Follow AforFaith on Twitter



-Should a President Lead America Spiritually?

by Dr. D ~ January 26th, 2015

On at least a dozen occasions President Obama has said that he has relied upon his Christian faith and has turned to God for guidance in leading the country. No journalist has directly questioned whether that was a good idea or not. Presidents have been doing that in various ways since Washington. Literally hundreds of examples may be given where a president in the past has asked to country to pray. In fact anytime a President concludes a speech with-“..May God Bless America” he is really offering a short prayer.

Here is just one poignant example from a president who is still a liberal icon and has never been accused of being too ‘religious.’ FDR asked the country to join him in prayer on D-DAY during WWII (See video above):

My fellow Americans, I ask you to join me in prayer. …

And so, in this poignant hour, I ask you to join with me in prayer:

Almighty God: Our sons, pride of our Nation, this day have set upon a mighty endeavor, a struggle to preserve our Republic, our religion, and our civilization, and to set free a suffering humanity.

Lead them straight and true; give strength to their arms, stoutness to their hearts, steadfastness in their faith.  …

Thy will be done, Almighty God.


<Read the whole prayer>

This is just one famous example which remains a bone of contention to some today. Some academics and even some Christians who theologically and philosophically oppose all war may question whether we should be asking for God’s help in killing others in battle. Nevertheless it is just one famous example of a president spiritually leading the country in a time of great need.

I bring this up because over the weekend, George Stephanopoulos, host of “This Week”, questioned Gov. Bobby Jindal whether it’s the “job of the president to lead a spiritual revival.” Jindal had attended a Christian prayer rally- “The Response” on Saturday and had called for spiritual revival in America. Gov. Jindal responded to the challenge:

“It is a time-honored tradition, going back to our nation’s founding, for our presidents, for our leaders to turn to god for guidance, for wisdom. George Washington did it, Abraham Lincoln did it, Harry Truman did it,” he said. “So, absolutely I think this idea of praying to God for wisdom and guidance is as old as our country.”

Jindal noted, too, that America is a diverse country with a majority Christian population, but that “we don’t discriminate against anybody” and “we believe in religious liberty.”

Response: It should be noted and understood that George Stephanopoulos is actually a Democratic Party strategist masquerading as a journalist. In the last presidential election cycle Stephanopoulos used his position to initiate the ‘War on Women’ issue that found considerable resonance among young women voters and was in actuality a war against Republican candidates.

I believe that Stephanopoulos may be initiating another key Democratic partisan issue for the 2016 campaign. Watch for ‘journalists’ to start questioning whether Republicans that are ‘too religious’ like Gov. Jindal are fit to lead our increasingly diverse and secular nation.            *Top

-New York Magazine Celebrating Incest?

by Dr. D ~ January 22nd, 2015


An interview in the January 15 edition of the New York Magazine entitled- “What it’s Like To Date Your Dad,” seems to be looking for love in all the wrong places including incest.  In fact, the 18 year old woman who was interviewed in the article celebrated losing her virginity to her father and planned to marry him, have children, and spend the rest of their lives together. The question that seemed to be raised in the article is why their loving relationship should be judged by other people since both of them are consenting adults:

What’s your response to people who just can’t get their head around your relationship?
I just don’t understand why I’m judged for being happy. We are two adults who brought each other out of dark places. People need to research incest and GSA because they don’t get it and I don’t think they understand how often it happens.

The ‘loving’ couple plan to move to New Jersey where consenting incestuous relationships between adults are supposedly legal. Also according to the article, the couple is already planning their wedding even if it is not legally recognized anywhere.

Response: So now the progressive drumbeat may begin for incestuous ‘loving’ relationships and marriage? Forget the fact that incest has literally ruined the lives of thousands of people. Nevertheless, consensual incest may now join an already active push for the legalization of polygamy and polyamory.

Seven years ago, same-sex marriage became an active issue in California when Prop 8 was being considered. Many Christians at the time voiced a concern that the legal re-definition of marriage might open the door to other alternative marital relationships like polygamy, and maybe even other kinds unforeseen ‘loving ‘ relationships including incestuous relationships.  That position was made fun of at the time by the media, liberal progressives, and the LGBT opposition.

Since that time I have read hundreds of articles supporting the future legalization of polygamy and polyamory (group relationships) asking for rational reasons why that should not happen in light of the legalization of same-sex marriage. After all, there are thousands of ‘loving’ families or groups living in committed alternative relationships that also should not be discriminated against and have full access to the benefits of legal marriage. How can any of these folks now be rationally denied?

In fact you can also find literally thousands of online articles and websites supporting what they are now calling- ‘Full Marriage Equality’ which would include:

The right of any and all consenting adults to legally marry regardless of number, gender, sexual orientation, race, religion, or family relationship.

From a progressive evolutionist world view, since we were descended from monkeys, why should we be restricted by outdated religious beliefs and made-up conventions of the past when we should be free ‘to evolve’ into what ever types of relationships we may want in the future?

Today it is same-sex marriage, tomorrow it may be equal rights for all consenting adults, but in many Muslim countries it is alright for men to marry pre-teen girls and what about those who support man-boy relationships?

The point is, same-sex marriage is just the beginning and who knows what different kinds of ‘loving’ relationships will be supported and condoned in the future if America continues to become more secular and less religious. What will the dominant American culture expect Christians to accept in the future? One can only hope for another awakening and revival for our country or the cultural marginalization of conservative Christianity will increasingly become a reality in the near future.            *Top

-SCOTUS to Rule on Same-Sex Marriage

by Dr. D ~ January 20th, 2015

The Supreme Court has finally agreed to rule on same-sex marriage and resolve the mixed rulings on it in the lower courts.

For a long time the current justices were in favor of the issue being resolved in the individual states but since Circuit Courts have substantially taken over the issue and have ruled on it in different ways, the Supreme Court must now consider it in order to resolve the lower court rulings. From Religion News:

The U.S. Supreme Court agreed Friday (Jan. 16) to resolve the national debate over same-sex marriage once and for all.

The justices agreed to consider four cases from Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky and Tennessee. They will be consolidated and heard together.

That sets up a schedule under which the court likely will hear oral arguments in April and issue a ruling before its current term ends in late June.

The justices’ hands were forced by a split among federal appellate courts after the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld marriage bans in those four states last November. While gays and lesbians can marry in 36 states, most recently including Florida, the practice is banned in those four states, along with 10 others.

<Read the whole article>

Also see the video above from CitizenLink and read their short article and another here.

Response: The whole redefinition of marriage started with a judicial activist ruling in Massachusetts and has substantially been spread by the decisions of  liberal judges rather than by the voice and vote of the people. In a few states the legislatures voted it in but in most cases the courts ruled against state decisions and the votes of the citizens.

The Supreme Court has substantially stayed out of the battle up to now. SCOTUS did rule against DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) but otherwise has refused to resolve the issue once and for all preferring it to be decided on the state level. Now they must act to resolve the mess made by mixed Circuit Court rulings over different state decisions.

How will it be resolved? It is anyone’s guess but Justice Kennedy is usually the swing vote in this court. Unfortunately he seriously considers European law and international precedence in his decision making. Eleven Western European countries have already allowed Same-Sex marriage so the current European trend to accept it might play into the ultimate decision made by SCOTUS later this year.              *Top

-Muslim Riots and 23 Churches Burned in Continuing Protests Against Charlie Hebdo

by Dr. D ~ January 19th, 2015

Muslim protests and riots escalated over the weekend in opposition to the latest issue of Charlie Hebdo which featured a cartoon of Muhammad on the cover. In Niger, at least 5 were killed and  23 churches were set on fire by irate Muslims following the prayer services at the Niamey Grand Mosque in the capital. UPDATE: The Count is now at 45 churches Torched.

The full extent of the different Muslim riots and protests are far too extensive to be adequately covered or updated on this site. Nevertheless there were reports over the weekend of protests and serious rioting in the following Muslim dominated countries:






Palestinian Territory








Response: Apparently all of these real Muslims in real Muslim dominated countries misunderstand the real nature of Islam and are all guilty of ‘hijacking’ the ‘Religion of Peace.’ Either that or the Western politicians, liberal journalists, and apologetic academics, who claim that the terrorists don’t understand or represent the ‘real’ nature of Islam, are the ones who are wrong. Which is more likely?

Actually there are hundreds of millions of peaceful Muslims around the world that would never hurt anyone. Nevertheless the tens of millions of Islamists who do support violent jihad readily cite  the Quran and the sayings and actions of Muhammad as the basis for their cause. It is time to face the truth in the West, the radicals are also real Muslims that represent a substantial number of believers in Islam. They are not ‘hijacking’ the religion if they are following the example that Muhammad set. We may wish it to be otherwise but historically Islam has never been a ‘Religion of Peace.’

Meanwhile all around the world, even in the West, the calls for limitations on free speech when it comes to Islam are also escalating. Funny thing, no one ever suggested that there should be limits to free speech when the same French newspaper was making fun of Christianity and slandering the Jews.              *Top

-Duke University Muslim ‘Call to Prayer’ Debacle

by Dr. D ~ January 16th, 2015


Earlier this week, Duke University announced that they were going to sponsor a regular Muslim Call to Prayer on Fridays. The Muslim prayers were going to be broadcast over loud speakers from the chapel bell tower on campus.

The school administrators believed that this would be good for promoting religious pluralism. But their timing could not have been worse in face of all of the diverse responses around the world to the Paris Islamist attacks. They really weren’t ready for all of the controversy the plan stirred up and the literally thousands of negative comments and responses to it on the Internet.

In the end, the Duke administrators cancelled the plan to broadcast the prayers though Muslim worship would continue on Fridays in a more subdued way on campus. Predictably they cited security concerns but the reversal more likely came so quickly in response to a firestorm of complaints from their alumni and major financial contributors.

Here’s just one comment that single-handedly incited a huge amount of responses among Evangelical Christians all across America. From Franklin Graham of Samaritan’s Purse and the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association:

“As Christianity is being excluded from the public square and followers of Islam are raping, butchering, and beheading Christians, Jews, and anyone who doesn’t submit to their Sharia Islamic law, Duke is promoting this in the name of religious pluralism. I call on the donors and alumni to withhold their support from Duke until this policy is reversed.”

Response: The amplified broadcast of the Muslim Call to Prayer is not an example of pluralism but religious propaganda and domination. The traditional Muslim prayer (Adnan) is broadcast 5 times a day in Muslim countries and starts out with a familiar phrase used by nearly every terrorist:  Allahu akbar  “Allah is the greatest.” The whole prayer is translated into English and the content is analyzed below.

Can you imagine being a student on the Duke campus relaxing under a tree quietly studying in preparation for your next class and then the Muslim Call to Prayer comes booming out from the loud speakers in the Christian chapel bell tower and every thought is literally driven from your mind. Is there any way that any non-Muslim would look upon that experience as a positive promotion of ‘religious pluralism’ since every Friday you would be forced to endure it whether you like it or not?

Can you also imagine the school administrators allowing Christian prayers and scripture readings to be broadcast over the same loud speakers in order to promote real pluralism and religious freedom?  Not at a time when Christian student groups are getting kicked off campus all across America. Fortunately Duke still allows Christian student groups which are actually lead by real Christians.

Nevertheless, recently Duke University has not done a very good job of promoting religious pluralism when it comes to conservative Christian values. Chick-Fil-A has been removed from campus because of the Christian views of their owner, and Pro-life events have recently been canceled. Meanwhile, Palestinian statehood and rights have been promoted while the state of Israel has been slandered during past events sponsored at the school. So pluralism may not apply when it comes to conservative Christianity and for supporters of the Jewish state of Israel. This is particularly surprising since the school started out as a Christian institution and still maintains a loose affiliation with the United Methodist Church.

The Muslim Call to Prayer- Text and Meaning

Call to Prayer ‘Adnan’

4x   Allah is the greatest, Allah is the greatest

2x   I bear witness that there is no God but Allah

2x   I bear witness that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah

2x   Hasten to worship (salat)

2x   Hasten to success

2x   Prayer is better than sleep (Inserted in Pre-Dawn prayer)

2x   Allah is greatest

1x   There is no God but Allah


The recital of the prayer itself is an affirmation of Islamic religious domination and  major theological beliefs:

Allah is the greatest” and “There is no God but Allah” are direct statements against all other religions and gods.

There is no God but Allah” is traditionally understood to be a direct statement against the Christian understanding of a triune God.

Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah” is understood to be a reference supporting Muhammad as the penultimate prophet along with his teachings and the Quran over all other prophets, Like Moses of the Jews and Jesus of the Christians, and writings of the ‘book’ (Bible) which they believe have been distorted.

In final analysis, if the Muslim Call to Prayer was broadcast over loud speakers on campus it would promote the exact opposite of the ‘religious pluralism’ that the Duke administrators say they trying to accomplish. The message of the prayer itself literally proclaims that all religions are false except Islam.              *Top

-Pakistan: Mob Calls for Death For Charlie Hebdo Staff

by Dr. D ~ January 16th, 2015


In the aftermath of the terrorist attacks and protest marches in Paris, the debates continue this week in America and the West over the true character of Islam with concerns about escalating ‘Islamophobia.‘ Meanwhile the reactions in Muslim dominated countries are quite different:

In Lahore, Pakistan a mob of over 300 in front of the French Consulate,  continued for the second day to call for the death and hanging of the entire Charlie Hebdo staff. While last week Pakistan formally condemned the terrorist’s violence, this week the Pakistani Parliament passed a resolution condemning the image of Islam’s prophet on the cover of the latest edition of Charlie Hebdo. Not only that, but the lawmakers filed out of the building and staged a protest of their own shouting;

‘In the name of the prophet, we’re ready to die.’

Meanwhile, on Tuesday in the city of Peshawar, a Muslim cleric actually led a memorial service for the terrorist brothers Said and Cherif Kouachi which was attended by at least 40 people who carried signs and banners condemning the magazine and praising the terrorists.

It should be noted that the penalty for slandering Islam and the prophet in Pakistan continues to be death.

In Turkey the Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu denounced the latest cartoons as an ‘open provocation’ and contended that:

‘Freedom of the press does not mean freedom to insult’

‘We do not allow any insult to the prophet in this country,’

‘As the government, we cannot put side by side the freedom of press and the lowness to insult.’

In Jordan, King Abdullah II called the latest cartoon-  ‘irresponsible and reckless’ and issued the following statement:

‘continuation of publishing the cartoon is an insult to the feelings of Muslims everywhere’

In the Philippines, Muslim mobs protested the latest issue and publication of cartoons by carrying banners against the satirical newspaper and burned an Israeli flag while chanting:

‘You are Charlie, I love Mohammed’

In Algeria, a Muslim militant leader and former member of an al Qaeda affiliate,   Mokhtar Belmokhtar, characterized the terrorist attack as:

‘heroic and rare attack’

  Also in his statement he praised the terrorist Kouachi brothers as:

‘two soldiers of Islam… who humiliated France.’

France ‘thought that it was immune to the strikes of the mujahedeen’

Meanwhile in Nigeria, the leader of the radical Islamist Boko Haram predictably came out in support of the terrorist killings in Paris:

‘We are indeed happy with what happened in France,’ the group’s leader Abubakar Shekau said in a video posted online.

‘We are happy over what befell the people of France… as their blood was shed inside their country as they (try to) safeguard their blood’


Finally, here are a few Muslim responses where both the cartoons and the terrorist killings were condemned:

In Egypt, Abbas Shumann, deputy to the Grand Sheik of Al-Azhar mosque commented on the new image of  Mohammad in the latest edition:

‘a blatant challenge to the feelings of Muslims who had sympathised with this newspaper.’  But he said Muslims should ignore the cover and respond by ‘showing tolerance, forgiveness and shedding light on the story of the prophet.’ 

An angry reaction, he said, will ‘not solve the problem but will instead add to the tension and the offense to Islam.’

In Jordan, a Muslim Brotherhood spokesman Murad Adaileh strongly condemned both the killings and the ‘offensive’ against the prophet. But he also announced that the group planned to stage a protest in Amman following Friday prayers in response to the latest Mohammed cartoon.

The Foreign minister of Iran, Mohammed Javad Zarif, strongly condemned the killings but noted: 

‘sanctities need to be respected.’

…’I think we would have a much safer, much more prudent world if we were to engage in serious dialogue, serious debate about our differences and then what we will find out that what binds us together is far greater than what divides us.’

<See the pictures and video and read the whole article>

Response: While the media and the left in America and the West are concerned about separating the terrorist violence from ‘real’ Islam, real Muslims in real Islamic countries continue to support the terrorist actions and violence and some are even calling for the death of the remaining Charlie Hebdo staff.

It should be noted that if someone printed cartoons slandering Mohammad or Islam in nearly any of these ‘real’ Muslim dominated countries around the world, the penalty would be prison at the very least or more likely death. Meanwhile Western apologists from the left are trying to tell us that the violence and death has nothing to do with ‘real’ Islam.

At the very least, officials from nearly all of the Muslim dominated countries are supporting new limits to free speech and calling for the UN to eliminate all slander and blasphemy against Mohammad and Islam.

It is my contention that the truth should never be dismissed as ‘hate speech’ or characterized as ‘Islamophobic.’ If the Western countries continue to try and disassociate Islam from Islamic terrorism then the truth will not be served and we will get more of the same.            *Top

-Paris Terrorism and Western Cave-Ins to The Islamists

by Dr. D ~ January 15th, 2015


Oxford University Press to Censor References to Pigs (Peppa Pig)

We all saw the huge marches on TV in Paris where the hundreds of thousands of folks showed up to support free speech and demonstrate against the terrorists. In the process the French Prime Minister even declared war on radical Islam. Meanwhile there are also dozens of examples of cave-ins to the terrorist demands that Islam and Muhammad be respected and off-limits to any criticism or what many Muslims consider as ‘blasphemy.’ The following are a few examples:

First of all, President Obama did not attend the march in Paris last weekend which included nearly all of the Western leaders and didn’t even bother to send a representative. Then when asked about the French PM’s declaration, the White House responded by saying that it would escalate their efforts to promote the ‘real tenets’ of Islam and that the terrorist actions had nothing to do with the Islamic religion even though they shouted “Allahu akbar” and claimed to be avenging the prophet Muhammad. The administration response was reflective of what Obama said a couple of years ago in a speech before the UN:

“The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”

But even more, according to the administration it is the duty of the President to encourage journalists to refrain from angering Muslims. So rather than marching with those who want to support free speech our own administration would like to curtail it when it comes to Islam.

Today while in route to the Philippines, Pope Francis said that free speech was a human right but it should have some ‘limits.’ He proposed that a line needed to be drawn when it comes to insulting or ridiculing someone’s faith. Earlier he had criticized the Paris terrorists for the killings and reached out to Muslim leaders asking them to condemn those actions but now seems to be caving-in to their demands and agenda.

A recent editorial in the Financial Times called for ‘common sense’ and self-censorship when it comes to alienating radical Muslims:

…some common sense would be useful at publications such as Charlie Hebdo, and Denmark’s Jyllands-Posten, which purport to strike a blow for freedom when they provoke Muslims….

The New York Times in a number of different articles failed to even mention the terrorist’s connection to Islam or their possible religious motives for their actions. But the worst cave-in from the ‘paper of record’ came in an article that claimed that Islam is a religion of peace and not any more violent than any other religion. From “Raising Questions Within Islam After France Shooting,” by David D. Kirkpatrick:

The majority of scholars and the faithful say Islam is no more inherently violent than other religions.

The article goes on to blame and excuse Islamic terror as being caused by poverty and authoritarian rulers:

“the sources of the violence are alienation and resentment, not theology.”

This week as an act of self- censorship, the Oxford University Press caved-in to radical Islam and the terrorists by announcing that they would no longer publish books or pictures, which contained any references to ‘pigs’, ‘pork,’ or ‘Sausage’ since it might be offensive to Muslims.

Then there are also dozens of examples where nearly every TV news station and American newspapers self-censored themselves by deliberately blurring the cover pictures of the Charlie Hebdo magazine.

Just in case you might be uncertain about the Muslim connection and motives of the Paris terrorists (after all of the efforts to apologize for Islam and combat ‘Islamophobia’), here is a clear statement published in USA Today from a ‘radical Muslim cleric’ in the UK condoning and identifying the Islamic basis for the terrorist actions:

Contrary to popular misconception, Islam does not mean peace but rather means submission to the commands of Allah alone. Therefore, Muslims do not believe in the concept of freedom of expression…

…the potential consequences of insulting the Messenger Muhammad are known to Muslims and non-Muslims alike.

Muslims consider the honor of the Prophet Muhammad to be dearer to them than that of their parents or even themselves. To defend it is considered to be an obligation upon them. The strict punishment if found guilty of this crime under sharia (Islamic law) is capital punishment implementable by an Islamic State. This is because the Messenger Muhammad said, "Whoever insults a Prophet kill him."

So hundreds of thousands of regular people in Europe along with Western leaders marched for ‘free speech’ while most of the Western press began to self-censor themselves in deference to Muslim sensibilities. Yes, a few did republish the Charlie Hebdo images in support of free speech but that effort quickly dried up after one German newspaper which published the cartoons was bombed.

This week the most popular response and word du jour is- ‘Islamophobia.’  There are literally hundreds of articles in the media and on the Internet calling for Islam to be respected and better understood in order to combat the possible rise of so-called ‘Islamophobia.’ In spite of the marches last week, the cause to curtail free speech in deference to Islam and Muhammad has been advanced, endorsed, and validated. The terrorists have actually won.            *Top