TRUMP CALLS PASTOR MACARTHUR, THANKS HIM FOR TAKING A STAND THAT CHURCHES ARE ESSENTIAL

John MacArthur Explains Why Christians Can’t Vote Democrat, Trump Calls to Thank Him for Taking a Stand for Religious Freedom

SEE: https://reformationcharlotte.org/2020/08/24/john-macarthur-explains-why-christians-cant-vote-democrat-trump-calls-to-thank-him-for-taking-a-stand-for-religious-freedom/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

John MacArthur has been almost single-handedly taking the heat from both the right and the left for his stand for religious liberty. As the California government has unleashed its wrath upon MacArthur, he and his congregation have stood strong in the midst of what is clearly a power grab by tyrants.

To be fair, MacArthur is not the only pastor who has stood up against the tyranny — there are countless others. But, because of his notoriety, his stance has received the most attention and has been targeted for the most attacks — even from other Evangelical leaders.

MacArthur discusses how Donald Trump called him to thank him for his stand and then talks about how no Christian should ever vote Democrat. It should be noted that Donald Trump has been much more supportive of the Christian community than most of our Evangelical leaders have been. For more on MacArthur and this situation, see this link.

_______________________________________________________________________________________

John MacArthur Files Declaration Against LA County for Depriving Christians of “Spiritual Refuge”

SEE: https://reformationcharlotte.org/2020/08/24/john-macarthur-files-declaration-against-la-county-for-depriving-christians-of-spiritual-refuge/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

(August 24, 2020 – Sun Valley, California) Los Angeles County is returning to court this morning, August 24, 2020, attempting – for the fourth time – to get a court order to shut down indoor worship services at Grace Community Church.

As the judge noted last week, the County simply refuses to accept the reasoned decisions of the California court. Judge Mitchell L. Beckloff, who will preside over today’s hearing, told Los Angeles County attorneys from the bench on August 20, “As I see it, Judge Chalfant said ‘No’ to you and the Court of Appeal declined to make the order that you requested.”

MacArthur’s declaration to the court states in part:

“Worship-bans appear to take the position that we should lock our doors and force our congregants to gather to worship the Lord in parking lots, in parks, or perhaps beaches—but never in any church. From Grace Community Church’s perspective, this is nonsensical, and we view it as a direct ban on engaging in the worship which our faith requires. The size of our congregation means that there is no place for it to meet outdoors; the summer heat makes meeting outdoors unhealthy and even dangerous; our experts have refuted that meeting indoors significantly aids in the spread of the coronavirus; and most principally, Grace Community Church’s sanctuary itself is a spiritual refuge for our congregants—a refuge of which the county has no right to deprive them.”

“Thus, the county’s and state’s July 13 and 14 worship-bans burden my and Grace Community Church’s free exercise of religion by criminalizing activity directly required by our faith. As a church, we have a moral and religious obligation to continue allowing our congregants to gather in our sanctuary to worship the Lord.

“This church is the core of life for thousands from nursery to seniors. Our church is not an event center. It is a family of lives who love and care for each other in very intensely personal ways. So essential to personal well-being that people rushed back as soon as they could. The utter unnecessary deprivation of all our people by completely shutting down the mutual love and care that sustains our people in all the exigencies, pressures and challenges of life, was cruel. And after 63 years of sacrificial, kindness to our city, to be repeatedly threatened with court-ordered efforts to shut Grace Community Church down when no one is sick, reveals an inexplicable preference for a mostly harmless virus over the life-enriching and necessary fellowship of the church. Our leaders and congregation see no real health threat to warrant such restraint. We see this action against us as an illegitimate misuse of power.”

Read the full Declaration of Pastor John MacArthur, filed on his behalf by Thomas More Society attorneys on August 23, 2020, in Superior Court of the State of California – County of Los Angeles – Central District in County of Los Angeles et al. v. Grace Community Church et al. here.

About the Thomas More Society

The Thomas More Society is a national not-for-profit law firm dedicated to restoring respect in law for life, family, and religious liberty. Headquartered in Chicago, Omaha, and Fairfield, NJ, the Thomas More Society fosters support for these causes by providing high quality pro bono legal services from local trial courts all the way up to the United States Supreme Court. For more information, visit thomasmoresociety.org.

 

 

 

MEET DON HARRIS, KAMALA HARRIS’ COMMUNIST FATHER

Meet Don Harris, Kamala Harris’ Communist Father

BY RENEE NAL

SEE: https://rairfoundation.com/meet-don-harris-kamala-harris-communist-father/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

The below article about Marxist economics professor Don Harris, Kamala Harris’ father, was posted at the Stanford University newspaper on May 13, 1975, when his daughter was just 10 years old.

The Stanford Daily article laughably claims that economic students at Stanford in 1975 were clamoring to learn more about Marxist economics, so the university accommodated them by offering Kamala’s father a position. Don Harris was referred to glowingly by fellow Marxist Economics Professor John Gurley as “one of the leading young people in Marxist economics.”

The 45-year-old Stanford Daily article, titled “Marxist Offered Economics Post,” was posted first on Trevor Loudon’s website Keywiki.org, where more information is posted about the father of the Democrat Party’s Vice Presidential Candidate. See Loudon’s articles at the Epoch Times about Kamala Harris’ own socialist ties, as well as a prophetic article from August 2019 about the forces surrounding Kamala Harris and why she was chosen to be the Democratic nominee for President.

According to the Stanford article:

“New course offerings in radical economics for 1975-76 are expected to include seminars in “Imperialism and Dependency,” “Marxian Social Change,” and “Marxist Economic Theory.'”

Here is one of Professor Harris articles: Capitalist exploitation and black labor: Some conceptual issues

By comparison, a bland article published today at Marie Claire refers to Don Harris as “a prominent former economics professor at Stanford and an immigrant from Jamaica.”

The economic polices of Kamala Harris from her now-archived website are hard left in nature: raising taxes, class war, pro-welfare state, etc. “As president, she’ll mandate equal pay for women, promote policies that build wealth in communities of color, and crack down on corporations that exploit vulnerable Americans for profit,” the article reads in part. Like Joe Biden, Kamala Harris is on board with getting rid of the tax cuts that, along with cutting unconstitutional regulations, led to the pre-pandemic economic boom in America.

Original article here:

Don Harris, a prominent Marxist professor, has been offered a full professorship in the Economics Department here, Department Chairman James Rosse confirmed yesterday. Rosse said Harris has not yet accepted the offer, but he “expects to hear from him this week.” Harris, who still holds a tenured position at the University of Wisconsin, has served as a visiting professor here, and is currently teaching at the University of the West Indies in Kingston, Jamaica.

The appointment is the direct result of student pressure in recent years to hire more faculty who favor an “alternative approach” to economics, said Economics Prof. John Gurley, who now teaches the only undergraduate course in Marxist economics. Gurley said the appointment of Harris was the culmination of a six-month “round-the-world” search for the most qualified Marxist professor available. ‘Exceptionally Good’ Gurley called Harris “an exceptionally good teacher, outstanding researcher and one of the leading young people in Marxist economics.”

One knowledgeable source told the Daily that some senior faculty members were very hesitant about hiring Harris, but that they gradually yielded to student pressure. A conservative economics faculty member, who wished to remain anonymous, said he was “not part of the decision and it would thus be fair not to say anything.”

He also added that “as far as I’m concerned, [Harris] is not in the same field I’m in.” Alternatives The department, Gurley said, looked for economists who espoused not only Marxist viewpoints, but other alternative perspectives as well. Libertarian economists, who advocate untrammeled laissez-faire capitalism, for example, also were considered in the selection, he claimed. Gurley said the search included those knowledgeable about socialist economies, even if they didn’t sympathize with a Marxist system.

Search Continues

He admitted, however, that for most of the students involved in the struggle for an alternative economist, “alternative meant Marxist.” The search will continue for qualified non-traditional economists, Gurley said. With the addition of Harris, the department would be able to offer a much greater number of courses taught from a Marxist viewpoint. Harris is expected to be a popular choice among students who have fought for more alternative economists.

“When the students were looking for someone last year, they wanted him,” said SWOPSI Director Andy Panies, a Marxist economist recently fired from San Jose State University. New course offerings in radical economics for 1975-76 are expected to include seminars in “Imperialism and Dependency,” “Marxian Social Change,” and “Marxist Economic Theory.” Two sections of Economics 120 will be offered, and a new undergraduate course taught by Harris may be added.

How many communists did you know growing up? It is amazing how many just happen to land in the vicinity of the Democrat Party. Where is the GOP?

Support our work at RAIR Foundation USA! We are a grassroots activist team and we need your help! Please consider making a donation here: https://rairfoundation.com/donate/

__________________________________________________________________________________

SEE ALSO:

https://keywiki.org/Donald_Harris

 

 

DEMOCRATS PREDICT FORCED CITIZEN DISARMAMENT WILL BE A WINNER THIS TIME AROUND

BY DAVID CODREA

SEE: https://www.ammoland.com/2020/08/democrats-predict-forced-citizen-disarmament-will-be-a-winner-this-time-around/#axzz6W39Wm7oH;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
If Biden and Harris win, history will require each of us as gun owners to make a terrible choice. (Giffords/Facebook)

U.S.A. – -(Ammoland.com)- “Democrats [are showing an] unprecedented embrace of gun control,” The Atlantic noted Thursday. “The party is betting that support for restrictions is more likely to attract moderate voters than turn them off.”

If nothing else, this shows the goalposts are continuously being moved to the left. If the “centrists” of the party are all in for eviscerating a keystone right and ignoring the crystal clear mandate of “shall not be infringed,” you know what those pulling sentiment in that direction intend to end up with. That also allows those previously considered “moderate” to now be smeared as “extremists,” with accusations of being haters not far behind.

It wasn’t always this way, of course – at one point within the lifetimes of many of us, even Democrat “liberals” were on record expressing belief in the Second Amendment and demonstrating that they understood founding intent in a way that today would have them condemned as insurrectionist traitors.

Two cases in point:

“By calling attention to ‘a well regulated militia,' the ‘security' of the nation, and the right of each citizen ‘to keep and bear arms,' our founding fathers recognized the essentially civilian nature of our economy,” John F. Kennedy responded to GUNS Magazine’s inquiries in the April 1960 issue’s “Know Your Lawmakers” feature. “Although it is extremely unlikely that the fears of governmental tyranny which gave rise to the Second Amendment will ever be a major danger to our nation, the Amendment still remains an important declaration of our basic civilian-military relationships, in which every citizen must be ready to participate in the defense of his country. For that reason I believe the Second Amendment will always be important.”

“Certainly one of the chief guarantees of freedom under any government, no matter how popular and respected, is the right of citizens to keep and bear arms,” then-senator, soon-to-be vice president,  future presidential candidate and “liberal” icon Hubert Humphrey had asserted in the February issue. “This is not to say that firearms should not be very carefully used, and that definite safety rules of precaution should not be taught and enforced. But the right of citizens to bear arms is just one more guarantee against arbitrary government, one more safeguard against a tyranny which now appears remote in America, but which historically has proved to be always possible.”

So much for the lie that the individual rights “theory” didn’t start to gain ground until the NRA started getting more political circa 1977:

“While conventional wisdom suggests that an individual’s right to bear arms is enshrined in the Second Amendment of the Constitution, it is, in fact, a relatively recent interpretation, according to New Yorker writer and legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin.”

It’s fair to wonder what it was Toobin “analyzed.” It certainly wasn’t the clear record left by the Framers or prior Supreme Court cases including Scott v. Sanford, Cruikshank, and Miller.  Then again. Perhaps he’s just an apparatchik advancing an agenda regardless of the truth, which my looking into past asinine assertions he has made appears to corroborate.

Meanwhile, back at The Atlantic, meet the new exemplar of “moderation”:

“He’s laid out an assault-weapons ban for new purchases,” a man named Bill, a managing partner at a small investment firm and a former intelligence officer, told me excitedly, when I asked why he backed Bloomberg for president. (Bill declined to give his last name for privacy reasons.) “And there absolutely should be universal background checks,” he continued. “It’s like, that’s a no-brainer—come on.”

“This is the new normal in the Democratic Party: Moderate voters not only support gun-control legislation, but have begun to use the issue as a litmus test,” The Atlantic advises.

So “Bill” is a Democrat? Having an intelligence background, I don’t suppose he actually did any pertinent data collection before deciding that trying to force millions of his armed countrymen to surrender their rights and bend to the will of the collectivists was a “no-brainer”?

Threatening infringements on the right to keep and bear arms did not work for Al Gore (who ended up losing his home state) or Hillary Clinton. Now the Democrats are betting the electorate has changed enough for denial of rights to be a winning issue. That makes fair the question: Has it? Virginia gives us some clues:

“Gun control was indeed a core campaign message for Spanberger, the Democratic representative who defeated the Republican incumbent Dave Brat two years ago in a suburban district near Richmond, Virginia, that had long been represented by the GOP. It was also central to the campaign platform of Jennifer Wexton, Spanberger’s fellow Virginian and fellow freshman, who flipped her D.C.-adjacent district from red to blue. By 2019, polling showed that gun control was the top issue for voters in their home state; that fall, Democrats managed to gain control of the state legislature and immediately passed a huge slate of gun reforms.”

How did that happen? The New York Times thinks it knows:

“Unlike three decades ago, the residents are often from other places, like India and Korea. And when they vote, it is often for Democrats.

“’Guns, that is the most pressing issue for me,’ said Vijay Katkuri, 38, a software engineer from southern India, explaining why he voted for a Democratic challenger in Tuesday’s elections.”

We will see in November if the demographics have changed enough nationally to give the House-holding Democrats the win for the White House and Senate, and for upcoming federal/Supreme Court appointments. If it is, that “history” the above feature photo predicts, with Joe Biden and Kamala Harris leading the charge against our guns, will prove catastrophic.


About David Codrea:David Codrea

David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating/defending the RKBA and a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament. He blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” is a regularly featured contributor to Firearms News, and posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.

 

MICHIGAN: GROUND BROKEN IN RESIDENTIAL AREA FOR MEGA-MOSQUE THAT CHRISTIAN REFUGEES OPPOSED

BY ROBERT SPENCER

SEEhttps://www.jihadwatch.org/2020/08/michigan-ground-broken;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Fox 2 Detroit claims, without evidence, that “some of the past opposition” was “sparked by islamophobia.” But in reality, “some residents previously cited zoning rules and the residential nature of the neighborhood.” However, Osama Siblani, publisher of The Arab American News, said: “I do not buy that, I think they were using it as an excuse.” For “Islamophobia,” that is.

Well, maybe they were using it as an excuse, and maybe there weren’t. But now the precedent has been set, with the help of the Justice Department: Muslims can build a mosque absolutely anywhere they want, including in quiet residential neighborhoods, and obliterate all concerns about zoning and parking and the character of the neighborhood by charging that all such concerns are just cover for “Islamophobia.”

Also, it wasn’t the racist, redneck, “Islamophobic” yahoos of Leftist media myth who were opposing this mosque. It was Iraqi Christian refugees, who know very well from bitter experience what a mosque in the neighborhood means for non-Muslims. But their concerns were also brushed aside. It was all “Islamophobia,” you see. The Justice Department said so.

 

“After years of roadblocks, ground finally broken on mosque in Sterling Heights,” FOX 2 Detroit, August 20, 2020:

STERLING HEIGHTS, Mich. (FOX 2) – It has been a point of contention for years, but now a new mosque is under construction in Sterling Heights.

“My mother, her father is a World War I veteran and we love this country and everyone is entitled to freedom of religion,” said Faye Hashem. “As long as there is peace and love – that is all that matters.”…

Erecting a place of worship isn’t necessarily something you would gather media together for, but in this case controversy has surrounded building a mosque for years wiht [sic] some of the past opposition sparked by islamophobia….

“This is not about an Islamic center or a mosque it’s about our freedom of religion,” said Osama Siblani, publisher of The Arab American News.

Some community members have used every legal tool at their disposal to block the building. They were upset that Sterling Heights struck a deal with the US Justice Department to allow the mosque after the DOJ sued the city for not allowing the plan to proceed.

Some residents previously cited zoning rules and the residential nature of the neighborhood.

“I do not buy that, I think they were using it as an excuse and the federal government intervened and the victory here today, is that we’re building a mosque,” Siblani said.

The city manager, police chief, some city council members and Congressman Andy Levin (D-9th Congressional District) were in attendance.

“The story of AICC, is no different than my Jewish family’s story,” said Levin. “Sometimes there was controversy and sometimes we were not welcome, but in the end we all came together as Americans.”

 

HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE AUTHORIZED: TRUMP TO ANNOUNCE “BREAKTHROUGH” THERAPEUTIC TREATMENT FOR COVID-19

BY MATT MARGOLIS

SEE: https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2020/08/23/trump-to-announce-breakthrough-therapeutic-treatment-for-covid-19-n827485;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

On Sunday evening, President Trump is expected to announce a “major therapeutic breakthrough” for COVID-19, according to a tweet by White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany.

“News conference with President @realDonaldTrump at 6 pm tomorrow concerning a major therapeutic breakthrough on the China Virus,” she tweeted. “Secretary Azar and Dr. Hahn will be in attendance.”

 

The news comes on the cusp of the 2020 Republican National Convention, which starts Monday evening.

President Trump made headlines Saturday morning by suggesting that the deep state was suppressing progress on vaccines until after the election.

 

No other details about the “major therapeutic breakthrough” were provided.

Time will tell just how the media will respond to the news of a “major therapeutic breakthrough,” but considering how they reacted to hydroxychloroquine, my money is on Trump’s announcement being immediately dismissed by the media and the Democratic Party as a political stunt to “save his reelection.”

When Trump first touted hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine as potential game-changers in the fight against the coronavirus, the media went to war against the decades-old anti-malaria drugs.

“To fight the coronavirus, President Donald Trump is adopting the audacity of false hope,” CNN declared after Trump announced he’s pushed the FDA to fast-track the approval of the antimalarial drug hydroxychloroquine to treat patients with the coronavirus.  The USA Today editorial board accused Trump of “peddl[ing] snake oil and false hope.” Salon’s rhetoric was even worse. “Trump was at the White House podium peddling a fake cure for a virus that could kill hundreds of thousands of Americans in a way that would have gotten him kicked off the Home Shopping Network and potentially invited federal prosecution for false claims and fraud.” A Democratic state lawmaker in Ohio said that Trump should be tried for “crimes against humanity” for touting the drug’s potential, and the New York Times even alleged that Trump’s motivation for touting it was financial because he holds “a small personal financial interest” in Sanofi, even though the drug is out of patent, and he only owned $29 – $435 in the stock as part of a mutual fund.

Success stories from coronavirus patients who recovered after being treated with the drug went largely ignored by the media. In April, Democrat State Rep. Karen Whitsett from Detroit, Mich., credited the drug and President Trump with saving her life. Other coronavirus patients have reported dramatic recoveries after taking the drug.

The media instead focused on a small number of studies that suggested that hydroxychloroquine was linked to higher mortality—but those studies were flawed. In the Veteran’s Affairs study published in April, for example, which wasn’t peer-reviewed, the sickest patients were disproportionately administered the drug. Two other studies linked hydroxychloroquine to higher mortality, but those studies were based on faulty data, and two well-respected medical journals had to retract one of them.

There have now been 80 studies on the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine (47 of them peer-reviewed). The overwhelming majority of them show positive results—especially when administered early.

The media and the Democratic Party have done everything they can to scare the public about hydroxychloroquine. But countries that are widely using the drug to treat coronavirus patients have had significantly lower death rates than those that aren’t:

 

It seems likely to me that whatever therapeutic breakthrough announced Sunday evening will get the hydroxychloroquine treatment. The left doesn’t want success in treating the virus to happen until after the election. Democrats seem more than happy to let people die needlessly in their quest for power.

_____

Matt Margolis is the author of the new book Airborne: How The Liberal Media Weaponized The Coronavirus Against Donald Trumpand the bestselling book The Worst President in History: The Legacy of Barack Obama. You can follow Matt on Twitter @MattMargolis