Sound Off!

Tuesday, April 20, 2010

The National Biometric ID Card: The Mark of the Beast?

Read the Commentary
Interesting article on REAL ID. I think it worthy to note a couple of
things: First, the term "Mark of the Beast could also be translated
"Tags for animals." And what are RFIDs? Pet tags. Secondly, the
writer of the Revelation of St. John was (allegedly) Jewish. In Hebrew,
they used letters for numbers much as the ancient Romans did. Guess
what the letter that represents "6" is? The Hebrew equivalent of "W".
So 6 6 6 would be WWW. Interesting hmmm?
I however, see Revelation in a totally different light. I myself do not
believe the book is canonical. It depicts Jesus in a manner that no
other book of the Bible does, and is focused on revenge, slaughter, and
death rather than forgiveness and life as the rest of the Bible.
Revelation has been used as an excuse in all manner of religious
oppression and horrible behavior. At one point, Martin Luther and the
Pope were both accusing each other of being the anti-Christ. The
establishment of the "Kingdom of God on Earth" was the motivating factor
of many of the Puritans in moving to the original colonies, and the
excuse they used for the genocide of the Indians. Lately, we have seen
evangelical Christians going into absolute religious ecstasy over the
war in Iraq, in the hopes that it was the beginning of Armageddon and
the Return of Christ.
In this particular case, if it becomes common belief that this card is
"the Mark of the Beast" we will see a rather curious development. Most
evangelical Christians will not actively oppose the implementation of
this policy. Who, after all, wants to stand in the way of PROPHECY and
potentially stop Jesus from coming back? At they same time, the more
devout will refuse to get this biometric card, seeing it as a damnation
to Hell. That means that a huge portion of the country will be in
rebellion. which means that there will also be a huge black market,
which means that people WILL be able to buy and sell without the mark,
and thus the prophesy will remain unfulfilled. See how wacky it gets?
Frankly, I think Revelation is a kind of religious Rorschach Test. It
is vague, undifferentiated, dreamlike. and we read into it what we see
in ourselves. In this case, it is very important that the book not be
taken seriously, or literally, lest we make it into some sort of
self-fulfilling prophesy and bring about an Armageddon upon
ourselves--one with no hope of Jesus returning to save us.

Sometimes I think I’ll wake up and realize that it’s all a bad dream. No rational being can read the constitution and then fathom that something like this would even be discussed in the halls of Congress, let alone introduced as a piece of legislation.
Thanks for the sobering article.
Robert L. N.

Censoring Glenn Beck: Doesn't the Left Believe in Free Speech Anymore?

Read the Commentary
Watch the Vodcast

The only negative comment about Glenn Beck that deserves serious attention is the statement by Stephen King. After all, King is obviously and intimately familiar with Satanic hierarchies.

Of course, Satan and his spokespersons are not known for their truthfulness. Herr Olbermann is a far more likely candidate for the title bestowed by King.

John is wise
If we don't support Beck, it will be us and brave truth tellers like him next.
thanks for this
James

John Whitehead is wrong. Free Speech is not the right to say whatever you want without consequences. In the market place of ideas, it is perfectly ok to for private interests, individuals, etc to attempt to persuade other private interests not to sponsor or facilitate speech with which those individuals disagree. Glenn Beck will not have to stop saying whatever he wishes if he loses all his sponsors. He can continue saying whatever to whomever wants to listen. Fox may even chose to continue to feature him as a political commentator. He will still have Free Speech.
In the case of Beck’s utterances about violence and murder (quoted in your article), I agree with his critics. There has far too much talk about violence and killing by many politicians and commentators in recent months. We all have a responsibility not to cry “Fire” in a crowded place. Our speech has consequences. Just yesterday, we commemorated the senseless deaths of 168 people (injuring 600) at the Federal Bldg in Oklahoma City. Hateful speech and encouragement of violence contributes to these horrible incidents. There have been several others in recent months, such as the deliberate crashing of a small plane into a IRS office in Texas. People listen to Beck and other hate mongers and believe that his speech justifies these horrific acts.
We have a democracy. If folks don’t like their government, organize and vote new elected officials into office. That is what the Tea Party Movement is attempting to do.
Thanks for your attention and consideration.
mark k j

To Whom It May Concern,

I found the image of Glenn Beck's funny face superimposed over the head of my crucified Lord to be truly offensive. I support Glenn, and I support conservative values. Part of religious freedom for me is that we never profane what is held sacred by others. Religion is entitled to respect. Thank you.

Sincerely,
Fr. Brian D.

Friday, April 09, 2010

Thomas Jefferson: A True American Radical

Read the Commentary

Mr. Whitehead,
I think you hit the nail on the head perfectly about Thomas Jefferson, especially as it relates to his opinions on religion. Jefferson valued religion for its moral guidance, but he was absolutely against any attempt by a government to establish religion by force. It's a radical concept that a lot of places in the world still haven't grasped.
I've always believed that there was something on a subconscious level that made both Jefferson and Adams pass away on the 50th anniversary of the founding of the United States, as if they both knew they were dying, and just let go of life on that day. I felt the same way when my own father passed away; a man very proud of his military service during the Vietnam era...he died on Veteran's Day.
I read the column about Fred Phelps, and I agree that the law you mentioned goes way too far. I feel like this so-called Christian has the right to his hate speech if he wishes, but that he tramples on the rights of others when he and his group disrupt funerals. But I don't know if there's an easy solution to protect the rights of the bereaved from people like that, without violating their right to free speech.
In any case, very thought-provoking work...
John

Mr. Whitehead:
I thoroughly enjoyed your article on T.J. in Sat. Plymouth (IN) Pilot
News. Quotes from his writings are particularly inspirational, and I
appreciate the effort it takes to maintain his relevance. Keep up the
good work.
Regards,
E. N.

Monday, March 29, 2010

The Government of God: An Easter Message

Read the Commentary

Nowhere in the gospels is it written "sermon on the mount." That is taken out of context. Only Jesus and his disciples were there and they sat down and Jesus began to teach them. . . what they were to do as they to go into all the world to preach the gospel. They were chosen by him and empowered by him; therefore, they and only they are subject to the teachings on the mountain.

Educate yourself, dude, and stay away from the Catholics and Baptists who declare everything a sin. . .

You are wrong and as usual so are others, Why, was Jesus killed he was accused of sedition, he had two swords in the Garden when the high priest men came to arrest him. Peter used one sword to cut off one of the guards ear. There was a law that to have a sword was an act of sedition and death was the penalty.
For an educated person, you know you should get your facts in more then one place'

Phillip E. R.

John,
Why did you find it necessary to quote from the work of two non-Christians, Marcus J. Borg and John Dominic Crossan? Easter is a celebration by those who believe Jesus rose from the dead.
Cort R.

Mr Rutherford:
I have just read your informative article about Jesus's life and especially his death, in the latest issue of The Citizen, here in Peachtree City, Georgia. One thing I did not know was that crucifixion was reserved for slaves and those causing political unrest, nor had I ever heard of the alarming number of crucifxions that were conducted.
Thanks for writing such interesting articles, and Happy Easter!

Jim D.

Broken Government, Bloodshed and Violence: Are Our Politicians Listening?

Read the Commentary

Some will give in to appeasement and inticements ,however we need to hold politicians feet to the fire. Not turn the heat down. We have the power to change our Gov. If Obama gives amnesty to the illegal aliens,he may well start what no one really wants except him and his Gov. Communists always start a civil war,with race ,class envy ,jealousy, ETC. ,for reasons. If you want every one to calm down,encourage Obama to back off before it`s to-late.

This is something that is very disturbing, the lack of civility was bad enough, but the tendency for people to do violence on others that they disagree with is frightening to me.

John himself is on the wrong side of this one. At the root of the
problem is conservative Christians, Muslims, Jews, etc. (John
included) insisting that 2000 year old ignorance is preferable to
learning and knowledge. John cheering in silence while Texans turn
back time and salute ignorance in their school text books is a fine
explanation where America's dissatisfaction comes from.
Fundamentalist ignoramuses and other evangelicals are not the majority
of Americans, and no matter how insistent they are on getting their
way and turning things backward, the American majority will prevent it
when possible. Fundamentalists are bad losers, and they continue over
and over to show it. It's the height of gall for John through Noonan
to suggest that the enlightened majority needs to give in to the bad
losers after winning their first victory in a generation.
It's not Democrats that are fanning the flames of discontent in the
country.
When one is Christian brainwashed from birth, he is denied the balance
needed to understand American politics.
rey

excellent, mr. whitehead - but i disagree that the administration is acting blindly. i think they are doing all they can to bring in the police state, by getting folks to become violent. how about the executive orders which have been signed in the past year - to coordinate the federal/state militias, insure indefinite detention of prisoners, grant immunity to Interpol - this is all headed somewhere, wouldn't you say? we're just about there.....the government knows exactly what it is doing, and what the public's reaction will be....

I would strongly encourage the Rutherford Institute to not cite reports or allegations propounded by the Southern Poverty Law Center as reliable evidence of almost anything. (For example, consider the article "The Church of Morris Dees" in the November 2000 edition of Harpers Magazine, hardly a right-wing media outlet.) Such diminishes the stature of the Rutherford Institute while giving the SPLC undue credibility.

Particularly over the last 20 years, the SPLC has been quick to identify as "racist," "extremist," or "hate group" almost any organization or individual which or who (1) supports limited govenment, private property rights, low taxes, and freedom of association, and/or (2) opposes quotas, abortion, high taxes, socialized healthcare, illegal immigration, environmental extremism, or "big government" in general. And God help anyone who has anything good to say about a Confederate flag or says anything derogatory (even if factually accurate) about Abraham Lincoln; in the eyes of the SPLC, such person almost "must" be a pro-slavery quasi-Nazi KKK supporter -- even if such person would gladly vote for a J.C. Watts or listen to and learn from a Walter Williams or Thomas Sowell any day of the week.

[And like it or not, "fascism" is historically a system in which the individual is diminished, the "state" is exhalted, and a trinity of big labor, big business, and big government essentially run the nation. In fascism, there is a veneer of "private ownership," but it is subject to extreme regulation. For a "tea party" person or any other concerned citizen to invoke the rhetorical claim of there being a rise of a fascist mindset in Washington, D.C. is most certainly not beyond the pale.]

Here's an interesting perspective from someone who got smeared by the SPLC: http://www.charlestoncitypaper.com/SouthernAvenger/archives/2007/12/13/the-never-ending-fraud-of-the-southern-poverty-law-center Check this out, too: http://www.cis.org/immigration-splc Consider them the next time the Rutherford Institute is tempted to cite the SPLC as a resource.

Ages ago, the SPLC did some legitimate work, particularly litigation. Not now. It is a fund-raising machine built upon alarmist rhetoric, guilt-by-association "analysis," and an astrounding lack of understanding and appreciation for nuance which rises -- sinks? -- to the level of invincible ignorance. There are plenty of other organizations to turn to for insight other than the SPLC.
Dan W.
Tallahassee, FL

John W. Whitehead
I read with interest your article on breaking the chain of hate in our
government. Let me offer a different perspective.
i do agree with you that the atmosphere of hate needs to be changed.
Problems cannot be solved with the same level of thought that gave rise
to the problems. The blame game that dominates politics cannot produce
the ideas we need to move forward. Where I disagree with you is where to
start.
If we try to start by looking to our elected officials we are looking to
solve the problem outside of ourselves. This is the most basic mistake
in all reform movements. What we see outside of ourselves is only the
projections of our current state of consciousness. So where does our
responsibility rest?
I am not responsible for what a politician does but I am fully
responsible for my reaction to it. If my reaction is one of anger I
have bound myself to the problem and the person, and this makes
resolution impossible. If my reaction is one of peace and
non-attachment I have created a space where resolution can occur.
We do need to break the cycle of anger, and that begins we me. Looking
for others to lead the way is just another way of avoiding
responsibility. We can no longer say to anyone that you are the cause of
the problem.
Living a life of peaceful non-attachment does not mean we are oblivious
to the problems we see, but we will not engage in the hate and anger
that seems to permeate this problems. This may seem idealistic but it is
the most effective and practical way of truly transforming the climate
in Washington.
Thank you for bringing this matter to the attention of the people. I
hope others can see the importance of it( but I am not attached to their
reaction).
Richard S.

Thanks

Thank you for your insightful writings that I read in the Sacramento
Valley Mirror, northern Cal. I cannot believe how polarized we have
become. We so desperately need a new strong leader that believes in
AMERICA and can unite us. Myself and about 99% of my friends are ready
for a wholesale clearing of Congress. The politicians just don't get it.
They work for US. Bring it on Nov 2.
Bob W.

dear mr. whitehead and staff - i totally appreciate the spirit of this forecast. however, i have listened carefully to alex jones and david icke over the past several months - and so i do not believe this is a case of the "government not listening" - this is all being implemented very much by design, according to the goals of the New World Order elite - for world government, a world army, microchipping and complete control of the "rabble" - the actions of government are to move us into a fascist country. what better way to establish the police state than to incense the populace to violence, then march the protesters off to FEMA camps - or, as is in the newest executive order, just assassinate american citizens by order of the president. ron paul has spoken at length on this latest one. alex jones has itemized a private presidential army, which is outlined in the new health law. these laws are so lengthy to read, that most just don't have the time - and these provisions - by stealth - come into law.
i know you come from the constitutional stance in all you say. but we do not have a
government who uphold the constitution now - that is obvious to anyone who looks closely. i am opposed to any and all violence - but we must have the power to at least attempt to protect ourselves, if masked militia appear at our doorsteps.

When President Obama lowered taxes for the middle class, conservatives formed a group called Taxed Enough Already.
When he passed a reform sending millions of new customers to insurance companies, these people called it a government takeover of healthcare.
Many of these protestors simply do not understand the legislation and they don’t want to. Are you familiar with some of the radical right websites out there. There are sites that call themselves X News when they have no reporters and do no reporting. They take news stories published in mainstream papers and rewrite them with their wildly inaccurate spin and call them news stories. I’ve spent enough time in higher education to know that most members of the general public don’t know the difference. I recently saw a news story that said Obama had liedliedlied about not raising taxes—it classified the penalty a person would pay for not buying insurance as a tax.
What could Obama possibly do? Lowering (albeit it just slightly, and in some cases not at all) taxes couldn’t be seen as “turning down the heat” for people mad about taxes? What more could he possibly do?
Let’s face the reality that the fabric of this country is made up mostly of irrational, poorly-educated people who cannot interpret information with any competence and who don’t make an honest effort to do so, instead letting their prejudices and unfounded fears take over. That is not President Obama’s fault.

Tuesday, March 23, 2010

The Right Not To Be Offended: The Supreme Court and Religion

Read the Commentary

When I have to fill out a race question on a government form I always check "other" and then write in desendant of Noah. Let them figure it out. If they object, I'll defend it on First Amendment religious grounds.
God bless - Pete

Two points on this excellent piece:
1.It should be hammered in, repeatedly and loudly, that the Establishment Clause
was intended to support the Free Exercise Clause by forbidding
any state supported particular sect or religion, and NOT any form
of hostility to religion generally--just the opposite!
2. Offending people, or not, is none of the government's business,
if only because it is impossible to avoid. It is entirely constitutional
for people to use the libel,slander,defamation laws,where applicable,
or merely to "offend back"---non-violently. For government to so involve
itself is not only unwise, but unconstitutional, ultra vires.
John M.,Esq. Richmond

I just wonder what the other two judges had in mind. You should have had an easy win. The ghosts of political correctness MIGHT have an objection to certain sounds in music? And the country and our judges cowers to them!
The judges rely on public whims and precedents; but have no philosophy to rely upon. I repeat my belief, that the country should adopt the philosophy of Jesus of Nazareth and attitudes would change for the better. Just stop at the dogma line

Dear Mr. Whitehead:

Thank you for your thoughtful and eloquent article published on March 24, 2010, in the Bucks County Courier Times concerning the refusal of the United States Supreme Court to review the case of Nurre v. Whitehead. The Court’s refusal has bolstered the current political trend toward elimination of all religious and potentially religious references in public schools.

More significantly, we have arrived at the preposterous position where the publically displayed image of the Blessed Mother covered in human feces and urine is a protected expression of free speech while it is a perceived violation of the First Amendment to refer to Easter or Christmas in any public place or setting.

I, for one, have grown weary of being forced to accept the elimination and even desecration of all things religious and particularly Christian, in order to avoid offending those of a different faith or who have no religious affiliation. You were exactly correct when you said that we are undermining the very freedoms on which this Nation was built by allowing political correctness to trump common sense and constitutional freedoms. If this movement is permitted to continue unrestrained then as you suggest, there will come Amendment XXVIII giving us the right not to be offended.

God help us all.

Sincerely,
Randall C.
Richboro, PA

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

The Race Question on the 2010 Census Raises Serious Questions

I got my census form yesterday and I filled it out except that I refused

to answer questions 8 and 9 because I think that asking what race you
are is a racist question. The way I see it if you go back in time we all

come from Africa and humans are not very genetically diverse and there's

no reason to use race to distinguish people. Most people are mixed race.

How, for example would President Obama answer the question? Is he black
or white? What about Tiger Woods? Is he black or asian? And what race
are Tiger's kids?

The time has come to lose racial identity to end racism and start seeing

ourselves as fellow humans and not to assume that you can determine
anything from the color of someone's skin other than the color of their
skin. I don't want to give the government information so that they can
make decisions based on race. If the government doesn't know what race
you are then all people are equal. I urge everyone to write in "human"
for the race answer or just refuse to answer it.

I'm Marc Perkel - And I approved this message!

Yes it is a race dilemma--- should we now start over?

My response to the question about race is going to be simple--Native
American.
Bill P.
Jennings, FL

I agree with John Whitehead. That the race question has been on the census since 1790 is no defense. It was wrong then and it is wrong now. Also inaccurate. (Perhaps there will be a DNA kit in future Census Envelopes?)

Today I listed to John Whitehead on a radio station – I don’t remember the name of the station. He made a fool of himself talking about the intrusive questions in the census form. I have been working for the US Census, and all those intrusive questions he mentioned – salary, insurance, etc – well, I don’t know what form he was looking at, but those questions simply aren’t on all the forms I have seen.

I am a Christian, and I must say John Whitehead is the poorest example of a Christian. Shame on him. He is precisely what is wrong with this country.
Please pass this along to him.
Barbara M.
Eagle, CO

Hi John,

I just read your excellent commentary: "The Race Question on the 2010 Census Raises Serious Questions". I wanted to share with you my recent letter to the editor:

Dear Editor:
Recently, I found the 2010 Census form hanging on my door. As I began filling it out, I came across a dilemma. The U.S. government wants to know if my children are adopted or not and it wants to know what our races are. Being adopted myself, I had to put “Other” and “Don’t Know Adopted” for my race and “Other” and “Don’t Know” for my kids’ races.
Can you imagine not knowing your ethnicity, your race? Now imagine walking into a vital records office and asking the clerk for your original birth certificate only to be told “No, you can’t have it, it’s sealed.”
How about being presented with a “family history form” to fill out at every single doctor’s office visit and having to put “N/A Adopted” where life saving information should be?
Imagine being asked what your nationality is and having to respond with “I don’t know”.
It is time that the archaic practice of sealing and altering birth certificates of adopted persons stops.
Adoption is a 5 billion dollar, unregulated industry that profits from the sale and redistribution of children. It turns children into chattel who are re-labeled and sold as “blank slates”.
Genealogy, a modern-day fascination, cannot be enjoyed by adopted persons with sealed identities. Family trees are exclusive to the non-adopted persons in our society.
If adoption is truly to return to what is best for a child, then the rights of children to their biological identities should NEVER be violated. Every single judge that finalizes an adoption and orders a child’s birth certificate to be sealed should be ashamed of him/herself.
I challenge all readers: Ask the adopted persons that you know if their original birth certificates are sealed.
Sincerely,
Mara R.

When I filled out my census form I decided that I wasn't going to answer
the questions on what my race is for two reasons. First, racial
classifications is in itself a form of racism in that we are not
racially equal until race is unimportant. But an even better reason is
that the question is scientifically meaningless.
President Obama answer on the census form is one of the best examples of
how scientifically meaningless the race question is. Obama answered that
he was "African-American" even though he mother is white. So he didn't
follow the rules. But more importantly, from the perspective of
biological anthropology, there isn't any one gene, characteristic, or
trait that distinguished race. In the human race there is extremely
little genetic diversity and if you go back far enough, we all come from
Africa.
What we call race is really a social construct that describes cultural
and language differences and the way different groups interact with the
world. And even from that perspective Obama is a mutt. I think if I had
it to do over again I would have written in mutt, because that is what
we all really are. I think we would get over the race issu faster if we
all started considering all of us to be the same race.
I'm Marc P. - And I approved this message!