answer that:

While Democrats spent the night jabbering about abortion and $15 minimum wage and climate change, jihadists stormed a church in Saint-Etienne-du-Rouvray in Normandy, France, and proceeded to behead an 86-year-old priest while shouting “Jesus Lives!”

Just joking. They were yelling “Allahu Akhbar.” But you guessed that already.

This is the fifth jihadist attack in Europe in 11 days.

So, how many times did Democrats mention ISIS last night and yesterday?

Zero.

That’s right – 61 speakers, zero mentions of ISIS. But the Democrats did find time to put an illegal immigrant on stage, as well as an irritating comedic actress who uses her spare time auctioning sanitary napkins. They found time to take down “offensive” Mississippi state flags and wave Palestinian ones on the floor of the convention. They found time for another actress who claimed that the “border crossed” her family, and a video from J.J. Abrams about that Queen of Mystery and Light, Hillary Clinton.

The Democrats know their priorities. And defeating ISIS isn’t one of them.

[…]Republicans worry about terrorism and crime, Democrats worry about whether men who think they’re women can go pee-pee next to the ladies.

If you’re watching the coverage of the Democrat convention, the media is busy fawning over the speeches. But the speeches don’t address any of the real problems that we are facing. It’s just the liberal elites preening themselves about how generous they are with other people’s money. The real problems like crime and terrorism are completely ignored. It takes a certain amount of intellectual capacity to be able to apprehend reality as it is in order to do a job. Democrats confuse their own felt needs with reality, and so prefer an illusion in which they can congratulate themselves for being better than others without having to actually solve any real problems by their own effort. Calling evil “good” feels good to a Democrat, it wins applause for Democrats. Democrats think: “who cares if a few innocent people have to suffer or die?” That’s how Democrats think.

Cambridge University professor Simon Gathercole lectures on geography in the Bible

BeThinking posted a new lecture featuring Dr. Simon Gathercole.

Here’s the speaker bio:

Dr Simon Gathercole is Senior Lecturer in New Testament Studies and Fellow of Fitzwilliam College, at the University of Cambridge. He is particularly fascinated by the connections between the New Testament and its contemporary literature.

Summary:

Simon Gathercole shows how the geographical information in the New Testament Gospels demonstrates their historical reliability and their basis in eyewitness sources. The illustrated lecture lasts about 60 minutes and is followed by about 20 minutes of Q&A.

BeThinking has a PDF containing all the slides used in the lecture.

The lecture is here:

Topics:

  • Detailed geography is difficult to fake, especially when it is far into the past
  • Bible authors would have to rely on eyewitness testimony if they wanted to get geographic details right
  • You can even cross-reference the geographic details mentioned in the New Testament with extra-Biblical sources of that time
  • Cities mentioned in the Bible are mentioned in other sources
  • Locations that are mentioned in Josephus, a Jewish historian
  • Locations that are mentioned in the Rabbis
  • 22 of 27 places mentioned in the gospels are attested
  • If you compare the gospels with Josephus they are as good

Example slide – he shows where these cities in orange are mentioned outside the Bible:

At the end of the lecture 22 out of 27 cities are attested in other sources
At the end of the lecture 22 out of 27 cities are attested in other sources

This lecture caught my eye because it was all about connecting the Bible to evidence outside the Bible. I like evidence. You should give it a listen.

Leaked DNC e-mails show that Democrat primary was rigged to favor Clinton

Hillary Clinton look bored about the deaths of 4 Americans who asked for her help
Hillary Clinton look bored about the deaths of 4 Americans who asked for her help

The radically leftist Washington Post posted an article that explained the big story on Monday.

Excerpt:

Thousands of leaked emails have sealed the fate of Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s uneven five-plus-year tenure as DNC chair.

Wasserman Schultz’s resignation announcement Sunday afternoon comes as a bad situation just keeps getting worse — and appears as though it might continue to do so. That’s because WikiLeaks has so far released nearly 20,000 emails, new details are still being discovered, and there is still the prospect of additional, damaging emails coming to light.

Many of the most damaging emails suggest the committee was actively trying to undermine Bernie Sanders’s presidential campaign. Basically all of these examples came late in the primary — after Hillary Clinton was clearly headed for victory — but they belie the national party committee’s stated neutrality in the race even at that late stage.

One of the biggest revelations from these e-mails was how the DNC, which is supposed to be fair to all the candidates running, basically threw the primary for Hillary Clinton – it was rigged that she would win the primary, and the DNC was actively opposing Sanders at every step.

The NY Post explains:

Democratic Party bigwigs enlisted prominent media outlets to slant coverage to boost Hillary Clinton and sandbag Bernie Sanders, according to some of the 19,000 e-mails hacked from the Democratic National Committee’s servers and posted to WikiLeaks.

The messages reveal behind-the-scenes meetings and off-the-record exchanges between DNC operatives and staffers at newspapers, networks and news Web sites, including The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, CNN, MSNBC, Politico and RealClearPolitics.

In one case, an investigative reporter at Politico gave DNC officials a sneak peek at an article about Clinton’s state-party fund-raising — before his editor even saw the piece.

“Per agreement . . . any thoughts appreciated,” wrote Politico’s Ken Vogel to the DNC’s national press secretary, Mark Paustenbach, on April 30.

“Vogel gave me his story ahead of time/before it goes to his editors as long as I didn’t share it,” Paustenbach told his boss, communications director Luis Miranda.

The communication officials cherry-picked reporters.

“We [have] been working him for weeks in general on writing up something positive,” Miranda wrote of The Washington Post’s Greg Sargent on May 20. “We think he’d play ball.”

But, there were other big surprises, like this one reported by the Daily Caller about the Democrat party’s plans to reward big donors with cushy federal appointments funded by taxpayer dollars.

Excerpt:

Democratic National Committee documents recently released by WikiLeaks include spreadsheets and emails that appear to show party officials planning which donors and prominent fundraisers to provide with appointments to federal boards and commissions.

The documents, which were circulated among top DNC officials in April, could raise legal questions for the party, says Ken Boehm, the chairman of the National Legal and Policy Center, a government watchdog group.

“The disclosed DNC emails sure look like the potential Clinton Administration has intertwined the appointments to federal government boards and commissions with the political and fund raising operations of the Democratic Party,” Boehm told The Daily Caller.

“That is unethical, if not illegal.”

[…]President Obama has been criticized for appointing dozens of top fundraisers — called “bundlers” in the political fundraising realm — to ambassadorships and other cushy federal positions.

Well, yes. That’s no surprise to anyone who has followed his many scandals, especially the green energy subsidies given to his top bundlers.

I guess it’s no surprise that 5 seconds that the DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, after receiving news that she wsa being released, immediately signed up with the Clinton campaign. She might as well have been working for them all along, for all the good the DNC did Bernie Sanders.

National Press Secretary of Human Rights Campaign to speak at Democrat convention

Hillary Clinton and her ally, the Human Rights Campaign
Hillary Clinton and her ally, the Human Rights Campaign

If I had to pick the organization that used the most intolerant coercion against Christians, I’d pick the Human Rights Campaign.

Well, guess who Hillary invited to speak at her convention?

The Hill reports:

The national press secretary for the Human Rights Campaign Foundation will speak at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia this week, marking the first time an openly transgender person will address a major party’s convention.

Hillary Clinton won’t be the only woman to make history this Thursday. When Sarah McBride takes the stage, she will become the first transgender person to speak at a national Democratic or Republican convention,” Human Rights Campaign President Chad Griffin said in a statement on Sunday.

“Sarah’s inclusion in Thursday’s program is a significant milestone for our community, and it sends a strong message that transgender people and their voices matter.”

Sarah McBride was invited to speak at the convention by the Congressional LGBT Equality Caucus.

[…]”I’m so proud to stand with the LGBT Caucus and speak out in support of Hillary Clinton, because we know she stands with us.”

Griffin, who will also speak at the convention, said the event will show a clear contrast between the Democratic and Republican tickets.

“I’m also honored to address a national convention where LGBTQ advocates will play such an integral and historic role,” he said.

“Next week’s Democratic National Convention will underscore the stark contrast between Hillary Clinton and Tim Kaine’s vision for a more equal America, and [Republican presidential nominee]Donald Trump and Mike Pence’s agenda of hate and division.”

The Human Rights Campaign endorsed Clinton, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, in January.

You might remember that the Human Rights Campaign has been featured on this blog a number of times, because they are the leading group seeking to silence, coerce and otherwise suppress Judeo-Christian values in the public square.

Let’s review the history the Human Rights Campaign to discover their agenda from actual actions:

And so on.

Many large corporations are on board with the Human Rights Campaign agenda of anti-Christian bigotry.

Here are their Platinum corporate partners:

Human Rights Campaign Platinum Partners
Human Rights Campaign Platinum Partners

How far would the Human Rights Campaign go to achieve their goal of stamping out any disagreement with their morality? We’re going to find out, because lots of Democrats who falsely claim to be Christians keep voting for the Democrat Party.

Related posts

Is Hillary Clinton’s VP pick of Tim Kaine conservative or liberal?

Hillary Clinton and Planned Parenthood
Hillary Clinton and Planned Parenthood

First, lets see where he stands on social issues, then we’ll go to fiscal issues.

Life News reports:

Abortion activist Hillary Clinton today tapped pro-abortion Virginia Senator Tim Kaine has her vice-presidential running mate.

The Virginia politician is on record as trying to have it both ways — saying he is both a “traditional Catholic” and a strong supporter of abortion. Kaine has a pro-abortion record and the potential Clinton running mate is not following anyone. As LifeNews previously reported, Kaine said he is a “strong supporter of Roe v. Wade”  despite supposedly being a “traditional Catholic.”

[…]Leading pro-life groups know Kaine is pro-abortion.

“Like Hillary Clinton, Sen. Tim Kaine supports the current policy of abortion on demand,” said Carol Tobias, president of National Right to Life. “Like Hillary Clinton, Sen. Kaine is so extreme on abortion he opposes even the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, legislation to protect unborn children from abortion after 20 weeks, when they are capable of feeling excruciating pain during dismemberment or other late abortion methods.”

As a U.S. senator, Kaine has voted against the pro-life position every chance he got. Sen. Kaine voted to allow government funding of abortion providers, and he voted against legislation to require an abortionist to notify at least one parent before performing an abortion on a minor girl from another state.

Kaine took his most extreme pro-abortion action yet with his recent co-sponsorship of the so-called “Women’s Health Protection Act” (S.217), known to pro-lifers as the “Abortion Without Limits Until Birth Act.” This bill would nullify nearly all existing state and federal limitations on regulation of abortion, and prohibit states from enacting meaningful pro-life laws in the future. This revamped version of the long-stalled “Freedom of Choice Act” is a priority of the pro-abortion forces in Washington, D.C.

“Sen. Kaine is good at hiding behind his Catholic background – but no one should be fooled,” Tobias said. “His record, and his openly declared legislative goals, are as pro-abortion as they come.”

[…][Kain says] “So for example, Monday, the Supreme Court’s likely to decide a really important case about abortion rights. Which is many states including Virginia have tried to basically take out the constitutional right that gives women the ability to choose by putting these onerous regulations on clinics, health clinics where abortions are provided. We fought those off in Virginia when I was governor because you have to let people make their own moral judgments.”Kaine is a longtime abortion advocate who has sought to appear moderate on abortion. But he was pro-abortion enough for Democrats for Life to yank its endorsement of him. His spokesman and website are now identifying him as a pro-choice Democrat.

Kaine says on his own web site that he doesn’t want to put any limits on the Roe v. Wade decision that allowed virtually unlimited abortions throughout pregnancy for any reason and has resulted in 55 million abortions.

“I strongly support the right of women to make their own health and reproductive decisions and, for that reason, will oppose efforts to weaken or subvert the basic holding of Roe v. Wade,” Kaine says, adding that he doesn’t support “criminalizing women’s reproductive decisions.”

“Tim Kaine will do nothing more than rubberstamp President Obama’s expanding abortion agenda,” said Marjorie Dannenfelser, President of the Susan B. Anthony List in 2012 when Kaine was running for the Senate.

Kaine avoided directly giving his stance on abortion, in order to appear more conservative. However, his refusal to defend life in his political career tells the voters that Kaine supports abortion.

Whenever you are trying to evaluate whether a candidate is conservative or liberal, it’s best to use rating systems from groups like Heritage Action or the American Conservative Union.

Here is his rating from Heritage Action, which is part of the Heritage Foundation:

Tim Kaine's radical leftist voting record
Tim Kaine’s radical leftist voting record

He’s to the left of the average Democrat in the very liberal U.S. Senate.  It you check the Heritage Action page, it actually shows all of his votes and explains why he got the 2% rating.

The American Conservative Union has an article discussing the voting record of Clinton, Sanders, Warren, Obama and Kaine.

They write:

“Another interesting fact in our analysis is the stark reminder that Sec. Hillary Clinton is no moderate.   While many in the media portray her as more centrist than self-described Socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) or fringe activist Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Clinton’s lifetime rating of 8.13% is within two percentage points from those extremists.  And shockingly, all three of these presidential hopefuls are even more liberal than President Barack Obama’s Lifetime Rating of 10% from when he served in the U.S. Senate.  If America wants a third Obama term, three candidates will not disappoint.

“Finally, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) is the only Member of Congress with a 0% ACU Lifetime Rating. Kaine is not the moderate Democrat that he likes to pretend he is.  We can only conclude that the former Democratic National Committee Chairman plans to serve one-term representing the Commonwealth of Virginia before he returns to lead the fringe portion of the liberal activist base.”

Finally, here is Citizens Against Government Waste:

The Council for Citizens Against Government Waste (CCAGW) today released its congressional rating of the presumptive Democratic Vice Presidential nominee, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.).

Sen. Kaine has served in the U.S. Senate since 2013. He holds a lifetime CCAGW rating of 7 percent, making him one of the Senate’s most “hostile” members toward taxpayers. In 2014, Sen. Kaine earned a dismal zero percent rating. CCAGW’s Congressional Ratings, which have been issued annually since 1990, identify which members of Congress voted to protect taxpayers and which voted against their interests on spending and taxes.

CCAGW President Tom Schatz said, “Sen. Kaine has spent his time in the Senate supporting the big-spending agenda of President Obama, so he makes for an ideal running mate for the fiscally reckless Hillary Clinton. Sen. Kaine’s miserable 7 percent CCAGW lifetime rating is worse than Mrs. Clinton’s 8 percent lifetime score, which included two years – her first and last – at zero percent. By comparison, President Obama’s lifetime CCAGW rating was 16 percent and Vice President Joe Biden’s lifetime rating was 21 percent. In other words, a President Clinton and a Vice President Kaine could be twice as damaging to the fiscal interests of the United States than the current administration, and would be highly likely to make the government bigger and more intrusive than any administration in history. That is certainly something to keep in mind as the presidential campaign goes into full swing after the Democratic convention next week.”

As Governor of Virginia, he was also far to the left, especially on social issues. Although the Democrats might like to present him as a moderate, he is no such thing. And you discover that if you are willing to do the work of looking at voting records. No one can hide from their voting record.

…integrating Christian faith and knowledge in the public square

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,515 other followers

%d bloggers like this: