Podcasts about article vi

Play Episode Listen Later Dec 31, 2024 30:16

Constitutional Law Lecture 1 – Structure of Government and Separation of Powers Source: Excerpts from "Constitutional Law Lecture 1: The Structure of Government and Separation of Powers" I. Foundational Overview I begin by noting that the U.S. Constitution creates a structure of government designed to prevent tyranny. The three branches—Congress (legislative), the President (executive), and the courts (judicial)—operate under a system of separation of powers. This arrangement is complemented by checks and balances, whereby each branch can restrain the others. Federalism further divides power between the federal government and the states. Key Themes: Separation of Powers: This doctrine ensures that no single branch amasses unchecked authority. “Separation of powers is … the bedrock of the American constitutional system.” Checks and Balances: Each branch has devices (like vetoes or judicial review) to limit the other branches. “These interlocking mechanisms create a dynamic tension that fosters a balance of power.” Federalism: The Constitution specifies certain powers (enumerated) for the federal government and reserves others for the states. Judicial Review: Established in Marbury v. Madison, it empowers courts to strike down unconstitutional laws or actions. “Without Marbury, the checks and balances system would lack a critical enforcement mechanism.” Supremacy Clause: Federal law preempts conflicting state law, unifying legal standards throughout the nation. II. Constitutional Foundations Articles I, II, III, and VI Article I defines Congress's powers, including the Commerce Clause and the Necessary and Proper Clause. Article II vests executive power in the President, granting authority as Commander-in-Chief and in foreign affairs. Article III establishes the judiciary, anchored by the Supreme Court. Article VI contains the Supremacy Clause, ensuring federal law supremacy. Federalism and Division of Power Enumerated Powers: Taxation, regulation of interstate commerce, defense. Reserved Powers: Those retained by states (e.g., police powers, education). Key Cases: McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) upheld implied federal powers. Gibbons v. Ogden (1824) expanded Congress's reach over interstate commerce. III. Separation of Powers Doctrine Legislative Powers (Congress) Commerce Clause: Broad authority over interstate activities, yet subject to judicial limits (United States v. Lopez). Taxing and Spending: Congress can attach conditions to federal funds (South Dakota v. Dole). Necessary and Proper Clause: Permits laws essential to carrying out enumerated powers. Nondelegation Doctrine: Congress must not transfer its core legislative function to another branch (INS v. Chadha). Executive Powers (President) Commander-in-Chief: Authority over military decisions. Appointment: Nominates judges and officials (with Senate approval). Veto: Power to reject legislation. Foreign Affairs: Treaties, diplomacy; recognized as broad in United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp. Key Cases: Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer (1952) – limited executive power over private property without legislative authorization. United States v. Nixon (1974) – limited executive privilege in criminal investigations. Judicial Powers Judicial Review: Power to invalidate unconstitutional statutes (Marbury v. Madison). Justiciability: Requires standing, ripeness, and mootness for a federal court to hear a case (Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife). Federal Question Jurisdiction: Authority over federal issues; example: Brown v. Board of Education (1954) advanced civil rights jurisprudence. IV. Checks and Balances in Practice Interbranch Conflicts Congress → Executive: Impeachment, budgetary control. Executive → Congress: Veto power, executive orders. Judiciary → Both: Judicial review of legislative acts and executive actions (Cooper v. Aaron). Balancing National Security and Civil Liberties Key examples include Korematsu v. United States (1944) and Ha --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/support

Constitutional Law Lecture 1 - Structure of Government and Separation of Powers

new york donald trump constitution scotus sleeve josh hammer supremacy clause article vi

Play Episode Listen Later Dec 30, 2024 22:05

Constitutional Law Lecture 1 - Structure of Government and Separation of Powers Introduction This lecture provides an overview of the structure of the U.S. government, emphasizing the doctrines of separation of powers and checks and balances, alongside foundational constitutional principles like federalism, judicial review, and constitutional supremacy. Key themes include: Separation of Powers: Division of authority among the legislative, executive, and judicial branches to prevent tyranny. Checks and Balances: Mechanisms for interbranch accountability. Federalism: Division of powers between the federal government and states. Judicial Review: Courts' power to declare laws unconstitutional. Constitutional Supremacy: Federal law and the Constitution take precedence over state law. Part 1: Constitutional Foundations Overview of the Constitution: Articles I, II, and III establish legislative, executive, and judicial branches. Article VI's Supremacy Clause ensures federal law overrides state laws. Marbury v. Madison (1803) established judicial review, making courts coequal enforcers of the Constitution. Federalism: Balances federal and state authority: Federal powers: Taxation, interstate commerce, national defense (e.g., Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)). State powers: Police powers, education, intrastate commerce (reserved via the 10th Amendment). Key cases: McCulloch v. Maryland (1819): Established federal supremacy and implied powers. Arizona v. United States (2012): Reinforced federal preemption over conflicting state laws. Printz v. United States (1997): Limited federal overreach on states' autonomy. Part 2: The Separation of Powers Doctrine Legislative Powers (Article I): Bicameral Congress enacts laws using powers such as: Commerce Clause (e.g., Gibbons v. Ogden (1824) expanded federal power; United States v. Lopez (1995) limited it). Taxing and Spending Power (e.g., South Dakota v. Dole (1987) upheld conditional federal funding). Necessary and Proper Clause: Authorizes laws to execute enumerated powers. Limits: Nondelegation Doctrine: Congress must set clear guidelines when delegating authority. Presentment Clause: Bills must pass both chambers and be presented to the President (INS v. Chadha (1983) invalidated legislative vetoes). Executive Powers (Article II): Includes: Commander-in-Chief authority. Appointment power (subject to Senate confirmation; limited by NLRB v. Noel Canning (2014)). Veto power and foreign affairs authority (United States v. Curtiss-Wright (1936)). Limits: Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer (1952): Prohibited unauthorized presidential seizure of private property. United States v. Nixon (1974): Limited executive privilege, affirming no one is above the law. Judicial Powers (Article III): Supreme Court exercises judicial review (Marbury v. Madison) and hears cases involving federal law or constitutional issues. Justiciability doctrines: Standing: E.g., Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife (1992). Ripeness, mootness, and political questions limit courts' jurisdiction. Federal judges' independence is ensured through life tenure and salary protections. Part 3: Checks and Balances in Practice Interbranch Conflicts: Legislative Checks on Executive: Impeachment (e.g., impeachments of Johnson, Clinton, Trump). Control of funding and oversight hearings. Executive Checks on Legislative: Veto power, executive orders, and signing statements. Judicial Checks on Both: Judicial review (e.g., Brown v. Board of Education, Cooper v. Aaron (1958) reaffirmed federal judicial supremacy). Balancing National Security and Civil Liberties: Cases such as: Korematsu v. United States (1944): Upheld controversial wartime actions, later repudiated by Trump v. Hawaii (2018). Hamdi v. Rumsfeld (2004): Affirmed detainees' due process rights. Ex parte Milligan (1866): Limited military tribunals where civilian courts are operational. Practical Applications and Exam Strategies Hypotheticals to Consider: Delegation of power to agencies --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/support

December 23rd, 2024: The Supremacy Clause Ace up Donald Trump's Sleeve

America On Trial

Play Episode Listen Later Dec 23, 2024 25:48

Your host Josh Hammer explains the power of President Trump's ultimate ace up his sleeve when it comes to his New York and Georgia prosecutions: the Supremacy Clause of Article VI of the Constitution. Plus, Trump's fantastic new announced picks to lead his Department of Justice, SCOTUS agrees to hear an important new abortion-related case, and more. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

EP 120 - Cam Sowa

IT'S ALL IN THE DELIVERY

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 30, 2024 93:26 Transcription Available

In this episode, the hosts share personal updates, discuss their experiences with new routes, and reflect on the evolution of their jobs in the delivery industry. They touch on the challenges of weather, memorable stories from their careers, and the importance of safety regulations. The conversation also highlights the community aspect of their podcast and the journey they've taken together. In this episode, the hosts discuss the implications of inward and forward-facing cameras in trucks, highlighting potential violations of Article VI. They also celebrate the contributions of women drivers in the industry. The conversation shifts to feel-good movies, with each host sharing their favorites, including 'The Big Lebowski' and 'Rudy.' The episode concludes with a fun question of the week, asking listeners where they would deliver in a fictional world, leading to creative and humorous responses. THE OPINIONS EXPRESSED OR VIEWS EXPRESSED ON THIS PODCAST ARE THOSE OF THE HOSTS AND GUESTS AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT ANY DELIVERY COMPANY Chapters: 00:00 Introduction and Personal Updates 06:02 Transitioning to New Routes and Experiences 12:06 The Evolution of the Job and Technology 17:59 Weather Challenges and Regional Differences 24:01 Memorable Stories and Experiences 30:01 The Importance of Safety and Regulations 36:01 The Podcast Journey and Community Engagement 55:16 Inward and Forward-Facing Cameras in Trucks 58:22 Article VI Violations and Truck Regulations 01:01:57 Shoutout to Women Drivers 01:03:42 Feel-Good Movies and Personal Favorites 01:16:00 Question of the Week: Fictional Delivery Locations

evolution safety transitioning shoutouts podcast journey sowa article vi

Constitutional Law Chapter 7: Federalism and State Powers (Part 1)

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 13, 2024 22:24

Summary of Chapter 7: Preemption and the Supremacy Clause Chapter 7 delves into the intricacies of federalism, focusing on the Supremacy Clause and the doctrine of preemption, which are foundational to understanding the relationship between federal and state laws in the United States. Supremacy Clause: Found in Article VI, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution, the Supremacy Clause establishes that the Constitution, federal laws, and treaties are the "supreme Law of the Land." This clause ensures that federal law prevails over state law in cases of conflict, promoting a uniform legal framework across the nation. It mandates that state judges must uphold federal laws even when state laws or constitutions conflict. Preemption Doctrine: Preemption, derived from the Supremacy Clause, occurs when federal law overrides or preempts state law. The chapter explains the two types of preemption: Express Preemption: Occurs when a federal statute explicitly states that it overrides state law. Implied Preemption: Arises when federal regulation is so pervasive (field preemption) or when compliance with both federal and state law is impossible (conflict preemption). Impact on State Laws: The chapter discusses how preemption reflects the tension between state sovereignty and federal authority. While it ensures national uniformity in law, it can also limit states' ability to regulate matters within their borders. The courts, particularly the Supreme Court, play a crucial role in determining the boundaries of preemption. Key Case Law: The chapter highlights significant Supreme Court cases, such as McCulloch v. Maryland and Arizona v. United States, which have shaped the interpretation of the Supremacy Clause and preemption. Federal Preemption in Practice: The chapter provides examples of how preemption operates in areas like healthcare, environmental regulation, and consumer protection, illustrating the practical implications of the doctrine. Interstate Relations and the Full Faith and Credit Clause: The chapter also covers the Full Faith and Credit Clause, which requires states to recognize and honor the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of other states, promoting legal consistency and cooperation across state lines. Privileges and Immunities Clause: This clause prevents states from discriminating against citizens of other states, ensuring that all citizens enjoy the same rights and protections when they travel or move between states. In essence, Chapter 7 provides a comprehensive overview of how the Supremacy Clause and the doctrine of preemption function within the U.S. federal system, emphasizing the balance between national authority and state autonomy, and the mechanisms that ensure legal consistency across the nation. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/support

united states law land arizona impact maryland supreme court constitution powers clause privileges constitutional law federalism mcculloch preemption full faith supremacy clause article vi credit clause

Constitutional Law Chapter 7: Federalism and State Powers (Part 2)

american donald trump news americans constitution big tech deep state treachery trump trial newsanalysis article vi

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 13, 2024 22:33

Summary of Chapter 7: Preemption and the Supremacy Clause Chapter 7 delves into the intricacies of federalism, focusing on the Supremacy Clause and the doctrine of preemption, which are foundational to understanding the relationship between federal and state laws in the United States. Supremacy Clause: Found in Article VI, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution, the Supremacy Clause establishes that the Constitution, federal laws, and treaties are the "supreme Law of the Land." This clause ensures that federal law prevails over state law in cases of conflict, promoting a uniform legal framework across the nation. It mandates that state judges must uphold federal laws even when state laws or constitutions conflict. Preemption Doctrine: Preemption, derived from the Supremacy Clause, occurs when federal law overrides or preempts state law. The chapter explains the two types of preemption: Express Preemption: Occurs when a federal statute explicitly states that it overrides state law. Implied Preemption: Arises when federal regulation is so pervasive (field preemption) or when compliance with both federal and state law is impossible (conflict preemption). Impact on State Laws: The chapter discusses how preemption reflects the tension between state sovereignty and federal authority. While it ensures national uniformity in law, it can also limit states' ability to regulate matters within their borders. The courts, particularly the Supreme Court, play a crucial role in determining the boundaries of preemption. Key Case Law: The chapter highlights significant Supreme Court cases, such as McCulloch v. Maryland and Arizona v. United States, which have shaped the interpretation of the Supremacy Clause and preemption. Federal Preemption in Practice: The chapter provides examples of how preemption operates in areas like healthcare, environmental regulation, and consumer protection, illustrating the practical implications of the doctrine. Interstate Relations and the Full Faith and Credit Clause: The chapter also covers the Full Faith and Credit Clause, which requires states to recognize and honor the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of other states, promoting legal consistency and cooperation across state lines. Privileges and Immunities Clause: This clause prevents states from discriminating against citizens of other states, ensuring that all citizens enjoy the same rights and protections when they travel or move between states. In essence, Chapter 7 provides a comprehensive overview of how the Supremacy Clause and the doctrine of preemption function within the U.S. federal system, emphasizing the balance between national authority and state autonomy, and the mechanisms that ensure legal consistency across the nation. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/support

united states law land arizona impact maryland supreme court constitution powers clause privileges constitutional law federalism mcculloch preemption full faith supremacy clause article vi credit clause

Trump Trial Treachery | JBS News Analysis

Talking Freedom Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 6, 2024

The verdict of Trump's so-called hush money trial only cemented in the minds of Americans that the justice system is not serving justice, but the Deep State. Trump's verdict reminds us of what we are up against. We'll look into this and offer ways you can help in today's Analysis Behind the News, perspective and solutions you won't get anywhere else. If you're concerned about American independence and freedom, then please watch and take the recommended actions. Also, be sure to like, subscribe, and share, so we can break through Big Tech censorship and reach many others. ACTION ITEMS: Learn About Nullification & Article VI of the Constitution by reading our free booklet download. Order physical copies of the booklet for distribution. Join The John Birch Society.

Readers Codex Article VI - Onyx Storm Name and Release Date Reaction

The Readers Quadrant

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 2, 2024 29:29

Hey everyone! Sorry for no new chapter ep this week, Sam has been super sick. But Rebecca gifted us with a HUGE announcement so we hope you enjoy this reaction episode to the title and release date announcement for Empyrean #3! Be sure to follow, rate, and review! Email - readersquadpod@gmail.com Instagram - @readersquadrantpodcast Discord - https://discord.gg/xuDZAjWHPh The Pyre Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com) Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/

discord readers release date codex empyrean article vi

S5, Ep. 17: The presidency and Christian nationalism

Respecting Religion

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 22, 2024 37:53

Presidents have made broad appeals to our country without dividing along religious belief throughout American history. Amanda Tyler and Holly Hollman look at presidential leadership and talk about how our country's founding documents set up our system of government that does not create a “Christian nation” in any sort of legal sense – rather, it ensures freedom of religion and freedom from a state establishment of religion. They also talk about why people like to claim we are a “Christian nation” and the reasons that is a problematic statement. Segment 1 (starting at 00:38): Religious freedom at the founding Learn more about the celebration of the holiday known as Washington's Birthday from the National Archives. Amanda and Holly mentioned this article by Peter Smith for the Associated Press: Many believe the founders wanted a Christian America. Some want the government to declare one now. He also wrote this piece with some frequently asked questions. Amanda mentioned a book she is writing that will come out later this year, which is titled How to End Christian Nationalism. Watch Holly's video answering the question “Is America a Christian nation?” at this link. The Rev. Jennifer Hawks wrote this piece about Article VI for Baptist News Global: How the Constitution's original religious freedom guarantee almost didn't happen Amanda spoke with historian Steven Green in 2019 for this episode of our podcast series on the dangers of Christian nationalism: We were founded as a Christian nation? Michael Meyerson is the author of Endowed by our Creator: The Birth of Religious Freedom in America. You can read more about his 2014 lectures – given for the Walter B. and Kay W. Shurden Lectures on Religious Liberty and the Separation of Church and State – in this recap. The BJC Fellows Program is open to all young professionals interested in deepening their historical, legal and theological understanding of religious liberty. The deadline to apply for the 2024 class is March 1 – visit BJConline.org/Fellows to learn more and apply. Segment 2 (starting at 24:21): Words from previous presidents Click here to visit BJC's website page with a few quotes from Founders, presidents, and Baptists about the relationship between church and state. The quotes include links or citations to the original source material. Segment 3 (starting at 33:20): What now? Respecting Religion is made possible by BJC's generous donors. You can support these conversations with a gift to BJC.

Formula of Concord - Article VI - The Third Use of the Law

Most Certainly True Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 21, 2024 50:21

Formula of Concord - Article VI- The Third Use of the Law --------------------------------After the death of Martin Luther in 1546, controversies arose in the Lutheran Church that began to question, compromise and erode the foundation upon which he stood and built his church. Written in 1577, Lutheran leaders faced those controversies head on by continuing to stand on the Word of God and continuing to put their faith in the clear message of Scripture. They produced a document, divided into twelve articles that we know today as the Formula of Concord.Follow along with us as we read through and discuss each article of the Formula and make applications to the lives of 21st Century Christians. You can read along with the Formula or just join in on the discussion.The best way to find the Formula of Concord is in the Book of Concord. Would you like to own your own copy? It's an inexpensive way to have the Formula and other beautiful confessional Lutheran writings at your fingertips and use them educationally and devotionally. Below are links to two different versions that we are recommending. Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions - A Reader's Edition of the Book of ConcordBook of Concord : Kolb Wengert EditionThere's a free edition of the Book of Concord online at: www.bookofconcord.org We hope that you can join us for the fun and that you can grow along with us. If you have any questions about this series or our Most Certainly True Podcast, please reach out to Pastor Hackmann at bhackmann@gracedowntown.org. If you'd like to learn more about Grace Lutheran Church, check out our website www.gracedowntown.org. Make sure to find the other titles in this series or check out a different series or one of our sermons from Grace on our Most Certainly True Podcast channel. We'd love to have you grow even more with us. Thanks for listening!

god scripture formula martin luther concord lutheran lutheran church grace lutheran church article vi century christians third use

S5, Ep. 12: Rob Reiner and ‘God & Country' director Dan Partland

Respecting Religion

Play Episode Listen Later Jan 18, 2024 43:05

What is the cost of speaking out against Christian nationalism? In this episode, Amanda Tyler talks with Rob Reiner and Dan Partland, two people behind a new film that discusses the dangers of Christian nationalism to the country, to the faith, and to pluralism. They share candidly about what they learned while making “God & Country,” the cost for Christians who are speaking out against the political ideology, and what new conversations they are hoping to create with this film. SHOW NOTESSegment 1 (starting at 00:35): Rob Reiner and Dan Partland on Christian nationalism “God & Country” will be in theaters on February 16. Learn more at GodAndCountryTheMovie.com. The phrase “separation of church and state” is not in the U.S. Constitution, but the concept is laid out several times, including Article VI's prohibition on any religious test for office, the First Amendment's prohibition of a government establishment of religion, and the First Amendment's guarantee of the free exercise of religion. Read more in Brent Walker's “Top 5 Myths of the Separation of Church and State.” Learn more about the Christians Against Christian Nationalism campaign – a project BJC began in 2019 – by visiting ChristiansAgainstChristianNationalism.org. Segment 2 (starting at 20:58): Post-screening Q&A with Partland and Reiner BJC and the Freedom From Religion Foundation released a comprehensive report on the role of Christian nationalism in the January 6 attack on the Capitol. You can access it here. Dan Partland mentioned The Power Worshippers, a book by Katherine Stewart on the rise of religious nationalism. It serves as a basis for the movie. Segment 3 (starting at 41:18): Closing Michelle Boorstein covered the screening for The Washington Post in this article: ‘God & Country' film spotlights Christian nationalism's threat to democracy Respecting Religion is made possible by BJC's generous donors. You can support these conversations with a gift to BJC.

director church state christians myths washington post capitol constitution separation first amendment rob reiner god country katherine stewart freedom from religion foundation bjc amanda tyler article vi brent walker

RCT 30: The Results of the Ascension.

Padre Peregrino

Play Episode Listen Later Dec 6, 2023 18:26

The Roman Catechism of Trent (RCT) p. 80-82 The Creed, Article VI, Section B.

ascension article vi section b roman catechism

RCT 29: He Ascended Into Heaven.

Padre Peregrino

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 15, 2023 20:42

The Roman Catechism of Trent (RCT) p. 76-80. The Creed, Article VI, Section A. Donate: https://padreperegrino.org/donate/

ascended article vi roman catechism

Article VI: The Holy Spirit

Bethel Community Church - Chicago – Podcasts

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 20, 2023 39:07

holy spirit article vi

Constitutional Law and the U.S. Constitution Session 6 - Federalism - The Division of Powers Between Federal and State Governments

Politics/News - Rockingham County, NC

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 13, 2023 4:45

Session 6 - Preamble and Articles of the Constitution. Part 6: Federalism - The Division of Powers Between Federal and State Governments. Welcome back to the sixth part of our session on the Preamble and Articles of the U.S. Constitution. In the previous segments, we examined the significance of the Preamble, scrutinized each Article of the Constitution, discussed the Amendments, and explored the principles of judicial review. Today, we will delve into another core principle of our constitutional system: federalism and the intricate balance of powers between the federal government and the states. Introduction to Federalism. Federalism is a fundamental aspect of the U.S. Constitution that shapes the distribution of powers and responsibilities between the federal government and individual state governments. This system was designed to strike a delicate balance, preventing either level of government from becoming too dominant. Federal Powers - Enumerated and Implied. The Constitution grants certain powers explicitly to the federal government. These are known as enumerated powers and are primarily found in Article I, Section 8. Some key federal powers include: Regulating commerce among the states and with foreign nations. Levying and collecting taxes. Coining money and establishing a national currency. Providing for the common defense and general welfare. Declaring war and maintaining the armed forces. These enumerated powers are the foundation of federal authority. In addition to these explicit powers, the federal government also possesses implied powers necessary to carry out its functions. These were affirmed in the landmark case of McCulloch v. Maryland. State Powers - Reserved and Concurrent. The Tenth Amendment to the Constitution reserves powers not delegated to the federal government to the states or the people. These reserved powers encompass a wide range of functions, including: Regulating intrastate commerce. Conducting elections. Establishing and maintaining schools. Enforcing criminal laws. Managing public health and safety. States also exercise concurrent powers, which are shared with the federal government. This means that both levels of government can act in areas such as taxation, law enforcement, and environmental regulation. The Supremacy Clause. The Supremacy Clause, found in Article VI, Section 2 of the Constitution, establishes that the federal Constitution, federal laws, and treaties are the supreme law of the land. This clause clarifies the hierarchy of laws in cases of conflict between federal and state laws. When state laws clash with federal laws or the Constitution itself, federal law prevails, and state laws are invalidated. This principle ensures that the federal government's authority is maintained when there is a need for uniformity in areas of national concern. The Role of the States. States play a crucial role in our federal system. They serve as laboratories of democracy, experimenting with different policies and approaches to address local needs. States also have the power to amend their own constitutions and pass laws in areas not explicitly reserved to the federal government. States are responsible for a wide range of policy areas, including education, healthcare, transportation, criminal justice, and environmental regulation. The diversity of state laws and regulations reflects the unique priorities and values of each state's citizens. Federalism as a Check on Government Power. Federalism serves as a check on government power, preventing any single entity from accumulating too much authority. It promotes competition and innovation in governance, as states can pursue their own policies to address specific challenges. The dual sovereignty of federalism also safeguards individual rights. If one level of government infringes on rights, individuals may find protection at the other level. This balance of power ensures that government remains responsive to the needs and preferences of its citizens. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/support

The Church

Longview Heights Sermons

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 9, 2023 41:24

As we continue to "Explore the Baptist Faith & Message," Bro. Derrick teaches us about Article VI. The Church. VI. The ChurchA New Testament church of the Lord Jesus Christ is an autonomous local congregation of baptized believers, associated by covenant in the faith and fellowship of the gospel; observing the two ordinances of Christ, governed by His laws, exercising the gifts, rights, and privileges invested in them by His Word, and seeking to extend the gospel to the ends of the earth. Each congregation operates under the Lordship of Christ through democratic processes. In such a congregation each member is responsible and accountable to Christ as Lord. Its two scriptural offices are that of pastor/elder/overseer and deacon. While both men and women are gifted for service in the church, the office of pastor/elder/overseer is limited to men as qualified by Scripture.The New Testament speaks also of the church as the Body of Christ which includes all of the redeemed of all the ages, believers from every tribe, and tongue, and people, and nation. Matthew 16:15-19; 18:15-20; Acts 2:41-42,47; 5:11-14; 6:3-6; 13:1-3; 14:23,27; 15:1-30; 16:5; 20:28; Romans 1:7; 1 Corinthians 1:2; 3:16; 5:4-5; 7:17; 9:13-14; 12; Ephesians 1:22-23; 2:19-22; 3:8-11,21; 5:22-32; Philippians 1:1; Colossians 1:18; 1 Timothy 2:9-14; 3:1-15; 4:14; Hebrews 11:39-40; 1 Peter 5:1-4; Revelation 2-3; 21:2-3.**Note: This article was amended June 14, 2023, by action of the 2023 Southern Baptist Convention**

Episode 1400: Saddleback and Other Part of Article VI

The Christian Commute

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 21, 2023 43:56

1. Seth continues his review of Matthew 22 examining the greatest commandment.2. Seth responds to a question in the inbox about freedom of religion. 3. Seth discusses a broader application of BFM Article VI.

saddleback article vi

Daily News Brief for Friday, June 16th, 2023 [Daily News Brief]

FLF, LLC

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 16, 2023 14:22

This is Garrison Hardie with your CrossPolitic Daily News Brief for Friday, June 16th, 2023. It’s been awhile guys, how about we start today with a little “On this day in history!” June 16th, on this day in history: 1779 Spain declares war on Great Britain in support of France and the USA, starting the Great Siege of Gibraltar which goes on to last 3 years, 7 months and 2 weeks 1858 Abraham Lincoln says "A house divided against itself cannot stand" accepting Illinois Republican Party's nomination for the Senate 1963 Soviet space mission Vostok 6 is launched with Valentina Tereshkova onboard, who becomes the 1st woman in space 2000 Israel complies with UN Security Council Resolution 425 after 22 years, which calls on Israel to completely withdraw from Lebanon. Israel withdraws from all of Lebanon, except the disputed Sheba Farms Film & TV 1960 "Psycho", psychological horror film directed by Alfred Hitchcock, starring Janet Leigh, Anthony Perkins, and Vera Miles, opens in New York City 1978 Film "Grease" opens, starring John Travolta and Olivia Newton-John, based on the 1971 musical https://www.baptistpress.com/resource-library/news/southern-baptists-pass-first-approval-of-constitutional-amendment-over-women-pastors/ Southern Baptists pass first approval of constitutional amendment over women pastors A motion to clarify Southern Baptists’ stance on women and men filling the role of pastor was passed by messengers on June 14. The motion, first brought last year by Virginia pastor Mike Law, received the required two-thirds vote by messengers. Another two-thirds vote of approval is necessary at next year’s annual meeting to proceed with the amendment to Article III of the SBC Constitution. The motion that was passed was amended from its original version, which was referred to the SBC Executive Committee last year at the SBC annual meeting in Anaheim, Calif. Juan Sanchez, senior pastor of High Pointe Baptist Church in Austin, Texas, offered the amendment to Law’s motion. Both pastors had discussed and agreed on its merits the previous weekend, Sanchez told fellow messengers. Article III lists five points that place churches within the definition of cooperation with the SBC. The amended motion calls for a sixth, adding churches that affirm, appoint, or employ “only men as any kind of pastor or elder as qualified by Scripture.” Sanchez initially presented his amendment as a “substitute motion.” SBC President Bart Barber, with no objection from the crowd, clarified later that it was being treated as an amendment. The Executive Committee agreed at its meeting on June 12 to bring Law’s motion to the messengers at this year’s meeting. However, the EC’s recommendation included EC opposition to the motion itself, stating that matters of belief ought to be addressed in the Baptist Faith and Message rather than the constitution. Article VI of the Baptist Faith and Message 2000 addresses The Church, stating that “While both men and women are gifted for service in the church, the office of pastor is limited to men as qualified by Scripture.” Bob Bender, pastor emeritus of Cross Fellowship Church in Colorado Springs, Colo., spoke in opposition to the motion. “Southern Baptist brothers and sisters, I beg of you,” he said. “Do not do this. All the liberals have left us. It looks like we conservatives are left to fight amongst ourselves.” Women in associate pastoral roles need to be recognized for their contributions, Bender said. Denny Burk, a messenger from Kenwood Baptist Church in Louisville, Ky., said the amendment “does nothing to diminish [women’s] calling and their work among us.” “We all believe they must be a part of the Great Commission,” said Burk, who also serves as the director of the Center for Gospel and Culture at Boyce College. The heart of the amendment, he continued, “is about how to apply our doctrinal statement to our cooperation when it comes to female pastors.” The vote took place at noon just prior to scheduled luncheons by seminaries and other groups. Before the final vote, a motion to extend time was defeated. https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2023/06/14/ma-middle-schoolers-foment-a-pronoun-rebellion-during-pride-month-and-the-media-is-aghast-n2624491 Middle Schoolers' USA Rebellion at Pride Event Causes Libs to Melt Down As the kids say nowadays, these middle schoolers are based. And by that, I mean they did something that sent shockwaves through a local Massachusetts community, stunned the local school board, and sent the liberal media into meltdown mode. Marshall Simonds Middle School in Burlington, Massachusetts, just outside of Boston, saw an LGBT event wrecked by a pronoun rebellion. Pride flags were destroyed, and chants of 'USA' rang throughout the school. To be more precise, they were chanting, “My pronouns are USA,” while decked out in patriotic colors. The event caused some local school board members to lose sleep over the incident, which proves that some people in this community need to go outside and touch some grass. Now, the LGBT mob is pushing to punish these kids for exercising their constitutional right to free speech and expression… Listen to the reaction they caused: https://twitter.com/i/status/1669005086167560194 -Play Video Nancy Bonassera, co-chair of the Burlington Equity Coalition, said that students were invited to wear rainbow clothing on June 2 in celebration of Pride Month. The coalition is calling for "consequences" for the students who participated in the counter-protest and is urging the district to fill a diversity, equity and inclusion role that they say has been vacant for almost a year. Select Board member Michael Espejo said a "bad light has been cast over our town." "I was very upset, I've lost sleep over it," Espejo said about the incident. "It kind of shocked me to my core. I didn't think something like that could happen in Burlington." Burlington School Committee Chair Martha Simon condemned the incident at a meeting Tuesday night, but declined any specifics on disciplinary actions, stressing the offenders were mere eighth graders. But a room full of parents, mostly of LGBTQ kids, argued that school officials needed to take a stronger stand and use the incident as a "teaching moment" refuting the notion that overt pride displays are somehow not appropriate for schools. This is just a reminder to get your kids out of public school, and here’s a way to do that! Classical Conversations Classical Conversations supports homeschooling parents by cultivating the love of learning through a Christian worldview in fellowship with other families. They provide a classical Christ-centered curriculum, local like-minded communities across the United States and in several countries, and they train parents who are striving to be great classical educators in the home. For more information and to get connected, please visit their website at ClassicalConversations.com. Again that’s ClassicalConversations.com. https://thenationalpulse.com/2023/06/14/farage-climate-lockdowns-are-coming-mark-my-words/ Farage: Climate Lockdowns Are Coming, ‘Mark My Words’. Brexit leader Nigel Farage has foretold of impending, authoritarian measures by Western governments designed to limit people’s movements and vehicle usage under the guise of “climate change” action. Speaking to supporters via social media, Farage warns: “climate lockdowns are coming,” citing a recent limit placed on automobile usage by the far left Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan. In response to one of Khan’s tweets, which encouraged Londoners to “avoid unnecessary car journeys,” Farage argued: “he’s telling us: don’t use your car unnecessarily, no engine idling, no burning of wood or waste.” Khan has often warned of the dangers of climate change and used it to justify London’s “Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ),” which charges Brits £12.50 per day to drive in the capitol. https://twitter.com/i/status/1668555766670802944 - Play Video Now it’s time for my favorite topic, sports! https://www.breitbart.com/sports/2023/06/14/huston-report-mlb-quietly-tells-teams-to-ditch-pride-uniforms/ MLB Quietly Tells Teams to Ditch ‘Pride’ Uniforms Major League Baseball has quietly told teams that they can stop forcing players to wear uniforms and hats adorned with gay pride rainbow colors during their “Pride Night” games. The decision comes as the L.A. Dodgers are taking major heat for inviting the radical, anti-Catholic hate group, the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, to its gay pride night game on June 16. And also as several major corporations, including Bud Light and Target, are facing serious economic losses thanks to their wild-eyed support of the far-left LGBTQ agenda. The Tampa Bay Rays was the first MLB team to announce that players would not wear any rainbow-colored patches or jerseys during the June pride game this year. But, the league kept this change to its pride celebrations very quiet since giving teams dispensation to dump the pride colors and special jerseys back in February, according to the Washington Examiner. The Rays had trouble with the pride night plans last year when several players balked at being forced to wear rainbow colors. At the time, several players rebelled against the pride jerseys and refused to wear them during last year’s pride game. Not all teams are dumping the forced fealty to the groomer agenda. The L.A. Dodgers and San Francisco Giants have announced their intentions to continue wearing the pride jerseys. There has been one team that has eschewed the pride business from the beginning. The Texas Rangers is the only team that has consistently refused to indulge in any demonstrations of “pride” and has never scheduled any “Pride Night” games. Pro baseball is not the only sport to see growing resistance to having “pride” forced on players, games, and their sport. A growing number of NHL players and teams are also turning away from blatant expressions of the groomer agenda. Teams, including the Chicago Blackhawks and the Buffalo Sabres, have experienced issues with using pride jerseys. In addition, San Jose Sharks goalie James Reimer opted out of wearing the jersey, citing his religious convictions. In January, Philadelphia Flyers defenseman Ivan Provorov also decided not to wear his team’s gay pride jersey for similar reasons. And that same month, the New York Rangers opted out of wearing the gay pride jersey. It seems to all be part of a growing trend of Americans finally getting sick and tired of the gay agenda being shoved down everyone’s throats by multi-billion-dollar corporations. Major League Baseball was one of the last major sports to succumb to the extreme woke agenda. It’s time it goes back to being the sport that welcomes everyone to come play baseball, not to be inundated with politics.

united states jesus christ women texas church culture israel france law americans gospel speaking pride lgbtq western spain scripture mayors mlb target massachusetts catholic lgbt nhl brexit sisters louisville los angeles dodgers lebanon pride month major league baseball great commission khan ditch abraham lincoln great britain sanchez ky anaheim colorado springs rays brits alfred hitchcock john travolta texas rangers bud light calif bender burlington san francisco giants tampa bay rays olivia newton john gibraltar new york rangers ec chicago blackhawks executive committee espejo southern baptists londoners colo philadelphia flyers sbc this day in history buffalo sabres san jose sharks nigel farage washington examiner burk farage anthony perkins pride night sadiq khan janet leigh middle schoolers perpetual indulgence vostok article iii mark my words james reimer juan sanchez vera miles valentina tereshkova on this day in history boyce college denny burk article vi un security council resolution great siege select board illinois republican party bob bender daily news brief crosspolitic daily news brief

Daily News Brief for Friday, June 16th, 2023

Daily News Brief

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 16, 2023 14:22

This is Garrison Hardie with your CrossPolitic Daily News Brief for Friday, June 16th, 2023. It’s been awhile guys, how about we start today with a little “On this day in history!” June 16th, on this day in history: 1779 Spain declares war on Great Britain in support of France and the USA, starting the Great Siege of Gibraltar which goes on to last 3 years, 7 months and 2 weeks 1858 Abraham Lincoln says "A house divided against itself cannot stand" accepting Illinois Republican Party's nomination for the Senate 1963 Soviet space mission Vostok 6 is launched with Valentina Tereshkova onboard, who becomes the 1st woman in space 2000 Israel complies with UN Security Council Resolution 425 after 22 years, which calls on Israel to completely withdraw from Lebanon. Israel withdraws from all of Lebanon, except the disputed Sheba Farms Film & TV 1960 "Psycho", psychological horror film directed by Alfred Hitchcock, starring Janet Leigh, Anthony Perkins, and Vera Miles, opens in New York City 1978 Film "Grease" opens, starring John Travolta and Olivia Newton-John, based on the 1971 musical https://www.baptistpress.com/resource-library/news/southern-baptists-pass-first-approval-of-constitutional-amendment-over-women-pastors/ Southern Baptists pass first approval of constitutional amendment over women pastors A motion to clarify Southern Baptists’ stance on women and men filling the role of pastor was passed by messengers on June 14. The motion, first brought last year by Virginia pastor Mike Law, received the required two-thirds vote by messengers. Another two-thirds vote of approval is necessary at next year’s annual meeting to proceed with the amendment to Article III of the SBC Constitution. The motion that was passed was amended from its original version, which was referred to the SBC Executive Committee last year at the SBC annual meeting in Anaheim, Calif. Juan Sanchez, senior pastor of High Pointe Baptist Church in Austin, Texas, offered the amendment to Law’s motion. Both pastors had discussed and agreed on its merits the previous weekend, Sanchez told fellow messengers. Article III lists five points that place churches within the definition of cooperation with the SBC. The amended motion calls for a sixth, adding churches that affirm, appoint, or employ “only men as any kind of pastor or elder as qualified by Scripture.” Sanchez initially presented his amendment as a “substitute motion.” SBC President Bart Barber, with no objection from the crowd, clarified later that it was being treated as an amendment. The Executive Committee agreed at its meeting on June 12 to bring Law’s motion to the messengers at this year’s meeting. However, the EC’s recommendation included EC opposition to the motion itself, stating that matters of belief ought to be addressed in the Baptist Faith and Message rather than the constitution. Article VI of the Baptist Faith and Message 2000 addresses The Church, stating that “While both men and women are gifted for service in the church, the office of pastor is limited to men as qualified by Scripture.” Bob Bender, pastor emeritus of Cross Fellowship Church in Colorado Springs, Colo., spoke in opposition to the motion. “Southern Baptist brothers and sisters, I beg of you,” he said. “Do not do this. All the liberals have left us. It looks like we conservatives are left to fight amongst ourselves.” Women in associate pastoral roles need to be recognized for their contributions, Bender said. Denny Burk, a messenger from Kenwood Baptist Church in Louisville, Ky., said the amendment “does nothing to diminish [women’s] calling and their work among us.” “We all believe they must be a part of the Great Commission,” said Burk, who also serves as the director of the Center for Gospel and Culture at Boyce College. The heart of the amendment, he continued, “is about how to apply our doctrinal statement to our cooperation when it comes to female pastors.” The vote took place at noon just prior to scheduled luncheons by seminaries and other groups. Before the final vote, a motion to extend time was defeated. https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2023/06/14/ma-middle-schoolers-foment-a-pronoun-rebellion-during-pride-month-and-the-media-is-aghast-n2624491 Middle Schoolers' USA Rebellion at Pride Event Causes Libs to Melt Down As the kids say nowadays, these middle schoolers are based. And by that, I mean they did something that sent shockwaves through a local Massachusetts community, stunned the local school board, and sent the liberal media into meltdown mode. Marshall Simonds Middle School in Burlington, Massachusetts, just outside of Boston, saw an LGBT event wrecked by a pronoun rebellion. Pride flags were destroyed, and chants of 'USA' rang throughout the school. To be more precise, they were chanting, “My pronouns are USA,” while decked out in patriotic colors. The event caused some local school board members to lose sleep over the incident, which proves that some people in this community need to go outside and touch some grass. Now, the LGBT mob is pushing to punish these kids for exercising their constitutional right to free speech and expression… Listen to the reaction they caused: https://twitter.com/i/status/1669005086167560194 -Play Video Nancy Bonassera, co-chair of the Burlington Equity Coalition, said that students were invited to wear rainbow clothing on June 2 in celebration of Pride Month. The coalition is calling for "consequences" for the students who participated in the counter-protest and is urging the district to fill a diversity, equity and inclusion role that they say has been vacant for almost a year. Select Board member Michael Espejo said a "bad light has been cast over our town." "I was very upset, I've lost sleep over it," Espejo said about the incident. "It kind of shocked me to my core. I didn't think something like that could happen in Burlington." Burlington School Committee Chair Martha Simon condemned the incident at a meeting Tuesday night, but declined any specifics on disciplinary actions, stressing the offenders were mere eighth graders. But a room full of parents, mostly of LGBTQ kids, argued that school officials needed to take a stronger stand and use the incident as a "teaching moment" refuting the notion that overt pride displays are somehow not appropriate for schools. This is just a reminder to get your kids out of public school, and here’s a way to do that! Classical Conversations Classical Conversations supports homeschooling parents by cultivating the love of learning through a Christian worldview in fellowship with other families. They provide a classical Christ-centered curriculum, local like-minded communities across the United States and in several countries, and they train parents who are striving to be great classical educators in the home. For more information and to get connected, please visit their website at ClassicalConversations.com. Again that’s ClassicalConversations.com. https://thenationalpulse.com/2023/06/14/farage-climate-lockdowns-are-coming-mark-my-words/ Farage: Climate Lockdowns Are Coming, ‘Mark My Words’. Brexit leader Nigel Farage has foretold of impending, authoritarian measures by Western governments designed to limit people’s movements and vehicle usage under the guise of “climate change” action. Speaking to supporters via social media, Farage warns: “climate lockdowns are coming,” citing a recent limit placed on automobile usage by the far left Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan. In response to one of Khan’s tweets, which encouraged Londoners to “avoid unnecessary car journeys,” Farage argued: “he’s telling us: don’t use your car unnecessarily, no engine idling, no burning of wood or waste.” Khan has often warned of the dangers of climate change and used it to justify London’s “Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ),” which charges Brits £12.50 per day to drive in the capitol. https://twitter.com/i/status/1668555766670802944 - Play Video Now it’s time for my favorite topic, sports! https://www.breitbart.com/sports/2023/06/14/huston-report-mlb-quietly-tells-teams-to-ditch-pride-uniforms/ MLB Quietly Tells Teams to Ditch ‘Pride’ Uniforms Major League Baseball has quietly told teams that they can stop forcing players to wear uniforms and hats adorned with gay pride rainbow colors during their “Pride Night” games. The decision comes as the L.A. Dodgers are taking major heat for inviting the radical, anti-Catholic hate group, the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, to its gay pride night game on June 16. And also as several major corporations, including Bud Light and Target, are facing serious economic losses thanks to their wild-eyed support of the far-left LGBTQ agenda. The Tampa Bay Rays was the first MLB team to announce that players would not wear any rainbow-colored patches or jerseys during the June pride game this year. But, the league kept this change to its pride celebrations very quiet since giving teams dispensation to dump the pride colors and special jerseys back in February, according to the Washington Examiner. The Rays had trouble with the pride night plans last year when several players balked at being forced to wear rainbow colors. At the time, several players rebelled against the pride jerseys and refused to wear them during last year’s pride game. Not all teams are dumping the forced fealty to the groomer agenda. The L.A. Dodgers and San Francisco Giants have announced their intentions to continue wearing the pride jerseys. There has been one team that has eschewed the pride business from the beginning. The Texas Rangers is the only team that has consistently refused to indulge in any demonstrations of “pride” and has never scheduled any “Pride Night” games. Pro baseball is not the only sport to see growing resistance to having “pride” forced on players, games, and their sport. A growing number of NHL players and teams are also turning away from blatant expressions of the groomer agenda. Teams, including the Chicago Blackhawks and the Buffalo Sabres, have experienced issues with using pride jerseys. In addition, San Jose Sharks goalie James Reimer opted out of wearing the jersey, citing his religious convictions. In January, Philadelphia Flyers defenseman Ivan Provorov also decided not to wear his team’s gay pride jersey for similar reasons. And that same month, the New York Rangers opted out of wearing the gay pride jersey. It seems to all be part of a growing trend of Americans finally getting sick and tired of the gay agenda being shoved down everyone’s throats by multi-billion-dollar corporations. Major League Baseball was one of the last major sports to succumb to the extreme woke agenda. It’s time it goes back to being the sport that welcomes everyone to come play baseball, not to be inundated with politics.

united states jesus christ women texas church culture israel france law americans gospel speaking pride lgbtq western spain scripture mayors mlb target massachusetts catholic lgbt nhl brexit sisters louisville los angeles dodgers lebanon pride month major league baseball great commission khan ditch abraham lincoln great britain sanchez ky anaheim colorado springs rays brits alfred hitchcock john travolta texas rangers bud light calif bender burlington san francisco giants tampa bay rays olivia newton john gibraltar new york rangers ec chicago blackhawks executive committee espejo southern baptists londoners colo philadelphia flyers sbc this day in history buffalo sabres san jose sharks nigel farage washington examiner burk farage anthony perkins pride night sadiq khan janet leigh middle schoolers perpetual indulgence vostok article iii mark my words james reimer juan sanchez vera miles valentina tereshkova on this day in history boyce college denny burk article vi un security council resolution great siege select board illinois republican party bob bender daily news brief crosspolitic daily news brief

April 17, 2023 Rockingham County Commissioners Meeting

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 19, 2023 126:59

April 17, 2023 Rockingham County Commissioners MeetingAGENDA1. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER BY CHAIRMAN RICHARDSON2. INVOCATION3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Aubree Herndon, 8 years old, Monroeton Elementary, Avery Herndon, 6 years old, Monroeton Elementary4. RESOLUTION - Lance Metzler, County ManagerApproval - Resolution honoring the work of Robert "Bob" Wray Carter, County Historian for his lifetime work in genealogy and Rockingham County history.5. APPROVAL OF APRIL 17, 2023 AGENDA6. CONSENT AGENDA (Consent items as follows will be adopted with a single motion, second and vote, unless a request for removal from the Consent Agenda is heard from a Commissioner)A. Pat Galloway, Finance DirectorApproval - Transfer the June 2023 outstanding principal balance of the 2020B (NTE Reidsville Energy Center) debt in the amount of $961,000 from a Water Sewer Enterprise Fund debt classification to a General Government debt classification. The project was suspended prior to construction of an enterprise system asset and is more appropriately classified as a General Government debt type as discussed during the February 2023 annual bUdget planning retreat.2 Approval - Fiscal Year 2022-2023 Audit Contract and Engagement Letter with audit firm Thompson, Price, Scott, Adams & Co. PA The audit fees are $50,500 for the County audit and $2,625 for the Tourism Development Authority audit. The County fee "is $2,000 less than the prior fiscal year due to transitioning the writing of the annual financial report from the audit firm to the County Finance Department.3. Approval - Appropriate $22,000 of Northwest Fire District restricted fund balance that is due to Northwest Fire Department.4. Approval - Transfer funds of $2,208 to install an awning at the entrance of the Board of Elections Building. Funding will be provided by eXisting budget appropriations as follows:Board of Elections Building Repair line $1,000 Public Buildings - All County Buildings Repair $1,2085. Approval - Appropriate $12,845 of fund balance restricted for the Sheriff Department to purchase rifles and related equipment in order to assign a patrol rifle to sworn personnel who currently are not issued a county owned rifle. B. Todd Hurst, Interim Tax AdministratorApproval- Tax collection and reconciliation reports for March including refunds for March 22, 2023 thru April 4, 2023.C. Susan Washburn, Clerk to the BoardApproval - Recessed Board minutes for February 10, 2023 and Regular meeting minutes for April 3, 2023.D. Ben Curtis, Rockingham County Register of DeedsApproval - Resolution authorizing the Rockingham County Register of Deeds, to temporarily transfer records to an off-site or out-of-County location for reproduction, repair or preservation.7. PUBLIC COMMENT8. PUBLIC HEARINGS:A. Hiriam "Marzy" Marziano, Community Development Director1. Case 2023-03 - Zoning Amendment: Rezoning from Residential Protected (RP) and Residential Agricultural (RA) to Residential Agricultural (RA) Applicant: Elizabeth Suzanne Knight - Tax PINs: 7903-01-48-7699 -Address: 466 Eden Church Rd. - Huntsville Township.2. Case 2023-04 - Zoning Amendment: Rezoning from Highway Commercial Conditional District (HC-CD) to Highway Commercial (HC) - Applicant: George Daniel Carter, 111- Tax PINs: 7923-01-18-2000 -Address: 2804 US Highway 220 - Huntsville Township.3. Case 2023-05 - Zoning Amendment: Rezoning from Residential Protected (RP) to Residential Agricultural (RA) - Applicant: Trent Prater, Clayton Homes - Tax PINs: 7061-09-25-4439 - Address: Odie Ln (Parcel # 175179) Leaksville Township.4. Case 2023-07 - A text amendment request to the UDO Permitted Use Table and Supplemental Regulations to permit Religious Schools and Places of Worship in the Residential Protected (RP) district when located on the same parcel - Applicant: Corey Engebretson, Floyd Missionary Baptist Church UDO Amendments Permitted use Table, Article IV, Section 41.04; Supplemental Regulations Article VI, Section 62.79.5. Case 2023-08 - A request to amend various sections of the UDO related to the following:i. Manufactured Homes on Individual Lotsii. Landscape Design Standardsiii. Major Subdivision Reviewiv.. Wireless Telecommunication Towersv. Accessory Dwelling Unit/Guesthousevi. Shipping ContainersApplicant: Rockingham County Community Development Department, UDO Amendments: Article III, Section 3401, Article IV, Section 41.04; Article V, Section 54.01; Article VI, Section 62.01, Section 62.39, Section 62.66, Section 62.79, Section 62.81, Section 62.88.B. Lance Metzler, County ManagerResolution requesting establishment of a "No Wake Zone" for Belews Lake at the Carolina Marina.9. PRESENTATION: Victoria Whitt, Sandhills CenterSandhills Center County General Budget funding request and program update.10. PRESENTATION: Lance Metzler, County ManagerApproval - Adoption of a resolution and approve a budget amendment for NC Opioid Settlement funding to establish a Behavioral Health Urgent Care (BHUC) in Rockingham County.11. NEW BUSINESS12. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS13. CLOSED SESSION:Pursuant to: N.C.G.S. 143-318.11 (a)(1) Approve Closed Session Minutes; and N.C.G.S. 143-31811(a)(5) Instruct Negotiating Agents14. ADJOURN###

Day 27 He Ascended Into Heaven, Sitteth At The Right Hand Of The Father Almighty

Catechism of The Council of Trent (in Less than a Year)

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 19, 2023 19:24

In this episode we commence our study of Article VI of The Apostles Creed. The sixth article is divided into two parts. The first part is "He Ascended into Heaven." and the second part is "Sitteth at the Right Hand of the Father Almighty." We explore the way in which Christ ascended into heaven both as man and as God. We also discuss the meaning of the words "sitteth" and "at the right hand." To aid us in our study we take a brief look at four articles from the third part of the Summa Theologica concerning the Ascension of Christ. (S.T. Q 57. a. 1-3 and Q. 58. a.1)

god jesus christ ascension ascended right hand apostles creed father almighty summa theologica article vi

The Neoliberal Round Breaking Interview with Brian Concannon on Haitian Justice

The NeoLiberal Round

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 11, 2023 77:13

Recently I interviewed Brian Concannon for my podcast, The Neoliberal Round. Little did I know that there was a situation that he is involved with as a Human Rights Advocate on Haitian justice and democracy. Brian is the Executive Director for The Institute for Justice and Democracy in Haiti. It's a US based Human Rights agency that is actively involved in working here in the US to advocate for the Haitians. While conducting the interview, I learned that the US through Canada is actively seeking CARICOM to intervene in the Haitian crisis since the assasination of the Haitian President October 2022. The US has since installed a Prime Minister that Haitians oppose and this has created internal conflicts especially against the US backed PM who is calling for the US to intervene, despite the objection of Haitians. Mr. Concannon shared a letter from a human rights and advocacy group in Haiti, written by Mario Joseph the Managing Attorney to CARICOM. The letter, written November 2022 stated: BUREAU DES AVOCATS INTERNATIONAUX 3, 2ème rue Lavaud B.P. 19048 Port-au-Prince, Haiti November 4, 2022 Dr. Carla Natalie Barnett Secretary-General Caribbean Community Re: Proposed International Intervention in Haiti Dear Dr. Barnett: We are writing you in relation to the armed international intervention in Haiti that has been requested by Dr. Ariel Henry, the de facto Prime Minister of Haiti, and supported by the United States and Canada, to explain that any support for the intervention by the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) would violate CARICOM's democratic principles, betray Haitians' centuries-long struggle for democracy and sovereignty, and implicate CARICOM in attacks against civilians exercising their basic human rights. Ever since the intervention was proposed, Haitians have taken to the streets by the tens of thousands to oppose it. We have issued statements, spoken out in the media, and done anything else we could to let the world know that the intervention is designed to prop up the unconstitutional, corrupt and repressive de facto government and stifle legitimate dissent. De facto Prime Minister Henry ascended to his post not through any Haitian procedure, but through an announcement by the US-led Core Group. He had been nominated by President Jovenel Moïse of the Parti Haitienne Tet Kale party (PHTK), whose mandate had expired five months previously. The PHTK has not run an election that was either fair or timely in the decade it has maintained power. Haiti's Parliament became inoperative in January 2020, and the terms of all local elected officials ended in July of that year. Haiti's Supreme Court has lacked enough members to constitute a quorum since March. This situation constitutes a sharp departure from the right to a fair and open democratic system guaranteed by Article VI of the CARICOM Charter of Civil Society. PHTK governance has been demonstrably brutal...We want CARICOM to once again insist that the international community stop supporting an unconstitutional, imposed regime, and allow Haitians to find a democratic, sustainable solution to our political crisis." In solidarity, MArio Josephs Managing Attorney. You can see the entire letter at https://theneoliberal.com. "Serving the world today, to solve tomorrow's Challenges By making popular what was the monopoly, which is the aim of our communication" Rev. Renaldo McKenzie is a Lecturer, Author of Neoliberalism.... Host of The Neoliberal Round Podcast. Support us at https://anchor.fm/theneoliberal/support. Email Renaldo at renaldocmckenzie.com. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/theneoliberal/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/theneoliberal/support

Article VI: Of Holy Scripture

Broome Anglican Church

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 29, 2022 21:23

Series: Firm Foundations Speaker: Michael Baines

holy scripture article vi

Ep# 262 Thoughtful Thursday

According to Kallas

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 15, 2022 26:25

Article VI not Article V Why enforcing the Constitution is better than changing it.

constitution thoughtful thursday article vi

Ep. 133 - Article VI & VII

Constitutional Chats hosted by Janine Turner and Cathy Gillespie

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 8, 2022 54:53

Buckle up, we are going to cover a lot of ground today! As we have learned, the grand structures of our government were created in earlier articles in the US Constitution: Congress, the Presidency, the Judiciary, the Amendment Process, the guarantee of republicanism. Article VI codified that debts incurred by the previous government would be recognized and paid back by the new government under the Constitution. Why was this important in making our new country a player on the international stage? Why were the Supremacy Clause and Oath Clause in Article VI revolutionary for its time and how did they work to bind the states into one unified country? And why wouldn't our country exists if not for Article VII which changed our system for ratifying the new Constitution? Join our student panel and guest, Former Assistant to the President for Economic Policy Andrew Olmem for our discussion into Articles VI and VII of the US Constitution.

president education congress buckle constitution american history presidency us constitution vii judiciary ratification remotelearning supremacy clause article vi

Cooper v. Aaron (1958) Majority Opinion (Arkansas Resistance to School Desegregation and Federal Law)

What SCOTUS Wrote Us

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 5, 2022 39:54

Audio of the 1958 unanimous opinion of the Court in Cooper v. Aaron. A few years after the Court's 1954 decision in Brown v. Board of Education, the Arkansas legislature and Governor Orval Faubus openly resisted the Supreme Court's decision to desegregate public schools. So, the February following the integration crisis at Little Rock High School, members of the Little Rock school board and Superintendent filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, urging suspension of the plan to integrate schools - they were asking the courts for black students to be returned to their former segregated schools for the next two-and-one-half years while they figured out a more permanent solution to avoid integration. When the case made its way before the Supreme Court, the question before them was whether Arkansas officials were bound by federal court orders mandating desegregation. In a unanimous per curiam opinion the Court broke it down like this: it was constitutionally impermissible under the Equal Protection Clause to deprive black students of their equal rights under the law, and that since the Supremacy Clause of Article VI made the U.S. Constitution the supreme law of the land, and Marbury v. Madison made the Supreme Court the final interpreter of the Constitution, the precedent set forth in Brown v. Board of Education was the supreme law of the land and was therefore binding on all the states. Yes, even Arkansas. I omit citations when reading SCOTUS opinions in order to provide a better listening experience; you may access the opinion here: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/358/1/#tab-opinion-1942101 Music by Epidemic Sound

Pro-life GOP Congresswoman killed in car accident, Ten Christian aid workers in Ukraine released by Russian soldiers, Southern Baptists: Role of pastor limited to men

The WorldView in 5 Minutes

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 4, 2022

It's Thursday, August 4th, A.D. 2022. This is The Worldview in 5 Minutes heard at www.TheWorldview.com. I'm Adam McManus. (Adam@TheWorldview.com) By Jonathan Clark Ten Christian aid workers in Ukraine released by Russian soldiers Praise God! Ten Christians with the ministry Orphan's Promise have been released in Ukraine. The group consisted of aid workers, volunteers, and refugees. Russian troops abducted the group as they were evacuating people from Mariupol. The troops beat and tortured the volunteers before releasing them. One is in the hospital. Orphan's Promise is asking for prayer for another volunteer named Valentina. Russian troops abducted her last March as she was distributing food to people in bomb shelters near Mariupol. Psalm 102:19-20 says, “For He looked down from the height of His sanctuary; from heaven the LORD viewed the earth, to hear the groaning of the prisoner, to release those appointed to death.” Sam Brownback heading up Nat'l Committee for Religious Freedom U.S. Ambassador Sam Brownback is leading the new National Committee for Religious Freedom to fight for the free exercise of religion in America. Brownback served as President Trump's Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom and established the first global ministerial on religious freedom. Brownback told CBN News he's now concerned about religious liberty violations right here in the U.S. BROWNBACK: “After working on international religious freedoms for so many years, I came back home and found we're losing ground here. We're losing ground in our schools, in our health care system. You keep getting government and big business crowding in on your right to freely practice your faith.” To illustrate, Brownback said his organization's bank account was cancelled without explanation. Pro-life, Christian Republican Congresswoman killed in car accident Republican Congresswoman Jackie Walorski of Indiana, age 58, and two of her staffers were killed in a car crash on Wednesday, reports NBC News. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy said, "This news is absolutely devastating. Jackie was a dear friend, trusted advisor, and the embodiment of integrity who achieved the admiration and respect of all her colleagues in the House." Walorski District Director Zachery Potts, age 27, and her Communications Director Emma Thomson, age 28, also died in the two-car collision. According to a sheriff's Facebook post, a car collided with Walorski's car head on. The driver of that car was also killed. Congresswoman Walorski and her husband, Dean, were devout Christians, spent four years as missionaries in Romania, and were faithful members of South Gate Church in the Assemblies of God denomination. She was dedicated to protecting the lives of unborn babies. In this particular speech from the floor of the House, she was especially enraged that her Democrat colleagues universally championed baby-killing by abortion. WALORSKI: “My colleagues remain obsessed with killing unborn babies in the name of female empowerment. “I've witnessed the cruelty of abortion and it's ugly. “In South Bend, Indiana. Dr. Ulrich Klopfer provided abortions for decades. When he died in 2019. His family found the medically preserved remains of 2,411 children hidden in his garage. That is 2,411 human babies preserved in formaldehyde in jars in his garage. It was national news for a week. This abortionist left a legacy of death and destruction. That is what extreme looks like. “Abortion sold as healthcare is a sickening violation of human dignity that Americans should not and cannot tolerate. As a nation, we have an obligation to future generations to reject abortion on demand and to fight for life.” With the death of Congresswoman Jackie Walorski, the unborn babies lost a true champion. Please pray for her husband, Dean, as well as for the families of her staffers that God would comfort them as they grieve. Join me and can send a card of sympathy to Dean Swihart, to 2410 Grape Rd. Suite 2A, Mishawaka, IN 46545. 43 abortion mills closed since Roe v Wade overturned The Guttmacher Institute reports 43 abortion mills across 11 states have stopped offering to murder unborn babies since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. The 11 states in the South and Midwest have banned nearly all abortions. Before the Supreme Court ruling, these states had 71 facilities offering abortions. Now, there are 28. Several states have shut down all abortion mills including Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, South Dakota, and Texas. Hispanics turning to Republican Party Since the 2018 midterms, a new CBS Poll found that more Hispanic voters are turning to the Republican Party In 2018, 69% of Hispanics supported Democrats, and 29% supported Republicans. This year, 45% of Hispanics support Democrats, and 42% support Republicans. Hispanic voters, along with women and voters under 30, have been key Democrat voting groups in the past. Florida v. “woke” businesses and government Florida officials are standing up to "woke" government and business. On July 28, the Florida Department of Education told schools they do not have to follow the Biden administration's new transgender policies for bathrooms and sports teams. And, on Monday, Florida Republican Governor Ron DeSantis tweeted, “Florida has put WOKE banking on notice.” DeSantis held an event last Wednesday on ending institutional discrimination against people for their political beliefs. Days after the event, Paypal reversed its account lock on the conservative group called “Moms for Liberty”. Southern Baptists: Role of pastor limited to men And finally, several Southern Baptist leaders released a clarification on the definition of “pastor” from the Southern Baptist Convention's statement of faith. The signatories included Albert Mohler, President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. The statement affirmed Article VI of the SBC statement of faith which says, “While both men and women are gifted for service in the church, the office of pastor is limited to men as qualified by Scripture.” The statement comes during controversy in the denomination after Saddleback Church, an SBC member congregation, appointed female pastors last year. 1 Timothy 3:2 says, “A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, of good behavior, hospitable, able to teach.” Close And that's The Worldview in 5 Minutes on this Thursday, August 4th, in the year of our Lord 2022. Subscribe by iTunes or email to our unique Christian newscast at www.TheWorldview.com. Or get the Generations app through Google Play or The App Store. I'm Adam McManus (Adam@TheWorldview.com). Seize the day for Jesus Christ.

america god jesus christ texas president lord donald trump education house americans christians joe biden ukraine russian alabama south scripture indiana oklahoma supreme court missouri republicans democrats moms mississippi midwest arkansas roe v wade large ambassadors abortion soldiers paypal killed released google play workers woke committee limited romania hispanic south dakota app store ron desantis nbc news seize pro life orphan religious freedom hispanics congresswoman car accidents southern baptists mariupol sbc southern baptist convention assemblies southern baptist theological seminary florida department saddleback church albert mohler international religious freedom christian aid cbn news mishawaka sam brownback brownback russian soldiers article vi walorski ambassador sam brownback

Misunderstanding the Establishment Clause

The BreakPoint Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 14, 2022 6:16

In response to the recent Dobbs decision and the Supreme Court's clear, consistent support for religious liberty throughout this term, many progressives are warning of an imminent “Christian theocracy.” Among the loudest voices predicting our collective doom are mainstream media outlets. For example, a recent story in Reuters claimed, “U.S. Supreme Court Takes Aim at Separation of Church and State.” What's missing in virtually all of these pieces is a proper understanding of the “establishment clause.” The establishment clause is derived from the opening lines of the First Amendment which states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof …” There are two ways this statement is commonly misunderstood. First, it is often described as establishing a “wall of separation between church and state.” In fact, those words are found nowhere in the Constitution. The phrase actually was coined later in a letter by Thomas Jefferson. Second, and more importantly, it is assumed that if organized religion cannot be supported by the state, then secularism is somehow “neutral.” Thus, by default, anything goes as long as it's “secular.” Understanding the historical context is essential. In the 18th century, an “established” religion referred to an official state church. In the U.S., individual states had already established churches, such as the Anglican Church in Virginia. The First Amendment specifically applied to Congress and prohibited a national church. To prefer the Anglican Church over the Congregationalists or Presbyterians would, at the time, mean alienating certain citizens and entire states. States continued to have established churches well into the 19th century. In addition, the First Amendment was not intended to prohibit religious activities in governmental institutions. From the very beginning, Congress started each session with prayer. That continues today and is led by an official chaplain. Our founding fathers, particularly James Madison, believed that religious liberty was an innate right, and inseparable from the freedom of conscience. He also believed that religion would better flourish in a free marketplace of ideas. That thinking was the basis for the free exercise clause. This understanding of the freedom of conscience is the foundation for the other freedoms protected in the First Amendment. Without conscience rights, we cannot truly speak, write, assemble, or advocate freely from our deepest beliefs. That's why the freedom of religion is often called “the first freedom.” Its position in the Bill of Rights highlights its importance. Although the rights of conscience should not be controversial, somehow, that's what they have become. How this happened is worth considering. By claiming secularism to be neutral, proponents of secularism ,as far back as the 19th century, attempted to broadly apply laws originally intended by Protestants to prevent Catholic schools from accessing state funds. In the 20th-century, secularists embraced the concept of “a living Constitution” in order to transform the meaning of the First Amendment, attempting to keep religious institutions from accessing state funds and allowing only “secular” views in the public arena. Though many court cases illustrate this, among the more important was Torcaso v. Watkins (1961), which declared unconstitutional Maryland's requirement that officeholders state belief in God. Rather than ruling on the basis of Article VI, which prohibits religious tests for public office, the Supreme Court ruled on the basis of the establishment clause of the First Amendment and of the Fourteenth Amendment, which prohibits states from violating the rights guaranteed to U.S. citizens. The same line of reasoning has since been used to challenge prayers at public meetings, Bible studies in schools, and nativity scenes on public property. In the process, the First Amendment was turned on its head, taking a clause intended to keep the state from backing any one denomination and construing it to position the state in opposition to all organized religions. In footnote 11 of the Torcaso v. Watkins decision, Justice Hugo Black listed secular humanism as one of a number of religions “which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God.” Calling humanism a religion was not outlandish. For a century, humanists such as John Dewey and Julian Huxley had defined their beliefs as a religion. After all, secularism involves certain claims about the cosmos, existence, and human nature. And yet in 1994, the Ninth Circuit Court ruled in Peloza v. Capistrano Unified School District that while “religion” should be broadly interpreted for free exercise clause purposes, “anything ‘arguably non-religious' should not be considered religious in applying the establishment clause.” In other words, secular organizations were able to play both sides, qualifying as a religion for the free exercise clause but free from constraints from the establishment clause. To further determine whether religious activities could utilize public spaces, the Supreme Court derived the so-called “Lemon Test” in the case Lemon v. Kurzman (1991). According to this rule, a religious activity is only licit on public grounds if it performs a secular purpose, neither advances nor inhibits religion, and does not foster excessive government entanglement in religion. This test maintained an obviously secular bias: Secular organizations were not required to pass any tests to obtain access. In the recent decision in the Coach Kennedy case, the Supreme Court continued its long-overdue corrections to the anti-religious way the First Amendment had been interpreted. Particularly by unequivocally tossing the “Lemon Test,” the Court has stopped the active suppression of religious beliefs and practice. We ought not fear an impending theocracy, but instead welcome a redress to the unjust and ahistorical understandings of religion.

2/2 #PRC: In violation of the NPT Article VI; & What is to be done? Henry D. Sokolski @HenrySokolski, Executive Director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center (NPEC). Henry #Sokolski @NuclearPolicy

The John Batchelor Show

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 24, 2022 8:25

Photo: 2/2 #PRC: In violation of the NPT Article VI; & What is to be done? Henry D. Sokolski @HenrySokolski, Executive Director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center (NPEC). Henry #Sokolski @NuclearPolicy https://npolicy.org/arresting-nuclear-adventurism-china-article-vi-and-the-npt-occasional-paper-2201/

executive director executives violation prc education center article vi henry d nonproliferation policy

1/2 #PRC: In violation of the NPT Article VI; & What is to be done? Henry D. Sokolski @HenrySokolski, Executive Director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center (NPEC). Henry #Sokolski @NuclearPolicy

The John Batchelor Show

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 24, 2022 10:25

Photo: 1/2 #PRC: In violation of the NPT Article VI; & What is to be done? Henry D. Sokolski @HenrySokolski, Executive Director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center (NPEC). Henry #Sokolski @NuclearPolicy https://npolicy.org/arresting-nuclear-adventurism-china-article-vi-and-the-npt-occasional-paper-2201/

executive director executives violation prc education center article vi henry d nonproliferation policy

CP Daily News Brief 03/06/2020

Daily News Brief

Play Episode Listen Later Mar 12, 2022 1354:38

This is Toby Sumpter with your CrossPolitic Daily News Brief for Friday, March 6, 2020 Nothing is Going on in the PCA, Especially Not in Missouri, Shut Up http://www.boom.lgbt/index.php/art-enter/144-a-e/1907-the-q-collective-announces-cast-of-transluminate-2020?fbclid=IwAR3q-htun27nHZRCunI2gX6bs_A-k4KhIPqNhO7nOaeK4bfaEX-syM18828 The Missouri Presbytery of the PCA and Greg Johnson's Memorial Presbyterian Church are back in the news today with the revelation that they recently hosted the Transluminate Arts Festival. The event describes itself as “a short-play festival and celebration of transgender, agender, non-binary, genderqueer, and genderfluid artists.” The event was held Feb. 27-29 and Feb. 29-March 1 at The Chapel, which is an event venue and ministry partner operated by volunteers from Memorial Presbyterian Church. Plays that were performed included a homosexual couple discussing their testosterone shots -- presumably implying that they are women trying to be men? Another description reads: “Joe, a transgender man, and Shawna, a transgender woman, are married, and Joe is carrying their child. The bottom of the page includes a content warning: Plays may contain adult language and frank sexual situations. Remember, Greg Johnson and Memorial Presbyterian were in the news back in 2018 when they hosted the first Revoice Conference, celebrating LGBT+ and other sexual minorities and helping them live in the traditional sexual ethic. If that sounds like a contradiction to you, you wouldn't be the only one. Greg Johnson was interviewed by CrossPolitic, and you can find that discussion in our show archives at crosspolitic dot com or on our youtube page. Included in their breakout sessions were titles like What Queer Treasure will be in the New Jerusalem? This kicked up quite a dust storm, which resulted in Missouri Presbytery forming a study committee to investigate Pastor Greg Johnson and Memorial Pres. This resulted in a presbytery committee that ultimately found that Greg Johnson and Memorial Pres did not commit any grave or serious errors at Revoice 2018 and nothing that took place there struck at the vitals of religion and it is too early to pass any judgment on whether the emphasis on the need for ‘gay spaces' is a grave or serious doctrinal error. The Missouri Presbytery also voted to commend the practice of same-sex back rubs but promised to revisit the issue next year. Likewise, the scandal elicited a response from Mark Dalbey, President of Covenant Theological Seminary – the official seminary of the PCA, located in St. Louis in March of 2019. Dalbey responded to criticisms and questions about Revoice 2018 . While he affirmed biblical sexuality and clearly identified homosexual identity, lust, and activity as sinful, his strongest admonition was for those who have publicly accused Covenant Seminary of compromise. The video captures quite well why conservatives consistently lose ground in these discussions. President Dalbey's most vehement condemnation was for people who may have shared speculations about Covenant's involvement or influence on Revoice. He effectively called the public questions and concerns “abominations” and “perversions” and “vile affections” and called sodomy and sodomite lust merely “sin.” The clearest thing from the video is that God hates slander, hates gossip, and hates anyone who raises questions and concerns publicly that might be construed by anyone as slander or gossip. So shut up. There was not a word of rebuke for Greg Johnson or Memorial Pres or the Missouri Presbytery for causing the confusion. Finally, remember that Greg Johnson “came out” as wishing he was a sodomite in Christianity today last year shortly before repeating the line on the floor of the PCA general assembly and receiving a round of applause. The assembly barely passed a resolution affirming the Nashville Statement (over Pastor Johnson's objections), but when another pastor read through the major Bible passages on homosexuality, his speech was objected to and a formal complaint was filed by a number of PCA delegates calling his speech intemperate. So notice that the great and heinous sin in the PCA is intemperate speech, asking questions, raising concerns publicly about public events. Sure homosex is technically a sin, but the real scandal is not churches hosting gay spaces and queer treasure inquiries. The real scandal is people being bothered by it and asking Covenant Seminary if they have anything to do with it. Don't forget the political nature of all of this: Jesus said that His people are the light of the world and the salt of the earth. The reason President Trump would have no problem appointing a sodomite to his cabinet is because the largest conservative Reformed denomination in America cannot speak clearly on the matter. The only thing they can say clearly is that you should talk very softly and with a lisp and only raise questions privately and after an ever more private back rub, while remaining completely celibate. Don't worry no grave or serious doctrinal error will take place. Ilhan Omar Wants Your Children https://parentalrights.org/convention-on-the-rights-back/?fbclid=IwAR3MqGCCktl2jUIu1SpahQkRfXlEsBWQOtNgfKUyLLmgIuOcI4ue06sr5Q8 From Parental Rights dot org we learn that In February, Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) introduced a resolution, House Resolution 854, to call for the US Senate to ratify theUnited Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (the Convention, or CRC). In so doing, she once more opened the door—or at least knocked on it—for international law to override parental rights in our country. On November 20, 1989, the UN General Assembly approved the CRC and opened it for ratification. Within ten months, the requisite 20 nations had adopted the treaty, bringing it into force. Since then, every nation except the United States has ratified the CRC. The United States signed the treaty under President Bill Clinton in 1995, signaling our intention to become a party to it. But it has never been ratified with the constitutionally required consent of two-thirds of the Senate as our Constitution requires, so we remain the lone holdout. But there are three solid reasons to give the Convention a solid raspberry, beyond the fact that Rep. Omar is the one who has re-introduced it into congress. The first reason is the content of the treaty itself. The worst part is a provision that states, “in all matters concerning children, the best interest of the child shall be the primary consideration.” But for the government to make “best interest of the child” its primary consideration, it must first decide—and get to decide—what the best interest of the child actually is. In our courts today, a judge or bureaucrat doesn't get to make that determination without first reaching a finding that the child's parents are unfit (abusive or negligent). Until then, American law presumes that “natural bonds of affection lead parents to act in the best interests of their child” (Parham v. J.R.(1979), emphasis added). So who decides what your child's “best interest” is? Well, at least for the time being, you do, not the government. The CRC would change that by removing this presumption that favors parents and jumping straight to the part where a judge or bureaucrat gets to decide. In every case. The treaty also claims to protect a child's “right to access information,” which could be used to override a parent's efforts to protect their child from pornography or other harmful web content; or a “right to access to medical care,” which can be used to cut parents out of their child's medical decisions, like pumping chemicals into their bodies, like puberty blockers or abortions. Another appalling part of the Treaty is the Committee on the Rights of the Child (the Committee), an oversight panel set up by the provisions of the treaty. Since beginning their work in 1990, the Committee has exercised unchecked authority in deciding what the treaty does or does not mean and what nations must do to be in compliance. For example, when the treaty first went into effect fewer than 10 nations worldwide had any kind of ban on corporal discipline (i.e. the biblical practice of spanking), and no nation expressed any concern that it violated the rights of children. But the Committee, of its own accord and with nothing in the Convention to support it, began telling nations that they were not in compliance because they had not outlawed corporal discipline of children in every setting, including the home. As a result, dozens of nations have since enacted such laws, believing it is their international treaty obligation to do so. And that brings us to the third and biggest reason this treaty is trouble: under Article VI of our own Constitution, a ratified treaty becomes “the supreme Law of the Land.” So ratification of this treaty, which for other nations is an aspirational statement at best (and for many, such as Iran, China, and North Korea, a mere political smokescreen), in America would have the effect of passing a massive new federal law on the family. Today, nearly all family law is at the state level. And these statutes, as bad as some of them are, are still bound by the Constitution and our courts to respect the role of parents as their child's first and best line of defense. Under the CRC, those laws would become the responsibility of the United States Congress, and respect for parents would be gone. Our system—the CRC system—would then depend on judges and bureaucrats to decide what is in a child's “best interests” as defined by Congress, and ultimately, as defined by the CRC. Ratifying the Convention would leave it to that elitist, foreign committee to decide when or if our treatment of children was acceptable under the CRC. Right, a committee in Switzerland is supposed to know what is best for your child. Fortunately, there is no significant threat of the CRC being taken up by President Trump or sent to the Senate, and there is no significant threat of this Senate giving its two-thirds consent. But lawmakers like Rep. Omar are dedicated incrementalists and groomers. They know that the way to get this eventually passed is by bringing it up over and over and over again. Of course Christians should oppose this kind of totalitarian nonsense with every fiber of their being. But they should also recognize that the government has already made a significant claim on your children by the very existence of the public school systems, especially the Department of Education in Washington D.C. Until that office is shut down, the Feds are already claiming an interest in parenting your children, and that is wicked and evil and tyrannical. But the same thing goes for the State as well. And as my colleague Gabe has pointed out numerous times, it's also a bit of Republican insanity that continues to fund public schools that disciple children to be hard lefty progressives. It would be like we had a Muslim invasion and the Muslims opened up free schools everywhere, and Christians just mindlessly send their kids to the Muslim schools and are confused by why their kids keep turning out at Muslims. The Republican Party needs to officially repudiate the socialism of public schools and begin working to defund and privatize them all. Until then, Republicans are all soft-socialists without cajones. At least Bernie is bold enough to admit it. This is Toby Sumpter with Crosspolitic News. You can find this show and all the others on the Fight Laugh Feast Network at Crosspolitic.com or Fightlaughfeast.com or on our app, which you can download at your favorite app store, just search “Fight Laugh Feast”. Support Rowdy Christian media, and become a Fight Laugh Feast Club Member, and for a limited time you can get your very own Fight Laugh Feast t-shirt. You can't get these anywhere else except by becoming a member while supplies last. You are also getting access to tons of content, including most recently, 2.5 hours with David French at a BBQ joint in Nashville, over an hour with Economist Walter Williams in his living room in Philadelphia, a couple of hours with Black Guns Matter Maj Toure and Pastor-Rapper Curt Kennedy in a look bookshop in Fishtown, Philly, as well as Gary Demar's God and Government and No Limits Eschatology, and our very own Worldview Shotgun Series. You also get $100 off your registration for our first annual Fight Laugh Feast Conference, where we hope to meet many of you in Nashville, TN October 1st through the 3rd. Go to fightlaughfeast.com to register now. Have a great weekend. https://flfnetwork.com/coming-soon/

united states america god jesus christ american president donald trump china education bible law state land child christians christianity government washington dc philadelphia nashville congress iran missouri republicans rights muslims lgbt covenant switzerland senate bernie sanders plays bbq constitution north korea committee convention bill clinton republican party feds us senate chapel treaty reformed new jerusalem pca united states congress un general assembly crc david french parham greg johnson fishtown covenant theological seminary house resolution revoice nashville statement crosspolitic pastor johnson gary demar article vi toby sumpter ratifying revoice conference ilhan omar d mn fight laugh feast conference pastor greg johnson daily news brief tn october crosspolitic daily news brief

Augsburg Confession Article VI: New Obedience

Concord Matters from KFUO Radio

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 26, 2022 51:42

What is faith, and what is the relationship of faith and good works? Learn what "new" means in regards to obedience, whether good works are necessary for the Christian, and what we mean when we say that good works are "bound to happen". Also, hear about how true worship is a good work, why it's wrong to "rely on good works," and how you might tell the difference between relying on works and just doing them. Rev. Michael Schuermann, pastor of University Lutheran Church in Champaign, IL joins host Rev. Sean Smith to discuss the New Obedience in Article VI of the Augsburg Confession. Find your copy of The Augsburg Confession - Concordia Reader's Edition at cph.org or read online at bookofconcord.org/augsburg-confession.

confessions rev obedience champaign sean smith augsburg confession article vi university lutheran church

Augsburg Confession Article IV: Justification

Concord Matters from KFUO Radio

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 12, 2022 57:41

We come to Article VI of the Augsburg Confession on Justification, the article by which the church stands or falls. Why is this article so critical? Also, learn the differences between the Lutheran and Roman Catholic concepts of "the grace of God" and the doctrine of justification, what we believe about justification and who does the work, and the implications of this article on justification for how we will read the rest of the Augsburg Confession. Rev. Charles Henrickson, pastor of St. Matthew Lutheran Church in Bonne Terre & Grace Lutheran Church in DeSoto, Missouri, joins host Rev. Sean Smith to discuss Article IV of the Augsburg Confession. Find your copy of The Augsburg Confession - Concordia Reader's Edition at cph.org or read online at bookofconcord.org/augsburg-confession.

god confessions missouri rev justification roman catholic lutheran sean smith desoto augsburg confession grace lutheran church article iv article vi matthew lutheran church

Episode 5: Religion and the Constitution

History From the Old Brick Church

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 2, 2022 56:30

Podcast Host John Ericson interviews Author Tony Williams on the role of religion in the Constitution. This episode focuses on Article VI, which prevents religious tests for holding public office, and the 1st Amendment, which guarantees that the federal government will not establish religion or interfere in the free exercise of religion. Williams expounds on the challenges that continue to test us and how Religious Freedom is still an evolving idea. What does the Constitution say about public religious displays? Prayer in public schools? What are the origins of the separation of Church and State? What other contentious issues do we continue to wrestle with in our time? Tony Williams is a Senior Fellow at the Bill of Rights Institute in Arlington, Virginia and the author of six books including Washington and Hamilton: The Alliance that Forged America, with co-author Stephen Knott, and Hamilton: An American Biography. Williams has degrees from Ohio State University and Syracuse University. Intro and outro created by Thomas Fosdick. Project supported by a grant from Virginia Humanities.

church washington prayer state religion project constitution amendment arlington ohio state university senior fellow syracuse university religious freedom tony williams article vi rights institute virginia humanities stephen knott hamilton the alliance

David Shestokas Article VI Life Liberty Rittenhouse Prosecutor Malfeasance Not Guilty Self Derfense 111121

Pastor Greg Young

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 11, 2021 32:09

guilty kyle rittenhouse prosecutors life liberty malfeasance article vi david shestokas

David Shestokas Article VI Life Liberty Rittenhouse Prosecutor Malfeasance Not Guilty Self Derfense 111121

Pastor Greg Young

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 11, 2021 32:09

guilty kyle rittenhouse prosecutors life liberty malfeasance article vi david shestokas

#263 Informing on the Informants

Liberty and Posterity with Ron Higgins

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 16, 2021 23:17

In this program, I will be reading, and commenting on, several articles that discuss the aftermath of the January 6 demonstration while inserting my comments. Among the articles, portions of which I will read, include: “FBI confirms there was no insurrection on Jan. 6” by Conn Carroll, Commentary Editor, which appeared in the Washington Examiner on August 20, 2021. “Exclusive: FBI finds scant evidence U.S. Capitol attack was coordinated – sources” By Mark Hosenball and Sarah N. Lynch, which appeared in Reuters.com on August 20, 2021. “'Horror story': Navy vet, never set foot in Capitol on Jan. 6, but held in solitary” Accused of leading 'military-style attack' despite no evidence by Art Moore, which was published on October 5, 2021, by World Net Daily.com. The disparity in viewpoints in these articles illustrates the difference in assessment they portray of the people who exercised their First Amendment rights of Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Assembly, and Freedom to Petition for a Redress of Grievances based on whether the article's author accepts the bogus narrative that the mostly peaceful demonstration at the US Capitol on January 6 was an insurrection. This emphasizes the importance of adhering to the Biblical admonition of Psalm 1:1 “Blessed is the man who walks not in the counsel of the ungodly This program continues to discuss the response to the events surrounding the mostly peaceful demonstration that occurred at the US Capitol on January 6, 2021 in which citizens protested the fraudulent 2020 election because the treatment of these demonstrators vividly illustrates the destruction of our Constitutional Republic. Numerous citizens who exercised their First Amendment rights of freedom of speech, freedom to peaceably assemble, and freedom to petition for a redress of grievances because of the blatant fraud that occurred during the 2020 election have been vilified by the treasonous Bible-mocking media and by deceitful, self-serving politicians. Many of those who peacefully demonstrated on January 6 have been incarcerated and tortured without a trial, thus violating the Fifth Amendment (deprived of liberty without due process), Sixth Amendment (deprived of a right to a speedy trial), and Eighth Amendment (deprived of reasonable bail and subject to cruel and unusual punishment). As stated in Article VI of the US Constitution, the US Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land, so the fact that various levels of government are blatantly violating the clearly stated rights codified in the Bill of Rights makes this exceptionally execrable. This outrageous criminal action by our government against law-abiding citizens is indicative of what the ruling class wants to do to any who question them or obstruct them in any way and is a message from our Deep State rulers to us to cower us into submission by giving us vivid examples of how cruel, sadistic, and criminal their behavior can be towards those who oppose them. As I said in a previous program, you are guaranteed to have friendly relations with liberals if you hand over your possessions, hand over your children, hand over your liberty, and keep your mouth shut. I intend to do none of these. The program title, Liberty and Posterity, comes from the US Constitution, the preamble of which states that one of the reasons for writing and ratifying the Constitution was to “secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity,” our posterity being our children and descendants not yet born. As a reminder, on the Liberty and Posterity program, we view all events and activities in relation to reality, truth, and Biblical morality. If you have a problem with that, the problem is on your end, not ours. James Madison, Fourth President of the United States and one of the authors of the US Constitution wrote: “The future and success of America is not in this Constitution, but in the laws of God upon which this Constitution is founded.” Proverbs 14:34 Righteousness exalteth a nation: but sin is a reproach to any people. Psalm 9:17 The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God. John Dickinson, one of the founding fathers of the United States and the author of the first draft of the Articles of Confederation, the agreement under which the thirteen colonies coordinated their actions after the Declaration of Independence in 1776, wrote: “Honor, justice, and humanity, call upon us to hold, and to transmit to our posterity, that liberty which we received from our ancestors. It is not our duty to leave wealth to our children, but it is our duty to leave liberty to them.” Five people died during the January 6, 2021 demonstration at the US Capitol, but the only death by violence was that of Ashli Babbitt, callously shot by a Capitol Police Officer. Never forget Ashli Babbitt. My email address is freedom@libertyandposterity.com. © Copyright 2021 Liberty and Posterity

#261 Justice Blocked

Liberty and Posterity with Ron Higgins

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 2, 2021 22:11

This program will continue to discuss the response to the events surrounding the mostly peaceful demonstration that occurred at the US Capitol on January 6, 2021 in which citizens protested the fraudulent 2020 election. I am continuing to do this because the treatment of these demonstrators vividly illustrates the destruction of our Constitutional Republic. Numerous citizens who exercised their First Amendment rights of freedom of speech, freedom to peaceably assemble, and freedom to petition for a redress of grievances because of the blatant fraud that occurred during the 2020 election have been vilified by the treasonous Bible-mocking media and by deceitful, self-serving politicians. Many of those who peacefully demonstrated on January 6 have been incarcerated and tortured without a trial, thus violating the Fifth Amendment (deprived of liberty without due process), Sixth Amendment (deprived of a right to a speedy trial), and Eighth Amendment (deprived of reasonable bail and subject to cruel and unusual punishment). As stated in Article VI of the US Constitution, the US Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land, so the fact that various levels of government are blatantly violating the clearly stated rights codified in the Bill of Rights makes this exceptionally execrable. This outrageous criminal action by our government against law-abiding citizens is indicative of what the ruling class wants to do to any who question them or obstruct them in any way and is a message from our Deep State rulers to us to cower us into submission by giving us vivid examples of how cruel, sadistic, and criminal their behavior can be towards those who oppose them. As I said in a previous program, you are guaranteed to have friendly relations with liberals if you hand over your possessions, hand over your children, hand over your liberty, and keep your mouth shut. I intend to do none of these. Specifically, in this program, I will be reading, and commenting on, the death of Steven Anderson of St Augustine, Florida, who was identified as one of eight people from North Florida involved in the January 6, 2021, protests at the US Capitol. He had been indicted in March on charges that included civil disorder and assaulting or resisting officers. Mr. Anderson claimed that he never assaulted anyone; that he collapsed after being sprayed and was assisted by Capitol Police officers. Prosecuting attorneys had suppressed the video that would have corroborated Mr. Anderson's account; by failing to provide exculpatory evidence to Mr. Anderson and his attorney, the prosecutors in Mr. Anderson's case appear to have violated the Brady Rule, named after Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), which requires prosecutors to disclose materially exculpatory evidence in the government's possession to the defense. It seems obvious to me that the incarceration of those involved in the mostly peaceful demonstration at the US Capitol on January 6, 2021 is meant to provide the rationale for the demonization and persecution of those who oppose the current regime in Washington, DC. Five people died during the January 6, 2021 demonstration at the US Capitol, but the only death by violence was that of Ashli Babbitt, callously shot by a Capitol Police Officer. Never forget Ashli Babbitt. My email address is freedom@libertyandposterity.com. © Copyright 2021 Liberty and Posterity

#260 Bush Whacked

Liberty and Posterity with Ron Higgins

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 25, 2021 23:32

This program will continue to discuss the response to the events surrounding the mostly peaceful demonstration that occurred at the US Capitol on January 6, 2021 in which citizens protested the fraudulent 2020 election. I am continuing to do this because the treatment of these demonstrators vividly illustrates the destruction of our Constitutional Republic. Numerous citizens who exercised their First Amendment rights of freedom of speech, freedom to peaceably assemble, and freedom to petition for a redress of grievances because of the blatant fraud that occurred during the 2020 election have been vilified by the treasonous Bible-mocking media and by deceitful, self-serving politicians. Many of those who peacefully demonstrated on January 6 have been incarcerated and tortured without a trial, thus violating the Fifth Amendment (deprived of liberty without due process), Sixth Amendment (deprived of a right to a speedy trial), and Eighth Amendment (deprived of reasonable bail and subject to cruel and unusual punishment). As stated in Article VI of the US Constitution, the US Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land, so the fact that various levels of government are blatantly violating the clearly stated rights codified in the Bill of Rights makes this exceptionally execrable. This outrageous criminal action by our government against law-abiding citizens is indicative of what the ruling class wants to do to any who question them or obstruct them in any way and is a message from our Deep State rulers to us to cower us into submission by giving us vivid examples of how cruel, sadistic, and criminal their behavior can be towards those who oppose them. As I said in a previous program, you are guaranteed to have friendly relations with liberals if you hand over your possessions, hand over your children, hand over your liberty, and keep your mouth shut. I intend to do none of these. Specifically, in this program, I will be reading, and commenting on, a speech given by former President George W. Bush on September 11, 2021, near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, where United Airlines Flight 93 is reported to have crashed on September 11, 2001. I will be frequently injecting my comments. I will compare what President Bush says in his speech to portions of an article entitled “20th ANNIVERSARY OF 9/11—TWO DECADES OF CENSORSHIP” that appeared in Joel Skousen's World Affairs Brief of September 17, 2021; specifically, I will include the portion of the World Affairs Brief article that covered Flight 93. The World Affairs Brief is an excellent source of information and is well worth the $4 per month that it costs. Five people died during the January 6, 2021 demonstration at the US Capitol, but the only death by violence was that of Ashli Babbitt, callously shot by a Capitol Police Officer. Never forget Ashli Babbitt. My email address is freedom@libertyandposterity.com. © Copyright 2021 Liberty and Posterity

The Secret Teachings 9/22/21 - Supreme Law in a Needle Stack

The Secret Teachings Archives

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 23, 2021 118:29

The United States Constitution is the 'Supreme Law of the Land', according to Article VI. While many dismiss or ignore this historically unique document as outdated in an attempt to obfuscate its meaning - the purpose of government and preservation of liberty - others invoke it to obtain its opposite meaning. Media is running wild with claims that there are no, few, or strict definitions of religious exemptions, despite 42 U.S. Code, Section 2000e, Subsection J, defining "religion" as "all aspects of religious observance and practice, as well as belief," meaning that the institution of religion(s) are separate as per the definition of your own views, and therefore those beliefs, observances and practices are protected under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, among other laws, and the U.S. Constitution. Trying to find meaning in all of this is like finding Supreme Law in a stack of needles. Support this podcast

media land code constitution stack needle civil rights act united states constitution secret teachings article vi supreme law

The Secret Teachings 9/22/21 - Supreme Law in a Needle Stack

The Secret Teachings

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 23, 2021 118:30

The United States Constitution is the 'Supreme Law of the Land', according to Article VI. While many dismiss or ignore this historically unique document as outdated in an attempt to obfuscate its meaning - the purpose of government and preservation of liberty - others invoke it to obtain its opposite meaning. Media is running wild with claims that there are no, few, or strict definitions of religious exemptions, despite 42 U.S. Code, Section 2000e, Subsection J, defining "religion" as "all aspects of religious observance and practice, as well as belief," meaning that the institution of religion(s) are separate as per the definition of your own views, and therefore those beliefs, observances and practices are protected under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, among other laws, and the U.S. Constitution. Trying to find meaning in all of this is like finding Supreme Law in a stack of needles.

media land code constitution stack needle civil rights act united states constitution secret teachings article vi supreme law

Middle East Military Mess | Constitution Corner

Talking Freedom Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 16, 2021 5:50

After 20 years of military operations in the Middle East, we are finally out. If Congress never declared war, how did we get there in the first place? What is an AUMF (Authorization for Use of Military Force) and how did President George W. Bush use it to get us into the Middle East and at what cost? Why did we leave so much military equipment when we pulled out? So many questions. Join Robert Owens to learn the answers and more in this episode of Constitution Corner. Resources: Read the latest articles about Afghanistan in The New American Issue, “Afghanistan: Planned Disaster?” Thousands of Afghans are flooding into the U.S. Learn more about our Action Project, “Stop Mass Migration”. Learn how to “Reign in Big Government with Article VI, Not V”. Join us in Dallas for a two-day conference featuring speakers, workshops, great food and more. Get involved and Join The John Birch Society.

congress afghanistan middle east military mess thousands constitution george w bush afghans big government military force article vi

EP269: The Feminist vs BFM Article VI

Laymen's Cup Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 13, 2021 84:39

On the Episode we discuss Article VI of the Baptist Faith and Message, on the church and the role of the pastor. This Episode is brought to you by Laymen's Cup Coffee, where everyone can find a brew. Check it out at laymenscupcoffee.com. Thank you for listening. If you are listening on iTunes, please subscribe and leave a review. Laymen on iTunes If you have comments or questions for us, you can email us at laymenscup@gmail.com. Go and follow our YouTube Channel and subscribe. We are on Facebook at www.facebook.com/laymensc up. You can also follow us on Instagram and Twitter @laymenscup. It is always our hope to get the Gospel out to as many people as possible and you can help us by sharing the show. Word of mouth is the greatest way we will get the show out to the masses. Thank you. Please pray for us, as we are praying for you. Kemp, Wes, Shaun, and Bob. Our Sponsors Candee Land Creations Navigating Neverland with Amy Carolina Furniture Mart

gospel feminists kemp laymen article vi

The Constitution - Article VI

The STAND podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 23, 2021 21:04

Few know or care about Article VI of the Constitution. But any person of faith, whatever the belief, should know about the content of this very special constitutional provision and be prepared to both understand and defend it. Here the words: “No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.” If you qualify and consequently are nominated to office, federal office of any kind, or federal public trust of any kind, you can be a person of any religious belief you wish without disqualification, or for that matter none at all. Religious belief can not be investigated, vetted, much less required and no test of any kind regarding that religious belief shall ever be given to any qualified candidate for office of the United States of America. Rather plain, clear and direct words, are they not? But of course, this constitutional prohibition was completely ignored by Democrats, you know those progressive, ultra–liberal – radical individuals who now inhabit and control the democratic party, when Judges Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett were nominated by then President Trump for confirmation as Justices of the United States Supreme Court. The confirmation of those three Judges, all good, incredibly intelligent, well versed and experienced in the law and the Constitution would make the composition of the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) CATHOLIC, with seven out of nine Justices professing such faith. SEVEN OF NINE ROMAN CATHOLIC! Anti–religionists, and perhaps quite clearly anti–Roman Catholic Senators obviously disliked that fact fearful that the: “Dogma runs deep” in the judicial veins of those Justices and that they would be tempted to vote Supreme Court decisions on the basis of their Catholic faith. That was anathema to Senator Schumer, Feinstein, themselves Jewish of some sort and with Justices Thomas, Alito, Roberts and Sotomayor already in place, three more Catholics on the Supreme Court comprising 80% of all Justices would simply be far too much. They therefore set about in confirmation hearings to expose their Catholicism, sincere as it was for these three, with the hope that there would be enough other Senators, themselves perhaps somewhat anti–Catholic or concerned with an overbalance, who would vote against confirmation. They cared nothing at all, these radical, liberal democratic Senators about the Constitution or the prohibitions against any such attempted qualification under the clear terms of Article VI. They wanted what they wanted and nothing, including and especially the Constitution in this case would get in the way. DOGMA RUN DEEP candidates would simply not be acceptable. By the way, in addition to the seven confirmed Roman Catholic Justices of the Supreme Court, the other two, Justices Kagan and Breyer are Jewish. Ironically, there are no Protestants, none at all even though Protestants are the largest religious grouping in the United States, all Christian people of faith included who are not Roman Catholic. I sometimes wonder whether Senators Schumer and Feinstein ever thought about that. Regardless of their religious belief, these seven Catholic Justices have voted the law, interpreted correctly the Constitution in virtually every case and decided what is fair and right for America, Catholicism notwithstanding. They are honest, fair minded, hardworking, truly American, constitutionally caring interpreters of the law and we the people are fortunate to have them making ultimate and life–guiding and changing decisions. Biden and company now study the possibility of: PACKING THE SUPREME COURT. That is, adding Justices as many as six, or four, or at least two, each of whom of course would be liberal if not radical with respect to the Constitution in order to make certain that they, the progressives – socialists – Marxists get the decisions they want. Virtually every one of the nine Justices has publicly stated what a horrible decision that would be, turning the court political, biased, and in many ways unconstitutional in decision making, all of which would utterly destroy any confidence which WE THE PEOPLE might have in this once great court of ultimate justice. Seven Roman Catholics and two Jews making ultimate decisions for Americans is simply repugnant to Biden and the radical Democratic party he comes from, and supports, and which supports him. If that packing happens in any form, what a tragic day it would be for we the people and for the America we love. Democrats have absolutely no regard for Article VI and the prohibition against inquiry into a nominee's religious views. Politically for them, it is a day and age of: ANYTHING GOES! Interestingly, Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor, herself Roman Catholic, may be the most liberal – radical – organic constitutionalist of any of the nine Justices. She professes a strong Roman Catholic faith on the one hand, and is often on the side of radical decision making some of which may be viewed as contrary to the teachings and principles of the Catholic church. And the same with Chief Justice John Roberts, himself Catholic, and nominated as a supposed conservative regardless of his Catholic beliefs. The Chief Justice has voted in irregular patterns with decision making sometimes contrary to Catholic principles or perhaps his own personal beliefs. And, although their time as Supreme Court Justices has been limited, there is really no clear and certain voting patterns and habits which have been displayed by the new Justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett. It seems that for some of these Justices, it is one thing to be Catholic and practice the faith in THE PERSONAL LIFE, but quite another thing to go up against Catholicism, the Catholic church and its teachings when it comes to judicial decision making. Many regard that as a supreme case of hypocrisy. Such however is life in America today, politically, judicially and spiritually. Take the most debated Supreme Court decision of all time: ROE V. WADE, which legalized abortion on a five – four Supreme Court vote. Five people authorized the killing, the murdering of now approaching 70 million known babies – human beings through the process of abortion. Now comes one case before the Supreme Court this next term, and perhaps even more which will put the issue of abortion and the decision making of Roe before the Supreme Court for elimination or modification. It will be fascinating to see the end results, the votes, especially the votes of those who are Catholic as this matter is decided. There is little doubt that Justices Thomas and Alito will vote against Roe. It cannot be predicted how Chief Justice Robert will vote, and of course, this will be the first opportunity for Justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett to evaluate and decide. Many legal scholars think that Roe v. Wade was a clear unconstitutional decision, with no foundation in the Constitution for the so called RIGHT OF ABORTION. These constitutional scholars indicate that the issue of abortion should properly remain with the states and the people, and fall under the terms and conditions of Amendments IX and X which prohibit the Congress or the courts of the United States to expand and add to the Constitution where the power to do so or the ultimate objectives have not been SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED by the Constitution itself. If in fact Roe is overturned or seriously constitutionally modified, the unrest, resistance and protest in America from liberal – radicals will be fearful indeed, no matter how constitutional such a decision might be. Watch carefully, my fellow Americans, what your – our Supreme Court decides in this critical next term. In Article VI of the Constitution, the so called religious test clause and section, the content again deals with the matter of oath upon taking office and the prohibition against religious test clause. At the original constitutional convention, proponents of the OATH CLAUSE wanted public servants to be: SINCERE FRIENDS TO RELIGION. That so called NOD TO GOD was watered down when oath could be replaced upon confirmation by affirmation. The framers in the First Amendment to the Constitution made FREEDOM OF RELIGION the very first freedom and for so many of those constitutional founders, the most important freedom of all. They knew what would happen in America should the religious wars of Europe occur once again in America. They knew that they must prevent the Congress from establishing any kind of religion, direct or indirect, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof in order to avoid European religious wars. Be a friend, and stay away from establishing or preventing anything RELIGION, direct or indirect. Let it be and let it happen. That was then, and this is now, something entirely different and religion, in so many ways direct and indirect, is on the judicial table and there will be numerous attempts to circumscribe, modify or even eliminate religion, and especially Christianity and perhaps even more especially Roman Catholic Christianity from the public square. The friends of religion in 1776 have turned to the enemies of religion in 2021. Now it is claimed by Democrats, all of them including the socialist – Marxist side of the Democrat party that Democratic President Joe Biden is a: DEVOUT CATHOLIC. If that is true, then Biden is perhaps one of the biggest hypocrites in America, professing to believe in and espouse the doctrine, principles and morals of the Catholic church on the one hand personally but working as aggressively and perhaps more so than any President of the United States against those principles in so many ways. Biden and his Administration champion abortion, the expansion of abortion rights and even the codification of Roe, that is turning the decision making of Roe into legislation, aggressively fostering the gay agenda, a proponent of euthanasia, forcing all, including and especially The Little Sisters of the Poor in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania to offer abortion and contraceptive coverage in health insurance among any other and many other attempts at legislation or executive orders which fly in the face of Roman Catholic teachings. One Catholic Bishop rightly said that President Joe Biden is a political embarrassment to the Roman Catholic church, an understatement if there ever was one. Catholic commentator and writer Mary Margaret Olohan writes that what she calls the “fake news media – both secular and Catholic” are going to such great lengths to portray Joe Biden as a “devout Catholic.” Ms. Olohan says that the strategy behind this public posturing by liberal – radical Democrats has one ultimate purpose in mind: “To make Catholicism indistinguishable from liberal ideology.” As such, nothing would be a better way to eviscerate Catholicism, water it down and change traditional thinking, principles, and even moral values as liberal – Democrats would want. They want the liberal, often hypocritical Joe Biden to be “the face of what it means to be a Catholic in good standing.” But the orthodox, the traditional, the real Roman Catholics top to bottom will have no part of that, none whatsoever. They know the hypocrisy; they chafe at the tolerance of anything or anyone liberal – radical in the Catholic church – faith who tolerates this and they now begin to take a stand as all men and women of spiritual goodwill should. Our society is deeply secular if not antireligious – Christianity – Catholicism and that cultural – spiritual warfare should be recognized and all good Christians should now be ready and actually involved in: THE FIGHT OF FAITH. You should know well the contents of Article VI of the Constitution, my fellow Americans. And you should know by heart, by memory all of those very precious terms and conditions, the freedoms and rights granted by the First Amendment to the Constitution. They are the most fundamental, the most necessary, the most indispensable rights and freedoms of a free people. If we wish to stay free, if we wish American democracy to survive, nothing can water down, change much less eliminate the precious protections of Article VI and Amendment I of the finest document ever written, the Constitution of the United States. The war for freedom is on, my fellow Americans. You are in that war, that cancel culture and religion war whether you like it or not. It is time for you to take a stand like we do and with all your might: FIGHT THE FIGHT OF FAITH.

Article VI: The Church (pt. 4) - The Baptist Faith and Message 2000

Play Episode Listen Later May 16, 2021 47:28

Sermon from Tom Buck on May 16, 2021

Article VI: The Church (pt. 4) - The Baptist Faith and Message 2000

Play Episode Listen Later May 16, 2021 47:28

Sermon from Tom Buck on May 16, 2021

Article VI: The Church (pt. 3) - The Baptist Faith and Message 2000

Play Episode Listen Later May 2, 2021 32:10

Sermon from Tom Buck on May 2, 2021

Article VI: The Church (pt. 3) - The Baptist Faith and Message 2000

Play Episode Listen Later May 2, 2021 32:10

Sermon from Tom Buck on May 2, 2021

Article VI: The Church (pt. 2) - The Baptist Faith and Message 2000

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 18, 2021 42:58

Sermon from Tom Buck on April 18, 2021

Article VI: The Church (pt. 2) - The Baptist Faith and Message 2000

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 18, 2021 42:58

Sermon from Tom Buck on April 18, 2021

Article VI: The Church - The Baptist Faith and Message 2000

church sermon baptist article vi

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 11, 2021 36:51

Sermon from David Attebury on April 11, 2021

Article VI: The Church - The Baptist Faith and Message 2000

church sermon baptist article vi

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 11, 2021 36:51

Sermon from David Attebury on April 11, 2021

3-31-2021 Constitution Classroom

Loving Liberty Radio Network

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 2, 2021 48:43

Col. John Eidsmoe with the Foundation for Moral Law shares his thoughts on Resurrection weekend as well as completing his exploration of Article V and beginning to delve into Article VI of the U.S. Constitution. --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/loving-liberty/support

foundation resurrection constitution col classroom moral law article v article vi

The Church

Crestview Baptist Church - Prattville

Play Episode Listen Later Mar 12, 2021 48:05

BF&M 2000: Article VI

church bf article vi

Military Moves to Purge Conservatives, Nullification Stops Gun Control, Best of Dinesh D'Souza

American Conservative University

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 17, 2021 43:37

Military Moves to Purge Conservatives, Nullification Stops Gun Control, Best of Dinesh D'SouzaThe left’s latest RADICAL moves include searching US military for ‘extremism’Nullification Stops Gun ControlYAF SUPERCUT: Best of Dinesh D'SouzaThe left’s latest RADICAL moves include searching US military for ‘extremism’https://youtu.be/4fmf2hNdI4kGlenn BeckGlenn runs through just SOME of the left’s latest, radical pushes under President Biden. One of those moves takes place inside the Pentagon, with Biden’s new Defense Secretary, General Lloyd Austin, emphasizing the need to search our own military for threats — like 'extremism'…but what does that even MEAN? Plus, Glenn details the left’s latest moves to make Puerto Rico a state AND to issue new, controlling regulations on our 2nd Amendment rights. ► Click HERE to subscribe to Glenn Beck https://bit.ly/2UVLqhL ►Click HERE to subscribe to BlazeTV: https://www.blazetv.com/glenn Connect with Glenn on Social Media: http://twitter.com/glennbeck http://instagram.com/glennbeck http://facebook.com/glennbeck Nullification Stops Gun Controlhttps://youtu.be/FYCPyWmHIRMTheJohnBirchSocietySo what do you do when an anti-gun Congress and anti-gun President move into position to infringe on your right to bear arms? Easy, the exact same thing you do when an outside authority tries to force anything unconstitutional onto constituents: you nullify it. This constitutional tactic is enjoying a surge in employment as counties and states battle to protect the rights of those they serve. Some groups argue that it’ll cause anarchy or suggest that the Civil War somehow settled the matter. Yet, others are successfully using it across the country. We’ll look at nullification in this episode of Analysis Behind the News, where we provide the perspective you can use to restore American liberty and independence. Action Items: 1) Download The Founders’ Brilliant Solution to Big Government: https://jbs.org/assets/pdf/Article-VI... Purchase and distribute physical copies: https://shopjbs.org/the-founders-bril... 2) Apply for JBS membership and get involved: https://jbs.org/join/ 3) Sign up for Legislative Action Alerts: https://jbs.org/alerts/ 4) Sign up for our news updates: https://jbs.org/ 5) Sign up for Top Daily Headlines from The New American: https://thenewamerican.com/top-daily-... ▶️ More Related Videos - Conspiracy Smears: the GOP’s Day of Reckoning. https://youtu.be/sm95wMpXo4I - Biden's Globalist Future? https://youtu.be/x8Xzc1EQ8KQ - Biden’s Executive Orders Barrage. https://youtu.be/piYaueu-Bw0 LIKE THE JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY AND WANT TO GET INVOLVED? HERE ARE SOME NEXT STEPS!

Military Moves to Purge Conservatives, Nullification Stops Gun Control, Best of Dinesh D'Souza

American Conservative University

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 17, 2021 43:37

Military Moves to Purge Conservatives, Nullification Stops Gun Control, Best of Dinesh D'Souza The left's latest RADICAL moves include searching US military for ‘extremism' Nullification Stops Gun Control YAF SUPERCUT: Best of Dinesh D'Souza The left's latest RADICAL moves include searching US military for ‘extremism' https://youtu.be/4fmf2hNdI4k Glenn Beck Glenn runs through just SOME of the left's latest, radical pushes under President Biden. One of those moves takes place inside the Pentagon, with Biden's new Defense Secretary, General Lloyd Austin, emphasizing the need to search our own military for threats — like 'extremism'…but what does that even MEAN? Plus, Glenn details the left's latest moves to make Puerto Rico a state AND to issue new, controlling regulations on our 2nd Amendment rights. ► Click HERE to subscribe to Glenn Beck https://bit.ly/2UVLqhL ►Click HERE to subscribe to BlazeTV: https://www.blazetv.com/glenn Connect with Glenn on Social Media: http://twitter.com/glennbeck http://instagram.com/glennbeck http://facebook.com/glennbeck Nullification Stops Gun Control https://youtu.be/FYCPyWmHIRM TheJohnBirchSociety So what do you do when an anti-gun Congress and anti-gun President move into position to infringe on your right to bear arms? Easy, the exact same thing you do when an outside authority tries to force anything unconstitutional onto constituents: you nullify it. This constitutional tactic is enjoying a surge in employment as counties and states battle to protect the rights of those they serve. Some groups argue that it'll cause anarchy or suggest that the Civil War somehow settled the matter. Yet, others are successfully using it across the country. We'll look at nullification in this episode of Analysis Behind the News, where we provide the perspective you can use to restore American liberty and independence. Action Items: 1) Download The Founders' Brilliant Solution to Big Government: https://jbs.org/assets/pdf/Article-VI... Purchase and distribute physical copies: https://shopjbs.org/the-founders-bril... 2) Apply for JBS membership and get involved: https://jbs.org/join/ 3) Sign up for Legislative Action Alerts: https://jbs.org/alerts/ 4) Sign up for our news updates: https://jbs.org/ 5) Sign up for Top Daily Headlines from The New American: https://thenewamerican.com/top-daily-... ▶️ More Related Videos - Conspiracy Smears: the GOP's Day of Reckoning. https://youtu.be/sm95wMpXo4I - Biden's Globalist Future? https://youtu.be/x8Xzc1EQ8KQ - Biden's Executive Orders Barrage. https://youtu.be/piYaueu-Bw0 LIKE THE JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY AND WANT TO GET INVOLVED? HERE ARE SOME NEXT STEPS!

01.27.21 Sewell Charlie

One Radio Network

Play Episode Listen Later Jan 30, 2021 98:17

Charlie Sewell How to Use a Politicians Oath of Office to Hold Them Accountable to You What did Benjamin Franklin mean by saying we have a Republic if we can keep it? What is meant by “We the People” with a capital letter “P”? Who exactly are “We the People”? Isn’t it all of us? What is the difference between small-p people and capital-P People? Why did the Founders of our country, who were prominent men and landowners, set up the Constitution the way they did? What is hidden in the legal wording of the Constitution? Why is Article VI, Clause 3 so important? What does this have to do with the Oath of Office, and how does it hold officeholders accountable? What does the Virginia Declaration of Rights have to do with the U.S. Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Bill of Rights? Is the right to bear arms in the Virginia Declaration of Rights? Virginia politician George Mason wrote most of the Virginia Declaration. What did he mean by “all men are by nature equally free and independent and have certain inherent rights”? Are these “inherent rights” comparable to our “inalienable rights”? Why did George Mason refuse to sign the U.S. Constitution? What’s the legal different between our “rights” and our “inalienable rights”? Are we taught in school how to protect these “inalienable rights”? Is everything your property, including free speech? “The Divine Right of Kings needs a Bill of Rights,” according to Mr. Sewell. Hands off our guns is one of those Rights. How can we use the Oath of Office to protect us from getting vaccinated or from having a medical device injected into us? Everybody with a government-related title has to take an Oath of Office and be Bonded, including a school principle and a school “sanitation engineer.” This Oath of Office includes all government employees — governors, mayors, politicians, policemen, sheriffs, etc. Why do government employees have to be Bonded? Why is a violation of the Oath of Office considered perjury? What is “equal protection under the law”? If the police can ask for your driver’s license and registration, you can ask for theirs. Do gold-fringed flags make any difference? You don’t have to go to court to report a crime. Such incidents are out of the court’s jurisdiction. What is the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871, and what does it have to do with our Civil Rights? How can small business owners use the Oath of Office to regain their rights to open? The reason politicians don’t listen to us is that we don’t have a contract with them. How to we contract with them? How are politicians violating the Constitution and the Oath of Office, and not just our rights? Mr. Sewell explains why the plaintiff lost in the landmark 1938 Supreme Court case of Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins, and what that has to do with contract law. Why do you have to put a No Trespassing sign on your property? Patrick wants to know how the county has the right to charge property tax. “We live in interesting times,” says Patrick. As Andy Gauss used to say, “Making predictions is difficult, especially when it involves the future.”

Augsburg Confession Article VI - Of New Obedience

The Doxology Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Jan 29, 2021 25:06

On this episode of Creeds & Confessions, the guys discuss the relationship between faith and works, as the Augsburg Confession takes a moment to speak about obedience in the Christian life. Do you want to follow us? Find us on: Email: doxologypodcast@gmail.com Twitter: @doxologypodcast Instagram: @doxologypodcast Do you want to receive our weekly newsletter to remain up to date on the latest Doxology Podcast news? Sign up here: https://mailchi.mp/0e7b881f95d9/doxologypodnewsletter

obedience augsburg confession article vi

Article VI

The Federal Rules of Evidence

Play Episode Listen Later Dec 6, 2020 11:43

A reading of the Federal Rules of Evidence, Article VI.If you find this helpful, buy me a coffee:https://ko-fi.com/whatfreshl

federal rules article vi

So now I hate the Dems even more, for pushing me to...

Bob Enyart Live

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 11, 2020

Bob Enyart reports, BEL style, on the lawsuits exposing widespread election fraud. How do I hate thee, let me count the ways. When the Democrats push us to defend the Republicans, we hate them even more! Bob first reads his reply to Misty, a Canadian pro-abortion leftist, who was incensed after learning that Bob despised her. (And though Bob does not have exhaustive foreknowledge, in truth, he despised her even before he had ever heard of her.) Then we aired the 15-second Fox News clip of devil anchor Sandra Smith reversing the We Report, You Decide to We Report You Shut Your Face. And just before alleging election fraud, in the extreme, against the Democrats, Bob explained why he really hates the Democrats for pushing him to defend the Republicans, when the righteous indignation of the Republicans against the Dems for not following the Constitution is itself completely fraudulent. (That is, the Republicans UTTERLY REJECT and themselves ignore the Constitution, especially at Articles vi and xiii.) Bob then gets to the 2020 election fraud as per decades of systematic Democrat corruption. * VeggieTales in 2008 Predicted the 2020 Election: * The Constitution is Unconstitutional: From kgov.com/unconstitutional... America has three primary founding documents, the Declaration and its two Constitutions, the Articles of Confederation from 1781 and the current U.S. Constitution from 1789. The current Constitution is itself unconstitutional, having violated the preamble, Article VI, Article XIII, and the postscript of the Articles of Confederation (1781). The Articles of Confederation Nov. 15, 1777 ratified 1 March 1781 Preamble: Articles of Confederation and perpetual Union between the states of New Hampshire, Massachusetts-bay Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia. Article I. The Stile of this Confederacy shall be "The United States of America". Article XIII. Every State shall abide by the determination of the United States in Congress assembled, on all questions which by this confederation are submitted to them. And the Articles of this Confederation shall be inviolably observed by every State, and the Union shall be perpetual; nor shall any alteration at any time hereafter be made in any of them; unless such alteration be agreed to in a Congress of the United States, and be afterwards confirmed by the legislatures of every State. Article VI. … No two or more States shall enter into any treaty, confederation or alliance whatever between them, without the consent of the United States in Congress assembled, specifying accurately the purposes for which the same is to be entered into, and how long it shall continue. Postscript: And that the Articles thereof shall be inviolably observed by the States we respectively represent, and that the Union shall be perpetual. Ratification: Agreed to by Congress 15 November 1777 In force after ratification by Maryland, 1 March 1781. Today's Resource: God's Principles of Government Join Bob Enyart as he explores God's Principles of Government. From Against Democracy where we look at the biblical principles related to the idea of majority rule, to a Representative Republic and its similarities with democracy, to a real Alternative to Democracy, to what a Bible-based Constitution actually looks like, after this series, the Scriptures' principles of governance will permeate your thinking like never before! Or your money back. (Really.)

S2, Ep. 01: Amy Coney Barrett hearings and the Supreme Court's future

Respecting Religion

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 29, 2020 47:02

What did we learn about religious freedom from the Amy Coney Barrett hearings? To kick off season two of Respecting Religion, Amanda Tyler and Holly Hollman put the Senate's confirmation hearings for Justice Amy Coney Barrett into context, spotlighting the religious freedom issues raised – or politicized – during the event. And, after so much talk about the Constitution's prohibition on a religious test for office, they ask an important question: Who was imposing a religious test during the hearings? Plus, in segment three, they look at how religion is showing up in our world today, including in a controversy with one of the Hollywood stars named “Chris” and a recent statement by Pope Francis about civil unions. Segment one: Barrett and Ginsburg, Cruz and Cornyn (starts at 1:09) Amanda mentioned two pieces BJC wrote about the impact and legacy of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg: RBG: Defender of equality, principled dissenter, faithful supporter of religious liberty by Holly Hollman, published by Baptist News Global Ruth Bader Ginsburg's legacy in upholding a key religious freedom law by Holly Hollman and Amanda Tyler, published by The Christian Citizen Click here to read BJC's review of Judge Amy Coney Barrett's church-state record, which was sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee before the hearings began. It includes questions BJC suggested that senators ask of her. For clips of discussions of religious liberty during the two days of hearings that involved questions, check out these two articles by Don Byrd on the “Latest News” section of our website: In Day 2 of Amy Coney Barrett's confirmation hearing, some religious liberty discussions, though little depth or insight Religious Liberty discussions on day 3 of Amy Coney Barrett's confirmation hearing Segment two: What did Judge Barrett say about religious freedom during her hearings? (17:43) Read the most recent State of the First Amendment Survey at this link, published by the Freedom Forum Institute. It says only 4% of respondents can name “petition” as one of the five rights guaranteed by the First Amendment. Holly mentioned the travel ban issued by President Trump in his first week in office. Read more about that case, which eventually was heard by the U.S. Supreme Court as Trump v. Hawaii: BJConline.org/travelban Holly mentioned the upcoming Fulton v. Philadelphia case, which focuses on nondiscrimination in government-funded foster care. Learn more at BJConline.org/Fulton Holly recently presented during a webinar on the future of the Establishment Clause, hosted by the American Bar Association (ABA). You can watch it at this link. The ABA also did a seminar on the Free Exercise Clause, which is available at this link. Amanda wrote a commentary about Article VI and the “no religious test” principle before the confirmation hearings began. You can read it at this link, published by Good Faith Media: This article from The Washington Post that includes the number of times “religion” was mentioned: Democrats' non-persecution of Amy Coney Barrett. Segment three: Where did we see religion in our world? Recent discussions on religion and LGBTQ rights in our culture (38:40) Holly mentioned the story surrounding Chris Pratt and his church's stance on same-sex marriage. Here's an article from The Washington Post: The latest celebrity cause: Defending the honor of Chris Pratt. Read more on BJC's website about the recent statement from Justice Clarence Thomas and Justice Samuel Alito about the Court reconsidering the Obergefell case in 2015 that upheld same-sex marriage. Statement from Justices Thomas and Alito on religious liberty and same-sex marriage makes tensions worse Amanda mentioned this New York Times article about Pope Francis and his recent support of civil unions: In Shift for Church, Pope Francis Voices Support for Same-Sex Civil Unions

Season 2, Ep. 01: Amy Coney Barrett hearings and the Supreme Court's future

BJC Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 29, 2020 47:02

What did we learn about religious freedom from the Amy Coney Barrett hearings? To kick off season two of Respecting Religion, Amanda Tyler and Holly Hollman put the Senate’s confirmation hearings for Justice Amy Coney Barrett into context, spotlighting the religious freedom issues raised – or politicized – during the event. And, after so much talk about the Constitution’s prohibition on a religious test for office, they ask an important question: Who was imposing a religious test during the hearings? Plus, in segment three, they look at how religion is showing up in our world today, including in a controversy with one of the Hollywood stars named “Chris” and a recent statement by Pope Francis about civil unions. Segment one: Barrett and Ginsburg, Cruz and Cornyn (starts at 1:09) Amanda mentioned two pieces BJC wrote about the impact and legacy of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg: RBG: Defender of equality, principled dissenter, faithful supporter of religious liberty by Holly Hollman, published by Baptist News Global Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s legacy in upholding a key religious freedom law by Holly Hollman and Amanda Tyler, published by The Christian Citizen Click here to read BJC’s review of Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s church-state record, which was sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee before the hearings began. It includes questions BJC suggested that senators ask of her. For clips of discussions of religious liberty during the two days of hearings that involved questions, check out these two articles by Don Byrd on the “Latest News” section of our website: In Day 2 of Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation hearing, some religious liberty discussions, though little depth or insight Religious Liberty discussions on day 3 of Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation hearing Segment two: What did Judge Barrett say about religious freedom during her hearings? (17:43) Read the most recent State of the First Amendment Survey at this link, published by the Freedom Forum Institute. It says only 4% of respondents can name “petition” as one of the five rights guaranteed by the First Amendment. Holly mentioned the travel ban issued by President Trump in his first week in office. Read more about that case, which eventually was heard by the U.S. Supreme Court as Trump v. Hawaii: BJConline.org/travelban Holly mentioned the upcoming Fulton v. Philadelphia case, which focuses on nondiscrimination in government-funded foster care. Learn more at BJConline.org/Fulton Holly recently presented during a webinar on the future of the Establishment Clause, hosted by the American Bar Association (ABA). You can watch it at this link. The ABA also did a seminar on the Free Exercise Clause, which is available at this link. Amanda wrote a commentary about Article VI and the “no religious test” principle before the confirmation hearings began. You can read it at this link, published by Good Faith Media: This article from The Washington Post that includes the number of times “religion” was mentioned: Democrats’ non-persecution of Amy Coney Barrett. Segment three: Where did we see religion in our world? Recent discussions on religion and LGBTQ rights in our culture (38:40) Holly mentioned the story surrounding Chris Pratt and his church’s stance on same-sex marriage. Here’s an article from The Washington Post: The latest celebrity cause: Defending the honor of Chris Pratt. Read more on BJC’s website about the recent statement from Justice Clarence Thomas and Justice Samuel Alito about the Court reconsidering the Obergefell case in 2015 that upheld same-sex marriage. Statement from Justices Thomas and Alito on religious liberty and same-sex marriage makes tensions worse Amanda mentioned this New York Times article about Pope Francis and his recent support of civil unions: In Shift for Church, Pope Francis Voices Support for Same-Sex Civil Unions

Children... Such is the Kingdom of Heaven

The Word from Mountain View

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 18, 2020 41:19

By Pastor Chuck Ryan Children…Such is the Kingdom of heaven Mark 10:13-16 Thesis: God has blessed our lives with beautiful children from family and friends, to our very own. These children are not only given to us to love and nurture in the ways of the Lord but to learn from. Parents, grandparents, aunts, uncles, friends, and family brought children to Jesus so that he could touch them. (vs13a) “People were bringing little children to Jesus for him to place his hands on them…” (vs13a) The “People” recognized the divine nature of Jesus. The “people” demonstrated their absolute trust in Jesus by bringing their child, for him to “lay hands on them.” As parents and guardians of our children we need to bring them into the presence of God. We need to bring our children to Church. We need to bring our children to Bible classes. We need to bring our children into fellowship with God through prayer, singing and praise experiences. The disciples tried to deny the children access to Jesus. “…but the disciples rebuked them.” (vs13b) The disciples' motives may have been sincere, but their actions were rebuked by Jesus. “When Jesus saw this, he was indignant. He said to them, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these.” (vs14) Children are welcome to attend all Church functions. (Remember: “Kids will be kids.” DAD) Jesus made some profound proclamations about children and the Kingdom of God. 1st- “The Kingdom of God belongs to such as these.” (vs14c) Due to their state of innocence God welcomes them into his presence. "See that you do not despise one of these little ones. For I tell you that their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father in heaven.” (Matthew 18:10) Manual statement under Article VI on the “Atonement” We believe that Jesus Christ, by His sufferings, by the shedding of His own blood, and by His death on the Cross, made a full atonement for all human sin, and that this Atonement is the only ground of salvation, and that it is sufficient for every individual of Adam's race. The Atonement is graciously efficacious for the salvation of those incapable of moral responsibility and for the children in innocency but is efficacious for the salvation of those who reach the age of responsibility only when they repent and believe. (Isaiah 53:5-6, 11; Mark 10:45; Luke 24:46-48; John 1:29; 3:14-17; Acts 4:10-12; Romans 3:21-26; 4:17-25; 5:6-21; 1 Corinthians 6:20; 2 Corinthians 5:14-21; Galatians 1:3-4; 3:13-14; Colossians 1:19-23; 1 Timothy 2:3-6; Titus 2:11-14; Hebrews 2:9; 9:11-14; 13:12; 1 Peter 1:18- 21; 2:19-25; 1 John 2:1-2) 2nd- “Truly I tell you, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it." (vs15) Jesus held the characteristics of a child that stem from their innocence, as entrance requirements into the kingdom of God. Children love unconditionally! Children genuinely loved and accepted Jesus. They did not pretend to love, to seek favor. Children are brutally honest. Children trust easily. Children laugh often. Children are humble. “And what does the LORD require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.” (Micah 6:8)

Assault on America: Dr. Alex McFarland Sounds an Alarm Against the Left

Lighthouse Faith – FOX News Radio

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 15, 2020 44:17

"Has America reached its expiration date?" That is a question Dr. Alex McFarland asks in his new book, "The Assault on America: How to Defend Our Nation Before It's Too Late." It's an alarm, and it's coming from someone who normally isn't prone to sounding them. McFarland is a genteel Southerner; a theologian, historian, national speaker, Radio host, and founder of Truth for A New Generation. He's traveled the country extensively and sees disturbing trends assaulting America's foundational values, the first of which is belief in God and adherence to God's laws. McFarland is no prude. He came to faith after many years of youthful indulgence in booze and music, culminating in a drunken stupor and waking up in a dumpster. He speaks from whence he knows and lends his experiential knowledge to young people on campuses all over America, understanding the pressures they face and the indoctrination they have been subject to in public institutions. But now those students of liberalism are adults working in the world, voting, becoming elected officials, and America is changing because of it. On this episode of Lighthouse Faith podcast, McFarland talks about how life is a privilege, that the family is foundational to a strong America, and fealty to a loving God essential. He also talks about Article VI of the Constitution that says there should be no 'religious test' to hold office. Alex emphatically asserts that, "objective morality is not the same thing as religion." Because, "the founders of the country and the thinkers from which they drew believed in something called natural law." Self-evident truths that he says America has forgotten.

Being Lutheran Podcast Episode #182 – Micah 6:8

Being Lutheran Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 13, 2020 24:01

In this episode, Brett, Brian, and Jason continue their examination of Article VI of the Augsburg Confession and Apology by doing a Bible study on Micah 6:8.

bible law gospel social justice apology lutheran law and gospel augsburg confession article vi

Please Enlighten Me

The TommyC Show

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 12, 2020 19:27

The fight again misinformation is one we are all in together. I also briefly discuss Article VI of the Constitution, and have some detailed questions for liberals to answer. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/therealtommyc/message

constitution enlighten article vi

Book of Concord, Bible Class #49: Article VI. The Third Use of the Law

Trinity's Pastor Writes

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 11, 2020 57:53

This Bible study examines Article VI. The Third Use of the Law Overhead: Overheads-for-Sep-6-2020.pdf Handout: Formula-of-Concord-Epitome-VI.-Third-Use-of-the-Law.pdf Note 1: A Divine Service was also video recorded and is available at trinityh.org, under the tab, Sermons Note 2: This is the audio only post. The vimeo video is also available. Click here --> Vimeo Video for #49 --Pastor Michael D. Henson, Trinity Lutheran Church (Herrin, IL)

law formula concord henson overhead bible class this bible divine service article vi third use vimeo video

Breaking Down The Constitution: Article VI & VII (w/ former US Solicitor General Paul Clement)

Constitutional Chats hosted by Janine Turner and Cathy Gillespie

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 10, 2020 55:56

How the Founding Fathers made the Constitution the supreme law of the land via Article VI, and the outlined Constitution's ratification process in Article VII! In Part 6 of the “Breaking Down the Constitution” series, Janine Turner, Jeanette Kraynak, and Lisa Williams interview former U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement on the history of the supremacy clause and the scope of federal government, how the courts and justices have interpreted Article VI in terms of federal statues and the amendments, and more! Livestreamed on 09/08/2020. Sign up for our next Constitutional Chat via Zoom at https://www.constitutingamerica.org

education zoom breaking down constitution american history federal government founding fathers former us constitution day live streamed solicitor general lisa williams ratification remotelearning paul clement janine turner article vi constitution article

New Obedience (Augsburg Confession Article VI)

Just and Sinner Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 3, 2020 52:58

This program is a continuation of our discussion of the Augsburg Confession. I covered the subject of new obedience, or sanctification.

obedience augsburg confession article vi

Constitutional Oaths

The 1787 Project

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 31, 2020 11:33

Article VI of the U.S. Constitution requires Senators and Representatives, members of state legislatures, and all state and federal executive and judicial officers to swear or affirm fidelity to the Constitution. Abraham Lincoln's First Inaugural Address, Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream Speech," and the Supreme Court's litigation over the constitutionality of the Civil Rights Act each highlight a fundamental question related to that oath: "What does it mean to be faithful to the Constitution?"

supreme court martin luther king jr constitution senators abraham lincoln constitutional oaths civil rights act dream speech article vi first inaugural address

The US Constitution (Part 1 of 4)

White Noise - Sleep - Study - Meditation - Sounds

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 20, 2020 20:02

The Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the United States of America. The Constitution, originally comprising seven articles, delineates the national frame of government. Its first three articles embody the doctrine of the separation of powers, whereby the federal government is divided into three branches: the legislative, consisting of the bicameral Congress (Article I); the executive, consisting of the president (Article II); and the judicial, consisting of the Supreme Court and other federal courts (Article III). Article IV, Article V and Article VI embody concepts of federalism, describing the rights and responsibilities of state governments, the states in relationship to the federal government, and the shared process of constitutional amendment. Article VII establishes the procedure subsequently used by the thirteen States to ratify it. It is regarded as the oldest written and codified national constitution in force. Since the Constitution came into force in 1789, it has been amended 27 times, including one amendment that repealed a previous one, in order to meet the needs of a nation that has profoundly changed since the eighteenth century. In general, the first ten amendments, known collectively as the Bill of Rights, offer specific protections of individual liberty and justice and place restrictions on the powers of government. The majority of the seventeen later amendments expand individual civil rights protections. Others address issues related to federal authority or modify government processes and procedures. Amendments to the United States Constitution, unlike ones made to many constitutions worldwide, are appended to the document. All four pages of the original U.S. Constitution are written on parchment. According to the United States Senate: "The Constitution's first three words—We the People—affirm that the government of the United States exists to serve its citizens. For over two centuries the Constitution has remained in force because its framers wisely separated and balanced governmental powers to safeguard the interests of majority rule and minority rights, of liberty and equality, and of the federal and state governments." The first permanent constitution of its kind, it is interpreted, supplemented, and implemented by a large body of federal constitutional law, and has influenced the constitutions of many other nations such as Australia. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/dwight-allen/message

united states america australia supreme court states rights constitution us constitution amendments united states constitution article ii article v article iii article iv article vi

The US Constitution: History and overview (Part 1 of 4)

united states america history australia supreme court states rights constitution us constitution amendments united states constitution article ii article v article iii article iv article vi

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 20, 2020 20:11

The Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the United States of America. The Constitution, originally comprising seven articles, delineates the national frame of government. Its first three articles embody the doctrine of the separation of powers, whereby the federal government is divided into three branches: the legislative, consisting of the bicameral Congress (Article I); the executive, consisting of the president (Article II); and the judicial, consisting of the Supreme Court and other federal courts (Article III). Article IV, Article V and Article VI embody concepts of federalism, describing the rights and responsibilities of state governments, the states in relationship to the federal government, and the shared process of constitutional amendment. Article VII establishes the procedure subsequently used by the thirteen States to ratify it. It is regarded as the oldest written and codified national constitution in force. Since the Constitution came into force in 1789, it has been amended 27 times, including one amendment that repealed a previous one, in order to meet the needs of a nation that has profoundly changed since the eighteenth century. In general, the first ten amendments, known collectively as the Bill of Rights, offer specific protections of individual liberty and justice and place restrictions on the powers of government. The majority of the seventeen later amendments expand individual civil rights protections. Others address issues related to federal authority or modify government processes and procedures. Amendments to the United States Constitution, unlike ones made to many constitutions worldwide, are appended to the document. All four pages of the original U.S. Constitution are written on parchment. According to the United States Senate: "The Constitution's first three words—We the People—affirm that the government of the United States exists to serve its citizens. For over two centuries the Constitution has remained in force because its framers wisely separated and balanced governmental powers to safeguard the interests of majority rule and minority rights, of liberty and equality, and of the federal and state governments." The first permanent constitution of its kind, it is interpreted, supplemented, and implemented by a large body of federal constitutional law, and has influenced the constitutions of many other nations such as Australia. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/law-school/support

140: Martin Luther - I Fix My Eyes On Christ, That Bronze Serpent Hanging From the Cross

Banned Books

Play Episode Listen Later May 21, 2020 47:08

The question isn't "what are we going to do," the question is "what aren't we going to do?" In this episode, Jesus becomes sin and death. Main Text: Martin Luther's Commentary on St. Paul's Epistle To the Galatians (1535), p. 135 Show Notes: Formula of Concord, Article VI http://bookofconcord.org/fc-ep.php#VI.%20The%20Third%20Use%20of%20the%20Law. CD214: Facial Recognition https://congressionaldish.com/cd214-facial-recognition/ Isenheim Altarpiece https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isenheim_Altarpiece They Might Be Giants - Older (Official Audio) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cozCYJCK4Bg Reformation Solas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_solae — CONTACT and FOLLOW BannedBooks@1517.org Facebook Twitter SUBSCRIBE YouTube (new!) Apple Podcasts Spotify Stitcher Overcast Google Play TuneIn Radio iHeartRadio SUPPORT Gillespie Coffee (gillespie.coffee) Gillespie Media (gillespie.media) 1517 Podcast Network Support the work of 1517

jesus christ cross galatians hanging martin luther concord bronze serpent article vi fix my eyes

Article VI (Part 2) - The Perseverance of the Saints

Podcast - Liberty Baptist Church

Play Episode Listen Later Dec 29, 2019 35:44

"We believe the saints will persevere in grace, and never finally fall away, and that good works are the fruits of faith, and follow after justification."

perseverance of the saints article vi

Article VI (Part 1) - Be Holy As I Am Holy

Podcast - Liberty Baptist Church

Play Episode Listen Later Dec 8, 2019 36:56

"We believe the saints will persevere in grace, and never finally fall away, and that good works are the fruits of faith, and follow after justification."

holy article vi

Evan Bernick and Christopher Green on the Ontology of the Constitution

Ipse Dixit

Play Episode Listen Later Dec 3, 2019 41:40

In this episode, Christopher Green, Professor of Law and H.L.A. Hart Scholar in Law and Philosophy at the University of Mississippi School of Law, and Evan D. Bernick, Law Clerk to the Honorable Diane S. Sykes of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, discuss their draft article "What is the Object of the Article VI Oath?" Bernick and Green begin by describing the nature and purpose of Article VI oath. They explain that swearing an oath to "this Constitution" implies a theory of the ontology of the Constitution, with both first- and second-order components. They observe that government officials uniformly understand themselves to be swearing an oath to the "same" Constitution as the one that was ratified in 1789. They argue that the nature of the oath permits for certain kinds of change, but disallows other kinds of change. And they suggest that this perspective on the continuity of the Constitution may help provide a common ground for debate over its meaning. Green is on Twitter at @crgreen24601 and Bernick is on Twitter at @evanbernick.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Associate Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

university law professor green philosophy constitution appeals object sykes frye ontology united states court kentucky college law clerk seventh circuit mississippi school brian l article vi christopher green

WE THE PEOPLE 10 - 11 - 19 - ARTICLE VI - DEBTS - SUPREMACY - OATHS

AM 1180 WFYL

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 11, 2019 54:50

WE THE PEOPLE 10 - 11 - 19 - ARTICLE VI - DEBTS - SUPREMACY - OATHS by WFYL 1180 AM

supremacy debts oaths we the people article vi wfyl

121. Dear Trump... Signed, SC Rep. Stewart Jones.

Let It Not Be Said

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 9, 2019 93:55

Returning guest, now Representative from South Carolina, Stewart Jones, joins the podcast to tell us about his op-ed in The Hill and his letter to Trump condemning Red Flag Laws that he had signed by 40+ colleagues. Read the letter >>> bit.ly/dear_trump and the Op-ed >>> bit.ly/noredflag_thehill Follow Stewart of Twitter @Jones4Liberty and Check out his website >>> votestew.com Episodes mentioned: Kavanaugh/NDAA/Stewart Jones >>> bit.ly/tr_25 Constitution & other text mentions: Article VI. "his Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof... shall be the supreme Law of the Land..." Read here >>> bit.ly/tr_constitution Papers of James Madison."In a word, as a man is said to have a right to his property, he may be equally said to have a property in his rights." Read here >>> bit.ly/jm_property Links mentioned: The Original Rebellion T-Shirt >>> bit.ly/original_tee

united states donald trump law land south carolina laws dear constitution signed representative papers james madison red flag laws article vi pursuance

Understorey: UnSustainable ANZUS? Part 3~Nuclear Exceptionalism

Understorey

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 3, 2019

Australia berates Iran and North Korea for ignoring multilateral treaties that guard against nuclear proliferation. Yet Australia makes a special exception for its ANZUS ally. The United States' has been modernising its huge nuclear arsenal, and President Trump has repudiated the INF and Iran nuclear deals. The requirement in Article VI of the 1970 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (to negotiate towards complete and general disarmament) has been glossed over by both Australia and the United States, with the two ANZUS allies talking down the new Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, which would implement such a framework. Australia says our security lies instead under a "nuclear umbrella" provided by the US, but our neglect of a general international rule of law could prove tragic. Professor Tilman Ruff from ICAN shares why even a "limited" nuclear war in South Asia, distant from superpower tensions, could lead to a global nuclear winter, render the ANZUS treaty irrelevant, and prove a catastrophe for us all. (Image: Postcard Great White Fleet 1908, with US nuclear missile, Trident sub, inset)

united states donald trump australia iran north korea nuclear prohibition treaty south asia inf nuclear weapons trident unsustainable exceptionalism article vi nuclear non proliferation treaty anzus

The Family

The Harper’s Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 15, 2019 46:37

The separation of church and state is one of the fundamental principles of American democracy; Article VI of the Constitution states that “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.” Yet there have been plenty of people who've tried to erode that boundary, or at the very least work around it. In the March 2003 issue of Harper's Magazine, Jeff Sharlet published a story that revealed (some of) the inner workings of one religious organization that has been at the task for decades: the Family. Since 1953, the Family has organized the National Prayer Breakfast—a seemingly innocuous nonpartisan event. Yet this annual celebration has allowed leaders from around the world—including dictators, warlords, foreign agents, and legitimate clergy—to covertly access the halls of power and exert influence. Espousing the ambiguous philosophy of “Jesus plus nothing,” the Family's willingness to work with powerful but diabolical leaders arises from their interpretation of predestination—if you're in power, it's because God said so, and isn't it better to have the wolf king on your side? Jeff Sharlet's reporting on the Family has led to several more articles and two books: The Family: The Secret Fundamentalism at the Heart of American Power and C Street: The Fundamentalist Threat to American Democracy. Netflix and Sharlet recently adapted this reporting into a five-part documentary. Web editor Violet Lucca spoke with Sharlet and director Jesse Moss about adapting this wealth of material into a documentary, the difficulties of getting straight answers out of deeply secretive Family members, and the organization's ascendant power. Read Sharlet's “Jesus Plus Nothing”: https://harpers.org/archive/2003/03/jesus-plus-nothing/ This episode was produced by Violet Lucca and Andrew Blevins.

united states god jesus christ american family netflix trust office heart web magazine constitution qualifications american democracy american power national prayer breakfast jeff sharlet article vi violet lucca

Does Article VI Apply to the States?

First Liberty Briefing

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 10, 2019 1:37

No one likes a test, especially one based on one’s character or religious belief, and no one should be forced to pass a religious test for office. But does Article VI apply to the states? Learn more at FirstLiberty.org/Briefing. No one likes a test. At least not the kind that are unfair, meant as a pass/fail standard upon the character of a person. That is why the Framers of the United States Constitution included a prohibition on a religious test for office in Article VI of the U.S. Constitution. But, did that federal prohibition apply to the states? That is a question presented by Roy Torcaso to the Supreme Court of the United States. Torcaso, a professed atheist, wished to be a notary public in the State of Maryland, but could not declare his belief in God, as required by the Maryland Constitution. Justice Hugo Black explained in Torcaso v. Watkins that the prohibition on religious tests for office in the U.S. Constitution was to be extended to state constitutions as well. He wrote, “neither a State nor the Federal Government can constitutionally force a person ‘to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion.’" That is similar to what James Madison wrote in Federalist 52, where he explains that “the door of this part of the Federal Government, is open to merit of every description, whether native or adoptive, whether young or old, and without regard to poverty or wealth, or to any particular profession of religious faith.” In other words, you don’t have to pass a religious test to qualify for public office in America. To learn how First Liberty is protecting religious liberty for all Americans, visit FirstLiberty.org.

Rebutting False Disarmament Narratives

Heritage Events Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later May 15, 2019 36:16

The United States is often asked what more we can do to reassure the international community that we remain faithful stewards of the disarmament vision articulated in the Preamble and in Article VI of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). If we are to build the kind of disarmament dialogue we need in order to make progress toward that goal in a time of deteriorating global security conditions, it is important not to misdiagnose the problem. Please join us as we debunk the false critiques surrounding the NPT disarmament narrative with Dr. Christopher Ford, Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and Nonproliferation. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

united states state narrative false assistant secretary preamble international security disarmament nonproliferation npt rebutting article vi christopher ford

Article VI Protects Against Religious Tests for Office

First Liberty Briefing

Play Episode Listen Later Mar 18, 2019 1:40

Despite the presence of Article VI to the Constitution, confirmation hearings for judicial nominees have continued to include questions pertaining to the nominee’s religious viewpoints. This is not fair, nor permitted by the Constitution. Learn more at FirstLiberty.org/Briefing. Confirmation hearings have been interesting of late. Some senators are asking questions of nominees that are more than tough. They are unfair. My favorite example of this came when Sen. Cory Booker asked judicial nominee Neomi Rao whether she believed homosexuality is a sin. That’s a question that seems out of line because it invites the nominee to assert a theological pronouncement. Senator Mike Lee thought so too. He said, “I can’t fathom a circumstance in which it’s ever appropriate for us to ask a nominee about his or her religious beliefs about whether x, y or z is a sin.” Senator Lee then had to remind Sen. Mazie Hirono of Sen. Booker’s actual question about sin when Hirono shot back, “It is not that we all ask ‘do you think such and such is a sin, etc., etc.'” These questions may in fact violate Article VI of the Constitution, which guarantees that “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.” Forcing citizens to adhere to a specific religious ideology—or none at all—violates the rights common to our humanity, rights endowed to us by our Creator. Article VI exists to keep the halls of government open to an ideological variety of Americans. That’s something our senators would do well to remember. To learn how First Liberty is protecting religious liberty for all Americans, visit FirstLiberty.org.

2019-01-013 - Baptism of the Lord

Father George William Rutler Homilies

Play Episode Listen Later Jan 13, 2019 18:07

13 January 2019 The Baptism of the Lord Luke 3:15-16, 21-22 + Homily 18 Minutes 6 Seconds Link to the Readings http://www.usccb.org/bible/readings/011319.cfm (New American Bible, Revised Edition) (from the parish bulletin) The foundational documents of our nation were influenced by Catholic political philosophers such as Aquinas, Suárez, Báñez, Gregory of Valencia and Saint Robert Bellarmine, who wrote before theorists like Hobbes and Rousseau. This contradicts a popular impression that democracy was the invention of the Protestant Reformation. Luther and Calvin considered popular assemblies highly suspect. The concept of the Divine Right of Kings, which was a prelude to what we call “statism” and “big government,” was systematized by the Protestant counselor to King James I of England, Robert Filmer. For all his vague Deism, Thomas Jefferson might have acknowledged those Catholic sources, if obliquely, in his eloquent phrases. The Constitution’s First Amendment guarantee of the free exercise of religion and Article VI’s prohibition of religious tests for public office were developments rooted in the Thomistic outlines of human rights and dignity declared in the Magna Carta and the Declaration of Arbraoth. This was lost on some senators who have violated Constitutional guarantees by subjecting judicial nominees to religious tests. One senator complained to a Catholic nominee for the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals that “the dogma lives loudly within you.” Two other senators said that the President’s nominee for a federal district court in Nebraska was unsuitable because his membership in the Knights of Columbus committed him to “a number of extreme positions.” Members of their political party consider opposition to same-sex marriage and abortion “extreme.” This would characterize the Pope as an extremist, but at least he is not a judicial nominee. In the Statuary Hall of our nation’s Capitol are sculptures portraying heroes who represent the best of the history and culture of each state. They include Saint Junípero Serra of California, Saint Damien de Veuster of Hawaii, Declaration of Independence signer Charles Carroll of Maryland, Father Eusebio Kino of Arizona, General James Shields of Illinois, Chief Justice Edward Douglass White of Louisiana, Father Jacques Marquette of Wisconsin, Patrick McCarran of Nevada, Dennis Chavez of New Mexico, John Burke of North Dakota, John McLoughlin of Oregon, Mother Joseph of the Sacred Heart Pariseau of Washington, and John Edward Kenna of West Virginia, all of whom were Catholic. These canonized saints, statesmen, soldiers, jurists and pioneers would be extremists unworthy of public office in the estimation of some current senators for whom subscription to natural law and obedience to the Ten Commandments are violations of what they fantasize as the norm of moral being. The coruscating illiteracy of such senators burlesques reason. At every performance of Mozart’s Don Giovanni, audiences wait for the fifth scene of the second act, when the haunting statue of the Commendatore comes alive and knocks on the door to the sound of trombones. Would that all those statues of some of our nation’s greatest figures might come down from their pedestals and challenge the vacant minds of those inquisitorial senators to explain what constitutes extremism.

Article VI - Satan Continued

Community Baptist Church of Davison Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 4, 2018 45:00

Verses: NA Sunday School Down

satan article vi

Article VI - Satan

Community Baptist Church of Davison Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 28, 2018 45:00

Verses: NA Sunday School Downstairs

satan article vi

Article VI

Community Baptist Church of Davison Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 14, 2018 45:00

Sunday School Downstairs Verses: NA

article vi

087: The U.S. Constitution guides my environmental behavior

Leadership and the Environment

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 17, 2018 12:30

Why do I think about the United States Constitution when my pressure cooker finishes cooking? Or when I leave a room?The U.S. Constitution guides my environmental behavior and has since I learned it in elementary school.Today is U.S. Constitution Day since today in 1787 the delegates to the Constitutional Convention signed the document in Philadelphia and that's why today I'm sharing why I love the document, live by it, and think about it daily---specifically Article VI, paragraph 2, which I read and talk about in today's post. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

philadelphia behavior constitution environmental guides us constitution united states constitution constitutional convention constitution day article vi

No Religious Tests

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 19, 2015 30:00

Breaking both the timeline and the 4th Wall, the debate of religion and government in the United States has taken on a new and particularly partisan tone in recent days, as the Nation tries to decide what to do about the Syrian Refugee problem. Oddly enough, the debate has taken on religious tone, as some say that "as Christians" we must accept the refugees, while others say that we must not. Scripture is quoted to both support and defy the idea of bringing in the refugees. But as Dave so often says, people do not change. The do the same things for the same reasons usually with the same results, throughout history. Indeed, as we have already seen, they even have the same arguments. As the debate over debate the ratification of the Constitution continued, one of the ideals bubbled to the surface - religion, and the lack thereof in the proposed Constitution, came to the front and center. But you might be surprised as to who was on which side of things, and why. And how it shows that all these centuries later, we are still debating the same questions as those who debated the Ratification of the Constitution.

united states religion christians debate scripture wall religious tests constitution syrian refugees ratification article vi dave bowman constitution thursday

Shark Fins

Bards Logic Political Talk

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 2, 2015 43:49

The LPOV Group sits down for a wide ranging discussion of Article VI Clause 2, the Supremacy Clause. Shark_finningWhen California passes a law that bans the possession, distribution or sale of Shark fins in the State, a Chinese-American Neighborhood Association sues, claiming that they are being discriminated against by the law. There is a claim of Equal Protection, a claim under the Commerce Clause, and a claim that the United States already has laws dealing with Shark fins, and that those those laws should take precedence over California's law. Is there any merit to the claims? Is it racist to outlaw Shark fins? Does the law interfere with Interstate Commerce? Most of all, does the Federal law take supremacy over the States law banning shark fins?

united states california state states sharks federal constitution fins equal protection commerce clause saturday podcast supremacy clause article vi constitution thursday

Oath Keepers Founder Stewart Rhodes Solving the Puzzle of Enemy Combatant Status

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 21, 2014 180:00

Oath Keepers: is a non-partisan association of current and formerly serving military, police, and first responders who pledge to “defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” That oath, mandated by Article VI of the Constitution itself, is to the Constitution, not to the politicians, and Oath Keepers declare that they will not obey unconstitutional orders, such as orders to disarm the American people, to conduct warrantless searches, or to detain Americans as “enemy combatants” in violation of their ancient right to jury trial Stewart Rhodes: Stewart served as a paratrooper in a long range Airborne scout company. After the Army, graduated Summa Cum Laude from the University of Nevada where his honor thesis focused on the political theory of James Madison. Graduated from Yale Law School in where his paper “Solving the Puzzle of Enemy Combatant Status” won Yale’s Judge William E. Miller Prize for best paper on the Bill of Rights. He assisted teaching U.S. military history at Yale’s History Department, was a Yale Research Scholar, and is now writing a book on the dangers of applying the laws of war to the American people. Stewart was invited to speak at Stanford University on unlawful enemy combatant status, and teaches classes on the Constitution and Bill of Rights. He currently writes articles on the Bill of Rights for S.W.A.T. Magazine, and has written for The Warrior, the journal of Gerry Spence’s Trial Lawyer’s College; for www.moreliberty.org; and for Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, and for his own Dirt Rhodes Scholar blog He has appeared on dozens of nationally syndicated radio shows, on scores of local radio shows across the country, and has appeared on MSNBC’s Hardball with Chris Matthews, on Fox News’ The Factor with Bill O’Reilly, and on CNN Special Reports.

Constitution Study Radio: Lesson 14, Supremacy Clause

Constitution Study Radio

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 13, 2014 30:00

Article VI., The Supremacy Clause Federal Supremacy is among the most damaging myth we are taught regarding the Constitution. All Federal Laws ARE NOT supreme over all State Laws. Listen to find out why. Join Douglas V. Gibbs of Political Pistachio as he journeys through the United States Constitution. We study the concepts, principles, and direct text of the U.S. Constitution from the original point of view of the Founding Fathers. New episodes each Sunday Morning at 9:00 am Pacific Time. Go to Constitution Study Radio for all podcasts of past episodes. Doug's book, 25 Myths of the United States Constitution is available on Amazon, and CreateSpace.

history politics government study myths lesson constitution sunday morning founding fathers gibbs united states constitution state laws supremacy clause article vi douglas v gibbs

Operation American Spring - May 16, 2014

Charles Moscowitz

Play Episode Listen Later Mar 13, 2014 99:34

Chuck Morse is joined by Chris Blystone in a talk about Operation American Spring set to commence May 16, 2014. Description Mission: PRIME DIRECTIVE: Restoration of OUR Ninth and Tenth Amendment laws which limit Republicans and Democrats in Congress and the Executive Branch to eighteen powers and spending itemized under Article I Section 8 of the Constitution in accordance with the Supremacy clause of Article VI clause 2. SECOND DIRECTIVE: Inform and ENCOURAGE all Americans and our home Countries, which form "a more perfect Union" of fifty free and sovereign States, to SPONSOR AND PASS "Joint State Sovereignty Resolutions with ARREST Provisions along with vital companion legislation which shall lead up to well contemplated, well deliberated, well organized, well orchestrated, incremental State NULLIFICATION of ALL Federal Spending, without prejudice, all Unlawful Acts and all usurpations by Congress and the Executive branch that exceed the eighteen limited powers and spending items granted them under Article I Section 8, of The Constitution, pursuant to our Ninth and Tenth Amendment laws on them and the supremacy clause of Article VI clause 2 as well. All other powers and spending, according to our Tenth Amendment law shall be handled by and/or paid for by the States or the people. THIRD DIRECTIVE: Restore the balance of OUR Bill of Rights and The Constitution. FOURTH DIRECTIVE: Along with the incremental State nullification of all spending not granted to Congress or the Executive branch, shall be incremental State nullification of all withholding taxes, all employment taxes, and all income taxes in obedience to the findings and rulings of The Supreme Court of The United States who ruled; "The Sixteenth Amendment confers NO NEW TAXES on anyone who wasn't taxable before it." This will nearly double the current size of all Middle Class American paychecks so that We and our home Countries can pay for whatever WE desire, want or need for ourselves. FIFTH DIRECTIVE: Replace a handful of the worst Republican and Democrat usurpers and despots, including President Barry Soetaro, with temporary replacements, pending an emergency election, with our replacements, as well as all remaining Republican and Democrat officials, all limited to the eighteen powers and spending enumerated under Article I Section 8 of The Constitution. Assumptions: Millions of Americans will participate. American veterans and patriots are energized to end the tyranny, lawlessness, and shredding of the US Constitution. Government is not the target, it is sound; corrupt and criminal leadership must be removed, and the balance must be limited to the powers and spending granted them, with all usurpations in power, spending and gross wages and salaries restored to the States and the people from whom they were stolen without a law to do so. Those in power will not hesitate to use force against unarmed, peaceful patriots exercising their constitutional rights. Patriots may be killed, wounded, incarcerated. There is no hope given today’s technology of secrecy for the effort nor do we want it secret. Concept of Operations: Phase 1 - Field millions, as many as ten million, patriots who will assemble in a peaceful, non-violent, physically unarmed (Spiritually/Constitutionally armed), display of unswerving loyalty to the Ninth and Tenth Amendment laws and the balance of the US Constitution and against the incumbent government leadership, in Washington, D.C., with the mission to bring down the existing leadership. Go full-bore, no looking back, steadfast in the mission. Phase 2 - One million or more of the assembled 10 million must be prepared to stay in D.C. as long as it takes to see Obama, Biden, Reid, McConnell, Boehner, Pelosi, and Attorney General Holder removed from office. Consistent with the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, The Declaration of Independence, our Bill of Rights and the US Constitution, as required, the U.S. Congress will take appropriate action, execute appropriate legislation, deal with vacancies, or U.S. States will appoint replacements for positions vacated consistent with established constitutional requirements. Phase 3 – Those with the principles of a Cruz, Dr. Ben Carson, Lee, DeMint, Sessions, Gowdy, Jordan, should comprise a tribunal and assume positions of authority to convene investigations, recommend appropriate charges against politicians and government employees to the new U.S. Attorney General appointed by the new President. *All actions in Phase 2 & 3 will be consistent with the U.S. Constitution. Date of Operation: “OPERATION AMERICAN SPRING – Beginning Of Tyranny Housecleaning, May 16, 2014, completion to be determined We are past the point of no return, thus must move forward with an effort to save our nation, as there is no other choice. We are asking, pleading with you, and any others that have resources, national voices, email lists, blogs, FB, Twitter, to call for a non-violent American Spring May 16 2014 in Washington D.C. We must appeal to ten million and more American patriots to come and stay in Washington, D.C. to stop the White House and Congress from total destruction of the United States. It’s now or never. God help us. .....the law of nature rules. A fluffy, cuddly lamb gets eaten by a mean old wolf is not an illegal or immoral event...the law of nature. When some greedy, self-serving occupant of the White House or Congress, or elements outside America, is threatening our existence, our freedom, our liberty, our Constitution, our life resources, our America, then we fight back to destroy the threat and there is nothing immoral or illegal about it. When the government becomes lawless, then "we the people" no longer are obligated to follow the government......there is no law when government picks and chooses for political purposes or personal agenda. At this time the government is performing as a lawless entity...... A duck cannot be turned into a fox; an elephant cannot be turned into a flea; the laws of nature will not permit. Likewise, a nation ordained and principled by the laws of nature, sovereign, free, with liberty for all cannot naturally become a nation guided by royalty, decrees, tyranny, elitist, self-serving criminals. The former has proven desirable, the latter has proven human pain. “We can become a nation guided by royalty IF "we the people" beguiled by the government in surrender to our lusts for that which we have not earned --for what is not natural --if we have become intoxicated by unbroken success" as Lincoln proclaimed in March 30 ,1863 call for fasting, humiliation, and prayer--we can very easily heap to ourselves leaders, and with itching ears, be turned from the Truth to become enslaved by the LIE.” The United States of America (elephant) while embracing the "LIE" is teetering on the abyss of becoming a sniveling, blood sucking, undesirable nation (flea). OPERATION AMERICAN SPRING will be a gigantic step in removing the flea infestation that is sucking the blood out of America. We see no reasonable, hopeful sign that indicates there are honorable, loyal, mature, critical thinking, experienced people in government that understands the chaos about to rain down on America, nor do they care....our only hope is that "we the people" call, organize, and draw a few million patriots to stay in D.C. for an "American Spring". It would be the catalyst to draw the line and bring to a conclusion a decision on the out of control government, one way or the other. America will rise up or surrender.........for me, I only go to my knees in the presence of God Almighty...........my knees will not touch the surface as a result of some piss ant occupant of the White House or a corrupt legislator, or outside element...I will fall to my death standing if necessary. http://patriotsforamerica.ning.com/forum/topics/purging-senior-military-officers-ncos-martial-law-in-the-not?xg_source=activity http://patriotsforamerica.ning.com/forum/topics/any-doubt-an-american-spring-is-needed http://patriotsforamerica.ning.com/forum/topics/the-uber-presidency-by-general-paul-vallely There is not much time and the only planning necessary is to select a starting date, which we have done, and then show up in Washington, D.C. on that date, and plan to stay for the duration. The goal is restoring our Ninth and Tenth Amendment laws, The Declaration of Independence, our Bill of Rights and our US Constitution as the law of the land, removing the lawless, usurping, despotic leadership. Will this be a cake-walk? No, it will be painful, and some people may die because the government will not be non-violent; some of us will end up in a cell, and some may be injured. If that’s what it will take to save our nation, do we have any choice? Freedom loving Americans will say there is no choice, we must begin the second American Revolution. Not with guns, but with millions of Americans demanding a return to constitutional government and the resignation of Obama, Biden, Reid, McConnell, Boehner, Pelosi, and Holder as a start...then the constitutional restoration process can begin UNDER the Rule of OUR Ninth and Tenth Amendment laws. An AMERICAN SPRING can be avoided only if the above mentioned officials resign and the balance of Congress and the Executive branch returns all powers and taxes usurped, which exceed that granted to them under Article I Section 8, pursuant to our Ninth and Tenth Amendment laws and the supremacy clause of Article VI clause 2, to the States and the people. Will our national patriot leaders step forward and declare, “send me”, I’ll lead? There are millions of veterans and patriots ready to follow and have said “I will go”. I urge all organizations, groups, particularly veterans and military retirees begin planning to visit Washington, D.C beginning May 16, 2014. Keep tuned to this facebook site and Constitutional Emergency/Patriots for America www.patriotsforamerica.ning.com for updates and guidance. Please bathe this effort in prayer as there is no personal agenda or gain save liberty, freedom, and restoration of constitutional government for "we the people".

united states america god american president freedom washington state americans truth spring joe biden government washington dc barack obama congress white house field fb executives supreme court union states republicans rights democrats phase patriots independence concept constitution operation consistent encourage nancy pelosi countries declaration lie luther attorney generals gandhi supremacy holder american revolution mcconnell ninth us constitution god almighty ben carson executive branch john boehner mahatma gowdy tenth amendment article vi demint sixteenth amendment american spring article i section chuck morse attorney general holder operation american spring chris blystone

The Supreme Law

constitution us constitution article vi supreme law

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 30, 2013 37:42

Article VI of the US Constitution says that the Constitution is the supreme law. What does that mean? Dave & John look at Article VI

The Supreme Law