KTLA covers police hoser incident; DA will not press charges
Wow. KTLA in Los Angeles ran an excellent story last night about this past Sunday’s police hosing incident at Ventura, CA’s, First Assembly of God Church.
The story accurately portrays Ventura police officer (“and a member of this church”) Jon Hixson as a major jerk, showing all the right clips from pro-life activist Todd Bullis’s video. (The backstory about the pro-life picket begins here.)
I think KTLA got Todd’s mission pretty much right in its 1-sentence summary of why his group was there in the first place….
One other point about all this. People complain about children seeing Todd’s signs, a whole other topic.
But Todd met with Associate Pastor Jim Deck on March 4 and told him of his plans to protest the church in 3-4 weeks.
Todd preceded that meeting by sending Pastor Deck photos of the graphic signs he planned to show at the church (click to enlarge)….
So the person responsible for his church’s children seeing graphic photos of aborted babies without their parents being warned is Pastor Jim Deck, not Todd Bullis.
Moving on, as the KTLA story indicated, the Ventura Co. District Attorney has decided not to press charges. Read pdf here.
Click to enlarge…
Infuriating. Why did Hixson fill his spray bottle with vinegar (so he says, still waiting on the contents to be analyzed) if his intent was not to inflict at least minimal harm by spraying Todd’s eyes with it?
Todd has responded with this letter to the Ventura Police Dept.:
This letter is to inform you of my intention to file a lawsuit against your Department, for violation of my constitutional rights, in U.S. District Court, if Officer Jon Hixson is not suspended without pay for an appropriate period; required to undergo remedial training in the rights afforded all Americans under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and compelled, as a condition of continued employment by your Department, to receive mandatory anger management counseling.
This officer is currently a menace to the community. The Office of the District Attorney of Ventura County has just released a statement finding that Officer Hixson’s attack on me constituted a “battery.” That is criminal misconduct which involves an act of violence.
A police officer who has difficulty resolving disputes without resorting to violence should not be carrying a badge and a gun. He should not be returned to duty until your Department is confident that he has the emotional maturity and self discipline to safely resume patrol duties.
Your entire Department is watching. The entire community is watching. Your response will either send the message that your officers may assault citizens with impunity or that no one is above the law. We all await your response.
Respectfully,
Todd Bullis
Stay tuned…
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Time to go to the State Attorney General and then to the Feds.
Is the DEGREE of assault the only difference between a Rodney King style assault and what happened here? Unlike the King assault, where he had led cops on a 100+ mph chase and was resisting arrest, these folks broke no laws.
I wonder if Todd walked up to this rogue cop today with a water gun and sprayed him if he wouldn’t be in jail within 30 minutes?
The reporter said Sunday Mass…AG does not call it mass. Was this protest done on a Sunday morning?
So, by this criteria, if the cop beat on him and the wounds healed, there would “no lasting damage” and the cop would get off then, too?
Or what if Todd did to the cop what the cop did to him — Todd wouldn’t have been prosecuted?
This stinks.
Will step up the prayers Todd. Unfortunately, this isn’t surprising. I’ve dealt with similiar but never had a camera. Money, Greed, Power vs. Innocent Life.
Please be careful and God Luck!
Suzie, yeah, I heard that. The reporter is obviously Catholic. Protestants don’t call their Sunday morning worship services “Mass,” although it’s not a bad thing to confuse terminology.
And yes, this was done on a Sunday morning.
Oh Yeah, forgot to add — a whole Lot of Guilt to Money, Greed and Power.
So anytime I dislike what someone is saying I can spray him in the eyes w/ vinegar water and hose him down? Good to know. I guess the uproar can die down now about the congressman who was spit on. The good citizen was just challenging him to a water fight! And certainly “no significant harm was done.” Mr. DA, I can think of few better uses for the resources of your office than to ensure that citizens are not subjected to unlawful physical attacks while exercising their constitutional rights. Enforce the law. It’s your job.
For the record, in case anyone thinks I take the spitting incident lightly, if someone spit on the Congressman, he or she should also be prosecuted. Somehow, I just doubt there would even be a question about whether charges would be filed in THAT case.
Here is another link to the KTLA 5 video. I could not get jills to work so here is another link to it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8wSosW-RiE
Can you imagine the Apostle Paul crying “He squirted me with water, call the police! Did you get that on video?”
Can you imagine the Apostle Peter calling for the dismissal of that off-duty cop (who probably had kids at that church).
Call yourselves pro-life crusaders, but please don’t call yourselves Christians. Real Christians know better.
Assaulting small children in a public place with your x-rated pictures doesn’t classify you as a hero, no matter how much you may be patting each other on the backs.
Offending the defenseless is sinful. True Christians will not purposefully bring offense to the body of Christ in pursuit of their goals.
As a father, the protection of my children is foremost in my mind. So don’t whine when you get a somewhat carnal reaction from a father who has been charged with the protection of the defenseless.
Eventually you will face real violence from someone far less restrained than the man at that church. And the cameras may not be rolling.
What will you do then?
@Tom:
What part of “sprayed vinegar in his face” are you having trouble understanding?
Was over at the Ventura County Star site where someone defended the bully cop and wrote:
“If you poke at the hornet’s nest, don’t be surprised when you get stung.”
Comparing this “Christian” church to a hornet’s nest and a vinegar spraying “Christian” to a stinging hornet is right on target. The only difference is, “nest poker” stayed within the law and never went near the nest with anything.
“Nest Poker” still struck a nerve and exposed an abortion-supporting above-the-law hornet though!
Hypocritical Hornets!
“Eventually you will face real violence from someone far less restrained than the man at that church. And the cameras may not be rolling.
What will you do then?” Tom, are you saying we should not stand opposed to murder because there is a chance of violence. WWJD? Oh, we already know what he did.
He didn’t call the cops.
Todd:
I agree that this is a bad decision by the District Attorney.
Don’t expect the “the powers and principalities” of this world to help you in your mission to wake up the church.
I would withdraw the lawsuit and continue with your original intent of bringing the focus where it needs to be which is, “the church is silent about abortion and needs to to more”.
Again, this is just my opinin and I know you have prayed to our Lord about where to go with this.
Peace.
Hey Tom Ambrose:
Peace to you bro.
We have lost track of the reality of this situation. Todd claims to have heard the voice of God telling him to INSIST that the churches need to follow him(TODD). If they don’t he is to bully and threaten them until they do. Everyone has the right to their opinion but its the way one goes about it that determines their true motives.
Todd came to the church looking for confrontation and some pr. The signs that he had were horrific and graphic and the children in the church are having night terrors because of them. Todd did a protest in front of Reality church but he gave them the respect to put parental warning signs far enough in advance so the parents could cover the childrens eyes. Why then did he not give us the same respect? He claims the churches are not doing enough but he has no facts of what they are doing. He claims it is not enough unless you are following him. I don’t know about you but I have a direct line to God himself and he lets me know if I need to be doing more.
Todd claims to care about the unborn but gives NO thought to the ones who are born. It doesn’t take much investigating to see that Todd is trying to be the “next American colt leader”.
I AM A CHRISTIAN AND I LIVE IN VENTURA AND I WANT IT TO BE CLEAR THAT TODD DOES NOT REPRESENT VENTURA OR CHRISTIANS.
Tom,
Vinegar has a pH of 2.4, the same as stomach acid. What id a person is wearing contact lenses?
As for persecution, we already had a pro-lifer gunned down last year. Many of us, including myself, have received death threats.
Say what you will Tom, you are NOT pro-life, but it’s a nice act. Peter and Paul lived under a brutal dictatorship, one that crucified, beheaded, and fed Christians to wild beasts for sport in arenas all over the empire.
Building a civilization of love necessarily means drawing the line way before we degenerate to the point where the Apostles lived their lives. So your assinine point makes no sense.
Today is Holy Thursday. We read of the agony in the garden where Jesus sweat blood, so terrified was He of what was about to happen, and begged the Father to let that cup pass Him by.
Nobody wants to drink from it, not even God Himself.
It starts with murdering the unborn. It progresses to assaulting peaceful protesters. It escalates into death threats and murder of protesters. Now we see the government selectively prosecuting assailants, no doubt ideologically driven.
I realize that ideological hacks such as yourself have trouble connecting the dots, but it’s really too bad for you if your children happen to see such images on the streets. You can instruct them to look down at their shoes as they pass by.
How come you aren’t as vexed at the hypersexual imagery that assaults your children at every turn in society? Hypocrite.
Mr. Nadal,
Thank you for the self-righteous rant.
Your refusal to accept responsibility for the harm that you inflict upon children speaks loud and clear.
“whoever offends one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck and he were cast into the sea” Mark 9
Why was Mr. Bullis excommunicated from his church and WHO is his pastor now?
The silence is deafening.
Eventually you will face real violence from someone far less restrained than the man at that church. And the cameras may not be rolling.
What will you do then?
Posted by: Tom at April 1, 2010 10:54 AM
———
When the violent fall upon pro-lifers who are raising awareness?
Probably end up looking like this little one here:
Tom – I want you to realize that an American man – a husband even, cannot defend his own child, from his wife who legally can do that to their child – without any consent from him whatsoever.
You may want to rethink what it means to be offensive.
The end always justifies the means, then?
Why was Todd Bullis put out oh his church and WHO is his pastor?
Why was Todd Bullis put out of his church and Who is his pastor?
Posted by: Tom at April 1, 2010 12:47 PM
Just as there were many who were appalled at him — his appearance was so disfigured beyond that of any man and his form marred beyond human likeness—
——
Hey Tom – here’s a photo for you – representative really, of another slaughter of an innocent:
You want a response to your question, then answer this: who is protecting their children from harm – the one who makes them aware of evil in the world, and the righteousness that comes by faith in a God unjustly convicted and cruelly executed, (just like the unborn) or one who hides the truth?
Christ pours out His life every day – what are you doing for Him?
Why was Todd Bullis put out of his church and Who is his pastor?
Posted by: Tom at April 1, 2010 12:50 PM
***********************
I don’t know but if it was because he threatened to picket the church because of their apathy toward child killing, I would consider that a hearty endorsement.
He may not have a pastor right now because finding one that will preach fervently and regularly about the horrific injustice of abortion in America can be a difficult task.
Pastors just don’t seem to like to mention the fact that we brutally torture and kill 4,000 of God’s children everyday.
Tom,
The offense of which Jesus speaks is the corruption of children by leading them into sin.
NIV:
“It would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around his neck than for him to cause one of these little ones to sin.”
New Living Translation:
“It would be better to be thrown into the sea with a millstone hung around your neck than to cause one of these little ones to fall into sin.”
New American Standard:
“”It would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck and he were thrown into the sea, than that he would cause one of these little ones to stumble.”
International Standard Version:
“It would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck and he were thrown into the sea than for him to cause one of these little ones to sin.”
God’s Word Translation:
“It would be best for that person to be thrown into the sea with a large stone hung around his neck than for him to cause one of these little ones to lose his faith.”
Douay-Rheims Bible:
“It were better for him, that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should scandalize one of these little ones.”
Darby Bible Translation”
“It would be more profitable for him if a millstone were hanged about his neck and he cast into the sea, than that he should be a snare to one of these little ones.”
New American Bible:
“It would be better for him if a millstone were put around his neck and he be thrown into the sea than for him to cause one of these little ones to sin.”
Revised Standard Version:
“It would be better for him if a millstone were hung round his neck and he were cast into the sea, than that he should cause one of these little ones to sin. ”
Clearly the implication is leading children into sin. So we can add scriptural illiteracy to your CV.
Whatever the reason that Bullis was excommunicated, has no bearing on the rightness or wrongness of his protest.
As for why Todd was put out of his church, that is a can of worms that is best left alone. It might say a great deal to his credit, depending on who the pastor is. It’s also horribly overused in many smaller churches. It also has no bearing on the sin of abortion, or its embrace by many churches.
Get over yourself and your pompous preening about your children being offended. I take my children to the March for life and simply distract their vision in the opposite direction when we pass by photos I don’t think that they are ready to see.
“The signs that he had were horrific and graphic and the children in the church are having night terrors because of them.”
These terrors might also come from the horrific and graphic things children are exposed to daily as well. Like seeing a church member bully someone off of church property. Children are exposed to abortion protesters in other parts of town. Would you not use this as a teachable moment if you drove by these protests? I always have. We don’t give children enough credit — abortion confirms this.
Church members could have calmly and quickly driven by the posters, walked into church and discussed it. I saw several children standing there as the adults questioned Todd in a rude way and these adults were not concerned then about the photos, but just wanted to be right.
Do you hide any pictures of starving children or cancer patients shown on flyers? These are not always easy to look at either. Neither are photos flashed on TV of the Holocaust or slavery.
Unfortunately, we cannot protect our children forever from the realities of our world. The true horrors of the world are worse than any video games they play. These video games have becoming more violent because WE have become more violent. REALITY check.
The murdered children on the signs never had the chance to experience night terrors. Or beautiful dreams.
I’m having day and night terrors knowing the atrocity of abortion has gone on this long. What about my rights? Maybe if more of us had been horrified as children things would be different.
I am very sorry for children having night terrors for any reason. However, using children to hide behind in order to defend something that is killing their playmates at a rate of 4000 a day is the absolute ultimate in hypocrisy. Comfort and reassure them that you will do everything you can to make this world safer for the most vulnerable among us. “Whatsoever you do. . .”
I don’t claim to have a “direct line” to God but I know he is speaking to me through these beautiful broken children. They are trying to tell us all something. Can you see them? Can you hear them?
Tom, your point about Jesus not calling the cops is duly noted. The sprayer was right, “the cops are already here.” My sincere apologies to you.
And you are also right when you state, The Silence is Truly Deafening. Boy (and Girl), is it ever.
Why was Todd Bullis disfellowshipped from his church and who is his Pastor now?
“Mr. Nadal,
Thank you for the self-righteous rant.
Your refusal to accept responsibility for the harm that you inflict upon children speaks loud and clear.
“whoever offends one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck and he were cast into the sea” Mark 9
Why was Mr. Bullis excommunicated from his church and WHO is his pastor now?
The silence is deafening.
Posted by: Tom at April 1, 2010 12:31 PM”
_________________________________
Tom:
Your chronic misuse of God’s word, adding and implying meanings, misquoting scripture, etc. makes me suspect of who you really are and what your true intentions are:
For example: You misquoted Mark 9 above by substituting the word “offend” which is just not in the text. Most texts say, “cause to sin”. http://www.Biblegateway.com, http://www.biblos.com
Just how is Todd Bullis causing children to sin? If anything he is trying to keep them from committing the sin of abortion. So your use of Mark 9 is totally wrong and indicates a lack of basic understanding.
I know this from blogging on this site for 3 years. Impostors come here and try to divide us Christians.
Brothers and sisters, let’s be aware of what we may be dealing with here when we respond to improper use of God’s word. Compare every use of scripture by Tom to actual scripture.
I’ll bet you he does not return to the site.
Revelation 22:18-19 (New Living Translation)
18 And I solemnly declare to everyone who hears the words of prophecy written in this book: If anyone adds anything to what is written here, God will add to that person the plagues described in this book. 19 And if anyone removes any of the words from this book of prophecy, God will remove that person’s share in the tree of life and in the holy city that are described in this book.
MOL says, “I AM A CHRISTIAN AND I LIVE IN VENTURA AND I WANT IT TO BE CLEAR THAT TODD DOES NOT REPRESENT VENTURA OR CHRISTIANS.”
Exactly. . . .
Tom,
Sticks and stones may break my bones… A silly children’s rhyme that happens to be the LAW. Speech is protected, including speech you don’t like.
I’m curious, is your concern really that the children saw these pictures? So if no children were involved, you would agree the man should be prosecuted? Should someone who spits on a Congressman be prosecuted?
Absolutely Todd should call the police for the very reason you pointed out. A lot of speech is controversial – it will spark anger. The original speech and any angry speech you get in return is constitutionally protected….if you can’t take an argument, don’t start one. But our society in principle does not tolerate physical attack in response to speech. Yes, it will happen, but that doesn’t mean we say, “eh, serves you right” whenever it happens in response to speech we ALSO don’t happen to agree with.
Why was Todd Bullis disfellowshipped from his church and who is his Pastor now?
Posted by: Tom at April 1, 2010 1:20 PM
——
Todd may not have a pastor or a fellowship (although he does have fellowship here, among other places), but that’s really not the important thing compared to serving his Lord and Savior.
He’s not ashamed of Christ, nor what he’s doing in His name.
Phil,
Tom is a pro-abort Troll.
Tom, if you want a scripture debate on this one, I’ve been deep in scripture study for 35 years. Bring it on buddy!
Yes my brother in Christ Gerard.
With knowing God’s word comes spiritual discernment.
You have it.
Love you and God’s peace to you.
The King James Version reads “Whosoever shall OFFEND one these little ones, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck and he were cast into the sea.”
So your accusation that I misquoted, or substituted a word is untrue. It is also untrue to assert that most translations use “to sin”. But I’m sure you already knew that.
By the way, why was Todd Bullis put out of the church and who is his pastor?
You know what harms children? Being diced up and suctioned out of their mother’s uterus.
Anyone who was in a position to have their children accidentally see these pictures-unless they have a guilty conscience themselves-would easily be able to explain what abortion is to a child who sees this and asks about it. Understanding is the natural enemy of fear. The fact that it is not getting explained to these children pretty much says it all.
Tom,
The King James Version came to be after St Jerome translated from Greek to Latin. Then the latin was translated into English. Much gets lost in the translations.
Modern scholars translate directly from the Greek and Hebrew, which is why King James is one of the comparatively few to use ‘offend’.
Your assertion that God’s wrath is tied to the aesthetic sensibilities of children is the best insight into your rather shallow spiritual development, and your pro-abort proclivities.
Get Well Soon.
Dear Tom.
I am obedient to Christ and his word. I fear no man that can destroy my body. I have already thought this to its ultimate end and one of the ways my life may end is working to save the lives of these poor unborn kids. I would rather die speaking out against their murder than live and not be obedient to God.
I have been so richly blessed seeing the hand of God work to soften so many hearts already. It is not even a matter of faith for me anymore, yes I started this work in obedience having faith that God would use me but know I need very litter faith because God has proven to me over and over again that what I am doing is good, right and his will.
Christians search your heart, open your eyes and exhort your church to help end abortion in the USA.
If they roll their eyes, if they discount you as just another person with a cause, if they discount you than stand up and proclaim the word of God out side the gates of the church just like in Jeremiah 7.
Oh and Tom I was kicked out of church because I was holding up a signs that said, Church Repent and a sign that said 4,000 abortion per day.
I will not tell you what church I go to now because I don’t think it would be cool to have a few upset guys like you calling him all the time.
This Tom character has a real knack for changing the subject. Laws are based on logic and causation. It doesn’t matter if Todd has fifty pastors or no pastor. He and his companions were exercising legitimate First Amendment rights showing the TRUTH that abortion is a VIOLENT act which KILLS A BABY.
Officer? Hixson committed the crime, not Todd. The Gregory D. Totten is not doing his job. PERIOD!!!
Even if no pastor would have me I will keep doing what God leads me to do. I do love going to church, praise and worship is always a blessing. The best thing about getting kicked out of reality is that it freed my Sundays up for a while so I could spend more time out in front of churches.
” The best thing about getting kicked out of reality is that it freed my Sundays up for a while so I could spend more time out in front of churches.”
You’ve departed from reality, alright, but you didn’t get kicked out: you left on your own.
Phil,
Thank you for your kind words. Coming from you, they are a profound compliment.
God Bless
Todd,
You are most sincerely welcome in the Catholic Church! It would be an honor to have you!!
God Bless
Thank you Gerard. Its funny my Catholic friends tell me that I am Catholic and just dont know it yet. I love you guys.
“Can you imagine the Apostle Paul crying “He squirted me with water, call the police! Did you get that on video?”
Can you imagine the Apostle Peter calling for the dismissal of that off-duty cop (who probably had kids at that church).
Call yourselves pro-life crusaders, but please don’t call yourselves Christians. Real Christians know better.
Assaulting small children in a public place with your x-rated pictures doesn’t classify you as a hero, no matter how much you may be patting each other on the backs.
Offending the defenseless is sinful. True Christians will not purposefully bring offense to the body of Christ in pursuit of their goals.”
Tom and Anne,
I think you are correct in the point you are trying to make. Notice how they turn on you for expressing your opinion.
These guys are just wolves roaming around outside the church stirring up dissension. They’re not worth talking to. They can’t hear the truth.
Paul Lopez
Tom:
Here’s an analysis of the verse Mark 9:42.
Mark 9:42 Greek Study Bible (Apostolic/Interlinear)
??? ?? ?? ?????????? ??? ??? ?????? ?????? ??? ???????????, ????? ????? ???? ?????? ?? ?????????? ????? ?????? ???? ??? ???????? ????? ??? ???????? ??? ??? ????????.
KJV with Strong’s
And whosoever __ shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me it is better __ for him that a millstone __ were hanged about his neck and he were cast into the sea
Note the 4th word in this sentence is “??????????” or skandalis? which means “may cause to stumble”
Source: Strong’s 4624, Morphology V-AAS-3S
Here is the same sentence in other translations which is more accurate than the King James Version. In fact, the New King James Version corrects itself:
Mark 9:42 (New King James Version)
42 “But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea.
Here’s the most accurate translation on the planet:
Mark 9:42 (English Standard Version)
42 “Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him if a great millstone were hung around his neck and he were thrown into the sea.
And one more…..:
Mark 9:42 (New Living Translation)
42 “But if you cause one of these little ones who trusts in me to fall into sin, it would be better for you to be thrown into the sea with a large millstone hung around your neck.
I think the point is that we should not be offending one another or causing one another to sin. Of course this would include the admonition to each other that abortion is sin. When Jesus turned over the money changers’ tables in the Temple do you think anyone was offended. Did they seek to arrest Jesus for doing this? Was this not the start the Pharisees’ pursuit against Him (zeal for my father’s house)?
You seem to think that Todd, by his actions, is causing others Christians to sin because he is “in the church’s face” about abortion. Is that right?
I and others think that he is warning other believers to wake up to what abortion is and get active so as to not sin or cause others to sin. This is frustration expressed at the church’s unwillingness to do very much against abortion or, outright support abortion or, commit abortion. After all, 70% of abortions are committed by Christians.
The question that one must ask is what should be considered an offense. I mean, if you hear a sermon against adultery and you are committing adultery would you be offended. So are we not to speak against adultery? What if you hear a sermon on women’s role in the church and you are offended? Is that a violation of Mark 9:42? Is Tood not speaking truth to a church body which appears to be not listening?
I am trying to see your connection to the use of this verse, however, the context of the verse is children: ’36 Then he put a little child among them. Taking the child in his arms, he said to them, 37 “Anyone who welcomes a little child like this on my behalf welcomes me, and anyone who welcomes me welcomes not only me but also my Father who sent me.”’
So it seems to me that Jesus is putting a special emphasis on the offending of children or causing them to sin since while he is holding a child in his arms he states, “if you cause one of these little ones who trusts in me to fall into sin”.
What’s worse, teaching a child that abortion is a sin or teaching them that abortion is OK and it’s a choice? We have to make a decision on how to answer that question.
For me the balance is to try to present the tuth, which can be offensive, depending on the audience, with a heart attitude and motive of love.
I don’t think Todd is doing this apart from that heart attitude of love but I understand how he could easily be led astray. This is why in an earlier post I recommended that he not pursue any type of lawsuit irregardless of its merit.
Peace to you.
Posted by: MOL at April 1, 2010 12:08 PM
I AM A CHRISTIAN AND I LIVE IN VENTURA AND I WANT IT TO BE CLEAR THAT TODD DOES NOT REPRESENT VENTURA OR CHRISTIANS.
—————————————————
I am a son of a God and I live in Fort Worth, Texas and I want it to be clear that
MOL
does NOT speak for me or my FATHER or all of of Ventura or all christians.
MOL is entitled to her ‘opinion’ but MOL is not entitled to his/her/its facts.
yor bro ken
“These guys are just wolves roaming around outside the church stirring up dissension. They’re not worth talking to. They can’t hear the truth.
Paul Lopez
Posted by: Paul Lopez at April 1, 2010 5:04 PM”
__________________________________
Paul,
C’mon, you’re calling the kettle black by the above statement.
Do you really think that we pro-lifers are trying to stir up dissension? Or, are we just speaking truth?
Do you agree with how the church is currently handling the abortion issue?
If not, what should the church be doing and if so, how would you propose that they be motivated to do so?
We’ve had legalized abortion now for 37 years. Estimates are that 52 million children have been killed in the US and 4 Billion worldwide since Roe v. Wade.
Do you really think Jesus would approve of 70% of abortions being committed by his children? How is this consistent with the Gospel of Life?
Have you ever read Jeremiah 7:30-34? What was the a major determining factor in God’s decision to judge Israel and evidence of their complete apostasy? Was Jeremiah a cause of dissension at the time or was he merely speaking the oracles of God? Do you think he offended anyone?
What does the bible teach about abortion? If it’s against abortion, should we as believers and salt and light not speak against it?
I’m waiting for your answers and will consider them if I need to change my attitude and beliefs about abortion. Am I worth the effort to you?
Could you spend the next three years of your life as I have done trying to show the world and other Christians about the evil and horrors of abortion? Or are you going to just come on here once and call us all “wolves”?
Further, the church is not what meets every Sunday in a building. That’s the local assembly. The church consists of the Kingdom of God which makes up all of the true believers in each of those local assemblies. While all of us attend local assemblies on Saturday or Sunday, we together, in fact, are the “church”, the called out, the Body and Bride of Christ. Please do not be so quick to judge us until you understand who we are and what we stand for in the defense of “the least of these”.
Speaking of “church”, blessings to all who are celebrating the Triduum from Holy Thursday on… and Easter!
“Can you imagine the Apostle Paul crying “He squirted me with water, call the police! Did you get that on video?”
Posted by: Paul Lopez at April 1, 2010 5:04 PM
——————————————————
Acts 16:35-39 35 But when it was day, the magistrates sent policemen, saying, Release those fellows and let them go.
36 And the jailer repeated the words to Paul, saying, The magistrates have sent to release you and let you go; now therefore come out and go in peace.
37 But Paul answered them, They have beaten us openly and publicly, without a trial and uncondemned, men who are Roman citizens, and have thrown us into prison; and do they now thrust us out secretly? No, indeed! Let them come here themselves and conduct us out!
38 The police reported this message to the magistrates, and they were frightened when they heard that the prisoners were Roman citizens;
39 So they came themselves and [striving to appease them by entreaty] apologized to them. And they brought them out and asked them to leave the city. AMP
Acts 22:25 25 But when they had stretched him out with the thongs (leather straps), Paul asked the centurion who was standing by, Is it legal for you to flog a man who is a Roman citizen and uncondemned [without a trial]? AMP
Acts 22:29 Instantly those who were about to examine and flog him withdrew from him; and the commandant also was frightened, for he realized that [Paul] was a Roman citizen and he had put him in chains. AMP
—————————————————
Paul Lopez,
What happened to ‘turning the other cheek’?
What happened to ‘bless and pray for those who perecute and use you’?
The point is not the severity of the violence inflicted.
The point is that men in and under authority abused their position of trust and viloated the ‘rights’ of a citizen.
Officer Hixson violated Todd Bullis’ right to free speech and freedom of assembly.
Officer Hixson ‘violated’ the law knowingly.
Officer Hixson could probably end all this right now if he went to Todd Bullis and acknowledged what he did was wrong as well as illegal.
If Officer Hixson refuses to acknowledge he was wrong then I would say Todd Bullis authorized to proceed the process outlined in Matthew 18.
If Hixson believes Todd Bullis has sinned against him then Hixson can begin the same process.
I actually believe it would be beneficial for the body of Christ if it went the Matthew 18 way.
yor bro ken
A wise old nun repeated a quote to me recently, “It’s not that we are afraid of failing. It’s that we are afraid of succeeding.”
I did not meet her by accident. I did not come here by accident.
Be not afraid. Now is the time.
It is written in the book that a woman who was caught in the very act of adultery was brought to Jesus. The men who apprehended the lady asked of him what should be done with her.
You will recall when Jesus ‘outed them’ obliquely, it is recorded that from the oldest to the youngest they dropped their stones and went away.
Even an old fool has more wisdom than a young one.
yor bro ken
‘MOL’
Is that short for Molech?
yor bro ken
Blessed Triduum to you, too, Janet! (…and to all!)
1 Corinthians 6 1-10
If any of you has a dispute with another, dare he take it before the ungodly for judgment instead of before the saints? 2Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? 3Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life! 4Therefore, if you have disputes about such matters, appoint as judges even men of little account in the church![a] 5I say this to shame you. Is it possible that there is nobody among you wise enough to judge a dispute between believers? 6But instead, one brother goes to law against another—and this in front of unbelievers!
7The very fact that you have lawsuits among you means you have been completely defeated already. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be cheated? 8Instead, you yourselves cheat and do wrong, and you do this to your brothers.
Posted by: Ex-GOP Voter at April 1, 2010 10:20 PM
“2Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? 3Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life!”
————————————————–
RINO,
Not sure what your point is in the passages but the apostle Paul, the same fellow who wrote the passage you posted, appealed to Caesar [the state] when he was wrongfully assaulted by agents of the the same state.
Also, the excerpt I posted above sounds a little judemental, even intolerant.
It is good thing Jesus sent Holy Spirit to help us understand these seemingly contradictory scriputes.
Paul was writing about civil suits between believers, not the prosecution of criminal acts, especially when the acts are perpetrated by a agent of the state.
RINO,
If you keep doing your word searches, then Holy Spirit might give you some understanding.
God can fix stupid.
Jer 10:21 For the shepherds [of the people] have become like brutes, irrational and stupid, and have not sought the Lord or inquired of Him or required Him [by necessity and by right of His word]. Therefore they have not dealt prudently and have not prospered, and all their flocks are scattered. AMP
If the God’s people become ‘irrational and stupid’, from NOT seeking God then God can reverse the process if we seek HIM.
But you seem to be wavering between two opinions. Commit yourself one way or the other.
Double mindedness is not conducive to fellowship with the Living God.
RINO,
I am of the ‘old fools’, which are you?
yor bro ken
This is the Humanist Manifesto that was published in 1933. Read it and you will see that it is Obama’s campaign speech. Out of it has sprung the religions of Liberalism, Environmentalism, Evolution, Naturalism, Eugenics (Abortion and Euthanasia), just to name a few which all stand in direct opposition to Our Lord. Church, wake up to what’s happening in our country. We must start engaging the culture with the truth of God’s word and the love of Jesus Christ, who is the Absolute Truth…..Phil Schembri (2010).
__________________________________________________
The Manifesto is a product of many minds. It was designed to represent a developing point of view, not a new creed. The individuals whose signatures appear would, had they been writing individual statements, have stated the propositions in differing terms. The importance of the document is that more than thirty men have come to general agreement on matters of final concern and that these men are undoubtedly representative of a large number who are forging a new philosophy out of the materials of the modern world.
– Raymond B. Bragg (1933)
————————————————–
The Humanist Manifesto
The time has come for widespread recognition of the radical changes in religious beliefs throughout the modern world. The time is past for mere revision of traditional attitudes. Science and economic change have disrupted the old beliefs. Religions the world over are under the necessity of coming to terms with new conditions created by a vastly increased knowledge and experience. In every field of human activity, the vital movement is now in the direction of a candid and explicit humanism. In order that religious humanism may be better understood we, the undersigned, desire to make certain affirmations which we believe the facts of our contemporary life demonstrate.
There is great danger of a final, and we believe fatal, identification of the word religion with doctrines and methods which have lost their significance and which are powerless to solve the problem of human living in the Twentieth Century. Religions have always been means for realizing the highest values of life. Their end has been accomplished through the interpretation of the total environing situation (theology or world view), the sense of values resulting therefrom (goal or ideal), and the technique (cult), established for realizing the satisfactory life. A change in any of these factors results in alteration of the outward forms of religion. This fact explains the changefulness of religions through the centuries. But through all changes religion itself remains constant in its quest for abiding values, an inseparable feature of human life.
Today man’s larger understanding of the universe, his scientific achievements, and deeper appreciation of brotherhood, have created a situation which requires a new statement of the means and purposes of religion. Such a vital, fearless, and frank religion capable of furnishing adequate social goals and personal satisfactions may appear to many people as a complete break with the past. While this age does owe a vast debt to the traditional religions, it is none the less obvious that any religion that can hope to be a synthesizing and dynamic force for today must be shaped for the needs of this age. To establish such a religion is a major necessity of the present. It is a responsibility which rests upon this generation. We therefore affirm the following:
FIRST: Religious humanists regard the universe as self-existing and not created.
SECOND: Humanism believes that man is a part of nature and that he has emerged as a result of a continuous process.
THIRD: Holding an organic view of life, humanists find that the traditional dualism of mind and body must be rejected.
FOURTH: Humanism recognizes that man’s religious culture and civilization, as clearly depicted by anthropology and history, are the product of a gradual development due to his interaction with his natural environment and with his social heritage. The individual born into a particular culture is largely molded by that culture.
FIFTH: Humanism asserts that the nature of the universe depicted by modern science makes unacceptable any supernatural or cosmic guarantees of human values. Obviously humanism does not deny the possibility of realities as yet undiscovered, but it does insist that the way to determine the existence and value of any and all realities is by means of intelligent inquiry and by the assessment of their relations to human needs. Religion must formulate its hopes and plans in the light of the scientific spirit and method.
SIXTH: We are convinced that the time has passed for theism, deism, modernism, and the several varieties of “new thought”.
SEVENTH: Religion consists of those actions, purposes, and experiences which are humanly significant. Nothing human is alien to the religious. It includes labor, art, science, philosophy, love, friendship, recreation–all that is in its degree expressive of intelligently satisfying human living. The distinction between the sacred and the secular can no longer be maintained.
EIGHTH: Religious Humanism considers the complete realization of human personality to be the end of man’s life and seeks its development and fulfillment in the here and now. This is the explanation of the humanist’s social passion.
NINTH: In the place of the old attitudes involved in worship and prayer the humanist finds his religious emotions expressed in a heightened sense of personal life and in a cooperative effort to promote social well-being.
TENTH: It follows that there will be no uniquely religious emotions and attitudes of the kind hitherto associated with belief in the supernatural.
ELEVENTH: Man will learn to face the crises of life in terms of his knowledge of their naturalness and probability. Reasonable and manly attitudes will be fostered by education and supported by custom. We assume that humanism will take the path of social and mental hygiene and discourage sentimental and unreal hopes and wishful thinking.
TWELFTH: Believing that religion must work increasingly for joy in living, religious humanists aim to foster the creative in man and to encourage achievements that add to the satisfactions of life.
THIRTEENTH: Religious humanism maintains that all associations and institutions exist for the fulfillment of human life. The intelligent evaluation, transformation, control, and direction of such associations and institutions with a view to the enhancement of human life is the purpose and program of humanism. Certainly religious institutions, their ritualistic forms, ecclesiastical methods, and communal activities must be reconstituted as rapidly as experience allows, in order to function effectively in the modern world.
FOURTEENTH: The humanists are firmly convinced that existing acquisitive and profit-motivated society has shown itself to be inadequate and that a radical change in methods, controls, and motives must be instituted. A socialized and cooperative economic order must be established to the end that the equitable distribution of the means of life be possible. The goal of humanism is a free and universal society in which people voluntarily and intelligently cooperate for the common good. Humanists demand a shared life in a shared world.
FIFTEENTH AND LAST: We assert that humanism will: (a) affirm life rather than deny it; (b) seek to elicit the possibilities of life, not flee from them; and (c) endeavor to establish the conditions of a satisfactory life for all, not merely for the few. By this positive morale and intention humanism will be guided, and from this perspective and alignment the techniques and efforts of humanism will flow.
So stand the theses of religious humanism. Though we consider the religious forms and ideas of our fathers no longer adequate, the quest for the good life is still the central task for mankind. Man is at last becoming aware that he alone is responsible for the realization of the world of his dreams, that he has within himself the power for its achievement. He must set intelligence and will to the task.
(Signed)
J.A.C. Fagginger Auer—Parkman Professor of Church History and Theology, Harvard University; Professor of Church History, Tufts College.
E. Burdette Backus—Unitarian Minister.
Harry Elmer Barnes—General Editorial Department, ScrippsHoward Newspapers.
L.M. Birkhead—The Liberal Center, Kansas City, Missouri.
Raymond B. Bragg—Secretary, Western Unitarian Conference.
Edwin Arthur Burtt—Professor of Philosophy, Sage School of Philosophy, Cornell University.
Ernest Caldecott—Minister, First Unitarian Church, Los Angeles, California.
A.J. Carlson—Professor of Physiology, University of Chicago.
John Dewey—Columbia University.
Albert C. Dieffenbach—Formerly Editor of The Christian Register.
John H. Dietrich—Minister, First Unitarian Society, Minneapolis.
Bernard Fantus—Professor of Therapeutics, College of Medicine, University of Illinois.
William Floyd—Editor of The Arbitrator, New York City.
F.H. Hankins—Professor of Economics and Sociology, Smith College.
A. Eustace Haydon—Professor of History of Religions, University of Chicago.
Llewellyn Jones—Literary critic and author.
Robert Morss Lovett—Editor, The New Republic; Professor of English, University of Chicago.
Harold P Marley—Minister, The Fellowship of Liberal Religion, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
R. Lester Mondale—Minister, Unitarian Church, Evanston, Illinois.
Charles Francis Potter—Leader and Founder, the First Humanist Society of New York, Inc.
John Herman Randall, Jr.—Department of Philosophy, Columbia University.
Curtis W. Reese—Dean, Abraham Lincoln Center, Chicago.
Oliver L. Reiser—Associate Professor of Philosophy, University of Pittsburgh.
Roy Wood Sellars—Professor of Philosophy, University of Michigan.
Clinton Lee Scott—Minister, Universalist Church, Peoria, Illinois.
Maynard Shipley—President, The Science League of America.
W. Frank Swift—Director, Boston Ethical Society.
V.T. Thayer—Educational Director, Ethical Culture Schools.
Eldred C. Vanderlaan—Leader of the Free Fellowship, Berkeley, California.
Joseph Walker—Attorney, Boston, Massachusetts.
Jacob J. Weinstein—Rabbi; Advisor to Jewish Students, Columbia University.
Frank S.C. Wicks—All Souls Unitarian Church, Indianapolis.
David Rhys Williams—Minister, Unitarian Church, Rochester, New York.
Edwin H. Wilson—Managing Editor, The New Humanist, Chicago, Illinois; Minister, Third Unitarian Church, Chicago, Illinois.
Copyright © 1933 by The New Humanist and 1973 by the American Humanist Association
Since then we have had prayer taken out of our schools, God taken out of our schools, the legalization of abortion, etc., etc., etc.
Now here’s the Humanist Manifesto II published in 1973 and it should scare the pants off you. You should also recognize the Obama lives by this religion.
Humanist Manifesto II
————————————————–
Preface
It is forty years since Humanist Manifesto I (1933) appeared. Events since then make that earlier statement seem far too optimistic. Nazism has shown the depths of brutality of which humanity is capable. Other totalitarian regimes have suppressed human rights without ending poverty. Science has sometimes brought evil as well as good. Recent decades have shown that inhuman wars can be made in the name of peace. The beginnings of police states, even in democratic societies, widespread government espionage, and other abuses of power by military, political, and industrial elites, and the continuance of unyielding racism, all present a different and difficult social outlook. In various societies, the demands of women and minority groups for equal rights effectively challenge our generation.
As we approach the twenty-first century, however, an affirmative and hopeful vision is needed. Faith, commensurate with advancing knowledge, is also necessary. In the choice between despair and hope, humanists respond in this Humanist Manifesto II with a positive declaration for times of uncertainty.
As in 1933, humanists still believe that traditional theism, especially faith in the prayer-hearing God, assumed to live and care for persons, to hear and understand their prayers, and to be able to do something about them, is an unproved and outmoded faith. Salvationism, based on mere affirmation, still appears as harmful, diverting people with false hopes of heaven hereafter. Reasonable minds look to other means for survival.
Those who sign Humanist Manifesto II disclaim that they are setting forth a binding credo; their individual views would be stated in widely varying ways. This statement is, however, reaching for vision in a time that needs direction. It is social analysis in an effort at consensus. New statements should be developed to supersede this, but for today it is our conviction that humanism offers an alternative that can serve present-day needs and guide humankind toward the future.
– Paul Kurtz and Edwin H. Wilson (1973)
——————————————————————————–
The next century can be and should be the humanistic century. Dramatic scientific, technological, and ever-accelerating social and political changes crowd our awareness. We have virtually conquered the planet, explored the moon, overcome the natural limits of travel and communication; we stand at the dawn of a new age, ready to move farther into space and perhaps inhabit other planets. Using technology wisely, we can control our environment, conquer poverty, markedly reduce disease, extend our life-span, significantly modify our behavior, alter the course of human evolution and cultural development, unlock vast new powers, and provide humankind with unparalleled opportunity for achieving an abundant and meaningful life.
The future is, however, filled with dangers. In learning to apply the scientific method to nature and human life, we have opened the door to ecological damage, over-population, dehumanizing institutions, totalitarian repression, and nuclear and bio-chemical disaster. Faced with apocalyptic prophesies and doomsday scenarios, many flee in despair from reason and embrace irrational cults and theologies of withdrawal and retreat.
Traditional moral codes and newer irrational cults both fail to meet the pressing needs of today and tomorrow. False “theologies of hope” and messianic ideologies, substituting new dogmas for old, cannot cope with existing world realities. They separate rather than unite peoples.
Humanity, to survive, requires bold and daring measures. We need to extend the uses of scientific method, not renounce them, to fuse reason with compassion in order to build constructive social and moral values. Confronted by many possible futures, we must decide which to pursue. The ultimate goal should be the fulfillment of the potential for growth in each human personality – not for the favored few, but for all of humankind. Only a shared world and global measures will suffice.
A humanist outlook will tap the creativity of each human being and provide the vision and courage for us to work together. This outlook emphasizes the role human beings can play in their own spheres of action. The decades ahead call for dedicated, clear-minded men and women able to marshal the will, intelligence, and cooperative skills for shaping a desirable future. Humanism can provide the purpose and inspiration that so many seek; it can give personal meaning and significance to human life.
Many kinds of humanism exist in the contemporary world. The varieties and emphases of naturalistic humanism include “scientific,” “ethical,” “democratic,” “religious,” and “Marxist” humanism. Free thought, atheism, agnosticism, skepticism, deism, rationalism, ethical culture, and liberal religion all claim to be heir to the humanist tradition. Humanism traces its roots from ancient China, classical Greece and Rome, through the Renaissance and the Enlightenment, to the scientific revolution of the modern world. But views that merely reject theism are not equivalent to humanism. They lack commitment to the positive belief in the possibilities of human progress and to the values central to it. Many within religious groups, believing in the future of humanism, now claim humanist credentials. Humanism is an ethical process through which we all can move, above and beyond the divisive particulars, heroic personalities, dogmatic creeds, and ritual customs of past religions or their mere negation.
We affirm a set of common principles that can serve as a basis for united action – positive principles relevant to the present human condition. They are a design for a secular society on a planetary scale.
For these reasons, we submit this new Humanist Manifesto for the future of humankind; for us, it is a vision of hope, a direction for satisfying survival.
Religion
FIRST: In the best sense, religion may inspire dedication to the highest ethical ideals. The cultivation of moral devotion and creative imagination is an expression of genuine “spiritual” experience and aspiration.
We believe, however, that traditional dogmatic or authoritarian religions that place revelation, God, ritual, or creed above human needs and experience do a disservice to the human species. Any account of nature should pass the tests of scientific evidence; in our judgment, the dogmas and myths of traditional religions do not do so. Even at this late date in human history, certain elementary facts based upon the critical use of scientific reason have to be restated. We find insufficient evidence for belief in the existence of a supernatural; it is either meaningless or irrelevant to the question of survival and fulfillment of the human race. As nontheists, we begin with humans not God, nature not deity. Nature may indeed be broader and deeper than we now know; any new discoveries, however, will but enlarge our knowledge of the natural.
Some humanists believe we should reinterpret traditional religions and reinvest them with meanings appropriate to the current situation. Such redefinitions, however, often perpetuate old dependencies and escapisms; they easily become obscurantist, impeding the free use of the intellect. We need, instead, radically new human purposes and goals.
We appreciate the need to preserve the best ethical teachings in the religious traditions of humankind, many of which we share in common. But we reject those features of traditional religious morality that deny humans a full appreciation of their own potentialities and responsibilities. Traditional religions often offer solace to humans, but, as often, they inhibit humans from helping themselves or experiencing their full potentialities. Such institutions, creeds, and rituals often impede the will to serve others. Too often traditional faiths encourage dependence rather than independence, obedience rather than affirmation, fear rather than courage. More recently they have generated concerned social action, with many signs of relevance appearing in the wake of the “God Is Dead” theologies. But we can discover no divine purpose or providence for the human species. While there is much that we do not know, humans are responsible for what we are or will become. No deity will save us; we must save ourselves.
SECOND: Promises of immortal salvation or fear of eternal damnation are both illusory and harmful. They distract humans from present concerns, from self-actualization, and from rectifying social injustices. Modern science discredits such historic concepts as the “ghost in the machine” and the “separable soul.” Rather, science affirms that the human species is an emergence from natural evolutionary forces. As far as we know, the total personality is a function of the biological organism transacting in a social and cultural context. There is no credible evidence that life survives the death of the body. We continue to exist in our progeny and in the way that our lives have influenced others in our culture.
Traditional religions are surely not the only obstacles to human progress. Other ideologies also impede human advance. Some forms of political doctrine, for instance, function religiously, reflecting the worst features of orthodoxy and authoritarianism, especially when they sacrifice individuals on the altar of Utopian promises. Purely economic and political viewpoints, whether capitalist or communist, often function as religious and ideological dogma. Although humans undoubtedly need economic and political goals, they also need creative values by which to live.
Ethics
THIRD: We affirm that moral values derive their source from human experience. Ethics is autonomous and situational needing no theological or ideological sanction. Ethics stems from human need and interest. To deny this distorts the whole basis of life. Human life has meaning because we create and develop our futures. Happiness and the creative realization of human needs and desires, individually and in shared enjoyment, are continuous themes of humanism. We strive for the good life, here and now. The goal is to pursue life’s enrichment despite debasing forces of vulgarization, commercialization, and dehumanization.
FOURTH: Reason and intelligence are the most effective instruments that humankind possesses. There is no substitute: neither faith nor passion suffices in itself. The controlled use of scientific methods, which have transformed the natural and social sciences since the Renaissance, must be extended further in the solution of human problems. But reason must be tempered by humility, since no group has a monopoly of wisdom or virtue. Nor is there any guarantee that all problems can be solved or all questions answered. Yet critical intelligence, infused by a sense of human caring, is the best method that humanity has for resolving problems. Reason should be balanced with compassion and empathy and the whole person fulfilled. Thus, we are not advocating the use of scientific intelligence independent of or in opposition to emotion, for we believe in the cultivation of feeling and love. As science pushes back the boundary of the known, humankind’s sense of wonder is continually renewed, and art, poetry, and music find their places, along with religion and ethics.
The Individual
FIFTH: The preciousness and dignity of the individual person is a central humanist value. Individuals should be encouraged to realize their own creative talents and desires. We reject all religious, ideological, or moral codes that denigrate the individual, suppress freedom, dull intellect, dehumanize personality. We believe in maximum individual autonomy consonant with social responsibility. Although science can account for the causes of behavior, the possibilities of individual freedom of choice exist in human life and should be increased.
SIXTH: In the area of sexuality, we believe that intolerant attitudes, often cultivated by orthodox religions and puritanical cultures, unduly repress sexual conduct. The right to birth control, abortion, and divorce should be recognized. While we do not approve of exploitive, denigrating forms of sexual expression, neither do we wish to prohibit, by law or social sanction, sexual behavior between consenting adults. The many varieties of sexual exploration should not in themselves be considered “evil.” Without countenancing mindless permissiveness or unbridled promiscuity, a civilized society should be a tolerant one. Short of harming others or compelling them to do likewise, individuals should be permitted to express their sexual proclivities and pursue their lifestyles as they desire. We wish to cultivate the development of a responsible attitude toward sexuality, in which humans are not exploited as sexual objects, and in which intimacy, sensitivity, respect, and honesty in interpersonal relations are encouraged. Moral education for children and adults is an important way of developing awareness and sexual maturity.
Democratic Society
SEVENTH: To enhance freedom and dignity the individual must experience a full range of civil liberties in all societies. This includes freedom of speech and the press, political democracy, the legal right of opposition to governmental policies, fair judicial process, religious liberty, freedom of association, and artistic, scientific, and cultural freedom. It also includes a recognition of an individual’s right to die with dignity, euthanasia, and the right to suicide. We oppose the increasing invasion of privacy, by whatever means, in both totalitarian and democratic societies. We would safeguard, extend, and implement the principles of human freedom evolved from the Magna Carta to the Bill of Rights, the Rights of Man, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
EIGHTH: We are committed to an open and democratic society. We must extend participatory democracy in its true sense to the economy, the school, the family, the workplace, and voluntary associations. Decision-making must be decentralized to include widespread involvement of people at all levels – social, political, and economic. All persons should have a voice in developing the values and goals that determine their lives. Institutions should be responsive to expressed desires and needs. The conditions of work, education, devotion, and play should be humanized. Alienating forces should be modified or eradicated and bureaucratic structures should be held to a minimum. People are more important than decalogues, rules, proscriptions, or regulations.
NINTH: The separation of church and state and the separation of ideology and state are imperatives. The state should encourage maximum freedom for different moral, political, religious, and social values in society. It should not favor any particular religious bodies through the use of public monies, nor espouse a single ideology and function thereby as an instrument of propaganda or oppression, particularly against dissenters.
TENTH: Humane societies should evaluate economic systems not by rhetoric or ideology, but by whether or not they increase economic well-being for all individuals and groups, minimize poverty and hardship, increase the sum of human satisfaction, and enhance the quality of life. Hence the door is open to alternative economic systems. We need to democratize the economy and judge it by its responsiveness to human needs, testing results in terms of the common good.
ELEVENTH: The principle of moral equality must be furthered through elimination of all discrimination based upon race, religion, sex, age, or national origin. This means equality of opportunity and recognition of talent and merit. Individuals should be encouraged to contribute to their own betterment. If unable, then society should provide means to satisfy their basic economic, health, and cultural needs, including, wherever resources make possible, a minimum guaranteed annual income. We are concerned for the welfare of the aged, the infirm, the disadvantaged, and also for the outcasts – the mentally retarded, abandoned, or abused children, the handicapped, prisoners, and addicts – for all who are neglected or ignored by society. Practicing humanists should make it their vocation to humanize personal relations.
We believe in the right to universal education. Everyone has a right to the cultural opportunity to fulfill his or her unique capacities and talents. The schools should foster satisfying and productive living. They should be open at all levels to any and all; the achievement of excellence should be encouraged. Innovative and experimental forms of education are to be welcomed. The energy and idealism of the young deserve to be appreciated and channeled to constructive purposes.
We deplore racial, religious, ethnic, or class antagonisms. Although we believe in cultural diversity and encourage racial and ethnic pride, we reject separations which promote alienation and set people and groups against each other; we envision an integrated community where people have a maximum opportunity for free and voluntary association.
We are critical of sexism or sexual chauvinism – male or female. We believe in equal rights for both women and men to fulfill their unique careers and potentialities as they see fit, free of invidious discrimination.
World Community
TWELFTH: We deplore the division of humankind on nationalistic grounds. We have reached a turning point in human history where the best option is to transcend the limits of national sovereignty and to move toward the building of a world community in which all sectors of the human family can participate. Thus we look to the development of a system of world law and a world order based upon transnational federal government. This would appreciate cultural pluralism and diversity. It would not exclude pride in national origins and accomplishments nor the handling of regional problems on a regional basis. Human progress, however, can no longer be achieved by focusing on one section of the world, Western or Eastern, developed or underdeveloped. For the first time in human history, no part of humankind can be isolated from any other. Each person’s future is in some way linked to all. We thus reaffirm a commitment to the building of world community, at the same time recognizing that this commits us to some hard choices.
THIRTEENTH: This world community must renounce the resort to violence and force as a method of solving international disputes. We believe in the peaceful adjudication of differences by international courts and by the development of the arts of negotiation and compromise. War is obsolete. So is the use of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons. It is a planetary imperative to reduce the level of military expenditures and turn these savings to peaceful and people-oriented uses.
FOURTEENTH: The world community must engage in cooperative planning concerning the use of rapidly depleting resources. The planet earth must be considered a single ecosystem. Ecological damage, resource depletion, and excessive population growth must be checked by international concord. The cultivation and conservation of nature is a moral value; we should perceive ourselves as integral to the sources of our being in nature. We must free our world from needless pollution and waste, responsibly guarding and creating wealth, both natural and human. Exploitation of natural resources, uncurbed by social conscience, must end.
FIFTEENTH: The problems of economic growth and development can no longer be resolved by one nation alone; they are worldwide in scope. It is the moral obligation of the developed nations to provide – through an international authority that safeguards human rights – massive technical, agricultural, medical, and economic assistance, including birth control techniques, to the developing portions of the globe. World poverty must cease. Hence extreme disproportions in wealth, income, and economic growth should be reduced on a worldwide basis.
SIXTEENTH: Technology is a vital key to human progress and development. We deplore any neo-romantic efforts to condemn indiscriminately all technology and science or to counsel retreat from its further extension and use for the good of humankind. We would resist any moves to censor basic scientific research on moral, political, or social grounds. Technology must, however, be carefully judged by the consequences of its use; harmful and destructive changes should be avoided. We are particularly disturbed when technology and bureaucracy control, manipulate, or modify human beings without their consent. Technological feasibility does not imply social or cultural desirability.
SEVENTEENTH: We must expand communication and transportation across frontiers. Travel restrictions must cease. The world must be open to diverse political, ideological, and moral viewpoints and evolve a worldwide system of television and radio for information and education. We thus call for full international cooperation in culture, science, the arts, and technology across ideological borders. We must learn to live openly together or we shall perish together.
Humanity As a Whole
IN CLOSING: The world cannot wait for a reconciliation of competing political or economic systems to solve its problems. These are the times for men and women of goodwill to further the building of a peaceful and prosperous world. We urge that parochial loyalties and inflexible moral and religious ideologies be transcended. We urge recognition of the common humanity of all people. We further urge the use of reason and compassion to produce the kind of world we want – a world in which peace, prosperity, freedom, and happiness are widely shared. Let us not abandon that vision in despair or cowardice. We are responsible for what we are or will be. Let us work together for a humane world by means commensurate with humane ends. Destructive ideological differences among communism, capitalism, socialism, conservatism, liberalism, and radicalism should be overcome. Let us call for an end to terror and hatred. We will survive and prosper only in a world of shared humane values. We can initiate new directions for humankind; ancient rivalries can be superseded by broad-based cooperative efforts. The commitment to tolerance, understanding, and peaceful negotiation does not necessitate acquiescence to the status quo nor the damming up of dynamic and revolutionary forces. The true revolution is occurring and can continue in countless nonviolent adjustments. But this entails the willingness to step forward onto new and expanding plateaus. At the present juncture of history, commitment to all humankind is the highest commitment of which we are capable; it transcends the narrow allegiances of church, state, party, class, or race in moving toward a wider vision of human potentiality. What more daring a goal for humankind than for each person to become, in ideal as well as practice, a citizen of a world community. It is a classical vision; we can now give it new vitality. Humanism thus interpreted is a moral force that has time on its side. We believe that humankind has the potential, intelligence, goodwill, and cooperative skill to implement this commitment in the decades ahead.
We, the undersigned, while not necessarily endorsing every detail of the above, pledge our general support to Humanist Manifesto II for the future of humankind. These affirmations are not a final credo or dogma but an expression of a living and growing faith. We invite others in all lands to join us in further developing and working for these goals.
Lionel Able, Prof. of English, State Univ. of New York at Buffalo
Khoren Arisian, Board of Leaders, NY Soc. for Ethical Culture
Isaac Asimov, author
George Axtelle, Prof. Emeritus, Southern Illinois Univ.
Archie J. Bahm, Prof. of Philosophy Emeritus, Univ. of N.M.
Pual H. Beattie, Pres., Fellowship of Religious Humanists
Keith Beggs, Exec. Dir., American Humanist Association
Malcolm Bissell, Prof. Emeritus, Univ. of Southern California
H. J. Blackham, Chm., Social Morality Council, Great Britain
Brand Blanshard, Prof. Emeritus, Yale University
Paul Blanshard, author
Joseph L. Blau, Prof. of Religion, Columbia University
Sir Hermann Bondi, Prof. of Math., King’s Coll., Univ. of London
Howard Box, Leader, Brooklyn Society for Ethical Culture
Raymond B. Bragg, Minister Emer., Unitarian Ch., Kansas City
Theodore Brameld, Visiting Prof., C.U.N.Y.
Brigid Brophy, author, Great Britain
Lester R. Brown, Senior Fellow, Overseas Development Council
Betty Chambers, Pres., American Humanist Association
John Ciardi, poet
Francis Crick, M.D., Great Britain
Arthur Danto, Prof. of Philosophy, Columbia University
Lucien de Coninck, Prof., University of Gand, Belgium
Miriam Allen deFord, author
Edd Doerr, Americans United for Separation of Church and State
Peter Draper, M.D., Guy’s Hospital Medical School, London
Paul Edwards, Prof. of Philosophy, Brooklyn College
Albert Ellis, Exec. Dir., Inst. Adv. Study Rational Psychotherapy
Edward L. Ericson, Board of Leaders, NY Soc. of Ethical Culture
H. J. Eysenck, Prof. of Psychology, Univ. of London
Roy P. Fairfield, Coordinator, Union Graduate School
Herbert Feigl, Prof. Emeritus, Univ. of Minnesota
Raymond Firth, Prof. Emeritus of Anthropology, Univ. of London
Antony Flew, Prof. of Philosophy, The Univ., Reading, England
Kenneth Furness, Exec. Secy., British Humanist Association
Erwin Gaede, Minister, Unitarian Church, Ann Arbor, Mich.
Richard S. Gilbert, Minister, First Unitarian Ch., Rochester, N.Y.
Charles Wesley Grady, Minister, Unit. Univ. Ch., Arlington, Ma.
Maxine Greene, Prof., Teachers College, Columbia University
Thomas C. Greening, Editor, Journal of Humanistic Psychology
Alan F. Guttmacher, Pres., Planned Parenthood Fed. of America
J. Harold Hadley, Min., Unit. Univ. Ch., Pt. Washington, N.Y.
Hector Hawton, Editor, Questions, Great Britain
Eustace Haydon, Prof. Emeritus of History of Religions
James Hemming, Psychologist, Great Britain
Palmer A. Hilty, Adm. Secy., Fellowship of Religious Humanists
Hudson Hoagland, Pres. Emeritus, Worcester Fdn. for Exper. Bio
Robert S. Hoagland, Editor, Religious Humanism
Sidney Hook, Prof. Emeritus of Philosophy, New York University
James F. Hornback, Leader, Ethical Society of St Louis
James M Hutchinson, Minister Emer., First Unit. Ch., Cincinnati
Mordecai M. Kaplan, Rabbi, Fndr. of Jewish Reconstr. Movement
John C. Kidneigh, Prof. of Social Work., Univ. of Minnesota
Lester A. Kirdendall, Prof. Emeritus, Oregon State Univ.
Margaret Knight, Univ. of Aberdeen, Scotland
Jean Kotkin, Exec. Secy., American Ethical Union
Richard Kostelanetz, poet
Paul Kurtz, Editor, The Humanist
Lawrence Lader, Chm., Natl. Assn. for Repeal of Abortion Laws
Edward Lamb, Pres., Lamb Communications, Inc.
Corliss Lamont, Chm., Natl. Emergency Civil Liberties Comm.
Chauncey D. Leake, Prof., Univ. of California, San Francisco
Alfred McC. Lee, Prof. Emeritus, Soc.-Anthropology, C.U.N.Y.
Elizabeth Briant Lee, author
Christopher Macy, Dir., Rationalist Press Assn., Great Britain
Clorinda Margolis, Jefferson Comm. Mental Health Cen., Phila.
Joseph Margolis, Prof. of Philosophy, Temple Univ.
Harold P. Marley, Ret. Unitarian Minister
Floyd W. Matson, Prof. of American Studies, Univ. of Hawaii
Lester Mondale, former Pres., Fellowship of Religious Humanists
Lloyd Morain, Pres., Illinois Gas Company
Mary Morain, Editorial Bd., Intl. Soc. of General Semantics
Charles Morris, Prof. Emeritus, Univ. of Florida
Henry Morgentaler, M.D., Past Pres., Humanist Assn. of Canada
Mary Mothersill, Prof. of Philosophy, Bernard College
Jerome Nathanson, Chm. Bd. of Leaders, NY Soc. Ethical Culture
Billy Joe Nichols, Minister, Richardson Unitarian Church, Texas
Kai Nielsen, Prof. of Philosophy, Univ. of Calgary, Canada
P. H. Nowell-Smith, Prof. of Philosophy, York Univ., Canada
Chaim Perelman, Prof. of Philosophy, Univ. of Brussels, Belgium
James W. Prescott, Natl, Inst. of Child Health and Human Dev.
Harold J. Quigley, Leader, Ethical Humanist Society of Chicago
Howard Radest, Prof. of Philosophy, Ramapo College
John Herman Randall, Jr., Prof. Emeritus, Columbia Univ.
Oliver L. Reiser, Prof. Emeritus, Univ. of Pittsburgh
Robert G. Risk, Pres., Leadville Corp.
Lord Ritchie-Calder, formerly Univ. of Edinburgh, Scotland
B. T. Rocca, Jr., Consultant, Intl. Trade and Commodities
Andre H. Sakharov, Academy of Sciences, Moscow, U.S.S.R.
Sidney H. Scheuer, Chm., Natl, Comm. for an Effective Congress
Herbert W. Schneider, Prof. Emeritus, Claremont Grad. School
Clinton Lee Scott, Universalist Minister, St Petersburgh, Fla.
Roy Wood Sellars, Prof. Emeritus, Univ. of Michigan
A. B. Shah, Pres., Indian Secular Society
B. F. Skinner, Prof. of Psychology, Harvard Univ.
Kenneth J. Smith, Leader, Philadelphia Ethical Society
Matthew Ies Spetter, Chm., Dept. Ethics, Ethical Culture Schools
Mark Starr, Chm., Esperanto Info. Center
Svetozar Stojanovic, Prof. Philosophy, Univ. Belgrade, Yugoslavia
Harold Taylor, Project Director, World University Student Project
V. T. Thayer, author
Herbert A. Tonne, Ed. Board, Journal of Business Education
Jack Tourin, Pres., American Ethical Union
E. C. Vanderlaan, lecturer
J. P. van Praag, Chm., Intl. Humanist and Ethical Union, Utrecht
Maurice B. Visscher, M.D., Prof. Emeritus, Univ. of Minnesota
Goodwin Watson, Assn. Coordinator, Union Graduate School
Gerald Wendt, author
Henry N. Wieman, Prof. Emeritus, Univ. of Chicago
Sherwin Wine, Rabbi, Soc. for Humanistic Judaism
Edwin H. Wilson, Ex. Dir. Emeritus, American Humanist Assn.
Bertram D. Wolfe, Hoover Institution
Alexander S. Yesenin-Volpin, mathematician
Marvin Zimmerman, Prof. of Philosophy, State Univ. NY at Bflo.
Additional Signers
Gina Allen, author
John C. Anderson, Humanist Counselor
Peter O. Anderson, Assistant Professor, Ohio State University
William F. Anderson, Humanist Counselor
John Anton, Professor, Emory University
Sir Alfred Ayer, Professor, Oxford, Great Britain
Celia Baker
Ernest Baker, Associate Professor, University of the Pacific
Marjorie S. Baker, Ph.D.,Pres., Humanist Community of San Francisco
Henry S. Basayne, Assoc. Exec. Off., Assn. for Humanistic Psych.
Walter Behrendt, Vice Pres., European Parliament, W. Germany
Robert O. Boothe, Prof. Emer., Cal. Polytechnic
W. Bonness, Pres. Bund Freirelgioser Gemeinden, Germany
Clement A. Bosch
Madeline L. Bosch
Bruni Boyd, Vice Pres., American Ethical Union
J. Lloyd Brereton, ed., Humanist in Canada
Nancy Brewer, Humanist Counselor
D. Bronder, Bund Freirelgioser Gemeinden, West Germany
Charles Brownfield, Asst. Prof., Queensborough Community College, CUNY
Costantia Brownfield, R. N.
Margaret Brown, Assoc. Prof., Oneonta State Univ. College
Beulah L. Bullard, Humanist Counselor
Joseph Chuman, Leader, Ethical Soc. of Essex Co.
Gordon Clanton, Asst. Prof., Trenton State College
Daniel S. Collins, Leader, Unitarian Fellowship of Jonesboro, Ark.
Wm Creque, Pres., Fellowship of Humanity, Oakland, Ca.
M. Benjamin Dell, Dir., Amer. Humanist Assn.
James Durant IV, Prof., Polk Comm. College Winter Haven, Fla.
Gerald A. Ehrenreich, Assoc. Prof., Univ. of Kansas School of Medicine
Marie Erdmann, Teacher, Campbell Elementary School
Robert L. Erdmann, Ph.D., IBM
Hans S. Falck, Disting. Professor, Menninger Foundation
James Farmer, Director, Public Policy Training Institute
Ed Farrar
Joe Felmet, Humanist Counselor
Thomas Ferrick, Leader, Ethical Society of Boston
Norman Fleishman, Exec. Vice Pres., Planned Parenthood World Population, Los Angeles
Joseph Fletcher, Visiting Prof., Sch. of Medicine, Univ. of Virginia
Douglas Frazier, Leader, American Ethical Union
Betty Friedan, Founder, N.O.W.
Harry M. Geduld, Professor, Indiana University
Roland Gibson, President, Art Foundation of Potsdam. N.Y.
Aron S. Gilmartin, Minister, Mt. Diablo Unitarian Church, Walnut Creek, Ca.
Anabelle Glasser, Director, American Ethical Union
Rebecca Goldblum, Director, American Ethical Union
Louis R. Gomberg, Humanist Counselor
Harold N. Gordon, Vice President, American Ethical Union
Sol Gordon, Professor, Syracuse University
Theresa Gould, American Ethical Union
Gregory O. Grant, Captain, USAF
Ronald Green, Asst. Professor, New York University
LeRue Grim, Secretary, American Humanist Association
S. Spencer Grin, Publisher, Saturday Review/World
Josephine R. Gurbarg, Secy., Humanist Society of Greater Philadelphia
Samuel J. Garbarg
Lewis M. Gubrud, Executive Director, Mediators Fellowship, Providence, R.I.
Frank A. Hall, Minister, Murray Univ. Church, Attleboro, Mass.
Harold Hansen, President, Space Coast Chapter, AHA
Abul Hasanat, Secretary, Bangladesh Humanist Society
Ethelbert Haskins, Director, American Humanist Association
Lester H. Hayes, Public Relations Director, American Income Life Insurance Company
Donald E. Henshaw, Humanist Counselor
Alex Hershaft, Principal Scientist, Booz Allen Applied Research
Ronald E. Hestand, author and columnist
Irving Louis Horowitz, editor, Society
Warren S. Hoskins, Humanist Counselor
Mark W. Huber, Director, American Ethical Union
Harold J. Hutchinson, Humanist Counselor
Sir Julian Huxley, former head, UNESCO, Great Britain
Arthur M. Jackson, Exec. Dir., Humanist Community of San Jose; Treasurer, American Humanist Association
Linda R. Jackson, Director, American Humanist Association
Steven Jacobs, former President, American Ethical Union
Thomas B. Johnson, Jr., consulting psychologist
Robert Edward Jones, Exec. Dir., Joint Washington Office for Social Concern
Marion Kahn, Pres., Humanist Society of Metropolitan New York
Alec E. Kelley, Professor, University of Arizona
Marvin Kohl, Professor, SUNY at Fredonia
Frederick C. Kramer, Humanist Counselor
Eugene Kreves, Minister, DuPage Unit. Church, Naperville, Ill.
Pierre Lamarque, France
Helen B. Lamb, economist
Jerome D. Lang, Pres., Humanist Assoc. of Greater Miami, Fla.
Harvey Lebrun, Chairman, Chapter Assembly, AHA
Helen Leibson, President, Philadelphia Ethical Society
John F. MacEnulty, Jr., Pres., Humanist Soc. of Jacksonville, Fla.
James T. McCollum, Humanist Counselor
Vashti McCollum, former President of AHA
Russell L. McKnight, Pres., Humanist Association of Los Angeles
Ludlow P. Mahan, Jr., Pres., Humanist Chapter of Rhode Island
Andrew Malleson, M.D., psychiatrist
Clem Martin, M.D.
James R. Martin, Humanist Counselor
Stanley E. Mayabb, Co-Fndr.; Humanist Group of Vacaville and Men’s Colony, San Louis Obispo
Zhores Medvedev, scientist, U.S.S.R.
Abeldardo Mena, M.D., senior psychiatrist, V.A. Hospital, Miami, Fla.
Jacques Monod, Institut Pasteur, France
Herbert J. Muller, Professor, University of Indiana
Robert J. Myler, Title Officer, Title Insurance & Trust Company
Gunnar Myrdal, Professor, University of Stockholm, Sweden
H. Kyle Nagel, Minister, Unit. Univ. Church of Kinston, N.C.
Dorothy N. Naiman, Professor Emerita, Lehman College, CUNY
Muriel Neufeld, Executive Committee, American Ethical Union
Walter B. Neumann, Treasurer, American Ethical Union
G. D. Parikh, Indian Radical Humanist Association, India
Eleanor Wright Pelrine, author, Canada
Bernard Porter, President, Toronto Humanist Association
William Earl Proctor, Jr., President, Philadelphia area, AHA
Gonzalo Quiogue, Vice Pres., Humanist Assn. of the Philippines
James A. Rafferty, Lecturer, USIU School of Human Behavior
Anthony F. Rand, President, Humanist Society of Greater Detroit
Philip Randolph, President, A. Philip Randolph Institute
Ruth Dickinson Reams, President, Humanist Association National Capital Area
Jean-Francois Revel, journalist, France
Bernard L. Riback, Humanist Counselor
B. T. Rocca, Sr., President, United Secularists of America
M. L. Rosenthal, Professor, New York University
Jack C. Rubenstein, Executive Committee, AEU
Joseph R. Sanders, Professor, University of West Florida
William Schulz, Ph.D. cand., Meadville/Lombard, Univ. of Chicago
Walter G. Schwartz, Dir., Humanist Com. of San Francisco
John W. Sears, clinical psychologist
Naomi Shaw, Pres., National Women’s Conference, AEU
R. L. Shuford, III, Instructor, Charlotte County Day School
Sidney Siller, Chm. Comm. for Fair Divorce and Alimony Laws
Joell Silverman, Chm., Religious Education Committee, AEU
Warren A. Smith, Pres., Variety Sound Corp.
A. Solomon, coordinator, Indian Secular Society
Robert Stone
Robert M. Stein, Co-Chairman, Public Affairs Committee, AEU
Stuart Stein, Director, American Ethical Union
Arnold E Sylvester
Emerson Symonds, Director, Sensory Awareness Center
Carolyn Symonds, marriage counselor
Ward Tabler, Visiting Professor, Starr King School
Barbara M. Tabler
V. M. Tarkunde, Pres., All Indian Radical Humanist Assn., India
Erwin Theobold, Instructor, Pasadena City College
Ernest N. Ukpaby, Dean, University of Nigeria
Renate Vambery, Ethical Soc. of St. Louis, President, AHA St Louis Chapter
Nick D. Vasileff, St. Louis Ethical Society
Robert J. Wellman, Humanist Chaplain, C. W. Post Center, Long Island University
May H. Weis, UN Representative for IHEU
Paul D. Weston, Leader, Ethical Culture Society of Bergen County
Georgia H. Wilson, retired, Political Sc. Dept., Brooklyn College
H. Van Rensselaer Wilson, Prof., Emer., Brooklyn College
James E. Woodrow, Exec. Dir., Asgard Enterprises, Inc.
Copyright © 1973 by the American Humanist Association
People are regularly arrested for throwing pies, tomatoes, tacos, custard, soy sauce, beverages, etc. at someone when no “lasting damage” or even any damage at all occurs.