This is a story of my husband and daughter. First, let me write about my husband. My husband is Iranian-born. He always loved America and, as a child, dreamed of the day when he could live here. My husband believed that America was the land of freedom and opportunity. Sadly, the America he read about is not the America of today. It is a scary place that is home to left wing secularists who have no problem terrorizing people including children.

We have two children—a boy and a girl. They are Christian. My daughter is very Christian. She prays. She goes to church. One day, while in school, my daughter offered comfort to one of her school mates who was crying. She stated, “Don’t worry. Lets pray to Jesus and everything will be alright.” Her teacher overheard her and attacked. She verbally abused my daughter who was 8 years old at the time! Usually, my husband isn’t home early, but that day he was. My daughter came home and told my husband. She was hysterical. My husband, who was beaten by teachers in Iran for writing against the teachings of Allah, was not about to tolerate American teachers making his little girl cry.

He went over to the school and pushed his way in to see the principal. The teacher was called to the office where both the principal and teacher stated very condescendingly that the “constitution” states separation of church and state. My husband stated not so quietly that the constitution states freedom of religion and the constitution takes precedence of everything especially over a speech made by a president over 200 years ago. My husband and the principal argued for a long period. But, my husband would not budge. His daughter had the right to say “Jesus,” and if the teacher approached my daughter again he would take “action.” As you can imagine the teacher and principal were horrified, and threatened to call the police. My husband left. The teacher never again reprimanded my daughter.

I am writing this story because we live in fear in America just like my husband did in Iran. (His native country continues to suffer under the sword of oppression). Fortunately, my husband had a place to run to. But we don’t. If our country continues in this downward spiral of political correctness and secularism, and becomes a place that is no longer feasible to live then where do we run? Not Iran, that’s for sure!

My story is actually a grave concern from a story in our local newspaper (www.svherald.com). A student was expelled from school for selling drugs. His home was searched and forged identification documents were found. Also, a history of legal infractions were uncovered. He and his parents were eventually deported.

When the taxpayer-funded Buena High School was asked how an illegal happened to be enrolled in the school, the school official said, “We are not allowed to ask them of their citizenship.”

How can this be allowed to happen? Who’s pockets are being lined by forces unseen? Was this policy approved by the school, city, or state? Where is the common sense and accountability?

Thank you for “listening.”

In April 2002, I was standing on a sidewalk in Bridgewater, Massachusetts collecting signatures under MGL c. 56, s.11. The post office personnel came out and told me that I had no right to stand on the sidewalk and collect signatures. I told the person she was wrong. She called the Bridgewater police who then threatened me with arrest if I did not stop exercising my rights. In Massachusetts, a false arrest record is eternal. So, I left.

I brought suit against the police and the town. The suit was unconstitutionally removed to federal court where Judge Reginald Lindsey refused to remand the case back to lower court and upheld the “right” of the police to deny use of the sidewalk alongside RT – 18 in Bridgewater.

Judge Lindsey has, at this point, allowed the violation of rights of anyone standing on a sidewalk in Massachusetts.

Court Case: Schwarz vs. Sgt Robert Lincoln
USDC of Massachusetts 1:05 CV 10959

First I would like to tell all reading this that I am British, and I am very proud to now be a LEGAL resident, married to a law enforcement officer with 3 American children! Thank you for having me. This is a long story but it is all relevant. It gets terribly bad towards the end. If you really want an idea of how badly we law abiding, rule respecting citizens get treated by the INS, stick with the story.

I met my husband back in ’02, and it truly was a match made in heaven. We lived in eachothers’ pockets, and my husband’s 2 boys and I became very attached to eachother. Everything seemed so wonderful. I was on a student visa and had a whole year before my visa was due to expire. My husband proposed to me, and I was ecstatic! I thought that America was truly wonderful and much more conservative than the UK, for this I was truly grateful. I decided immediately that all the correct paperwork needed to be filed and that the INS should be informed of our marriage and my desire to become an American citizen. Six months after getting married, we were blessed with becoming pregnant.

Over the next eight months, we were to have at least four trips into Sacramento for paperwork filing, photos, medical exams, and fingerprints – all of which we were paying lots of money for! The first visit we attended, after lining up at 4am, in the rain, amongst at least 300 people (we were the only white people there); we were met by an extremely rude lady at a little window that told me all the paperwork that I had sent in the mail was wrong and to go home until I had the correct paperwork! So, WE WENT HOME!

The second visit, after receiving and filling out more papers, we lined up at 4am after a 2-hour drive, in the dark and in the cold (we were one couple of about 3 that were white); we got to the window and the same rude lady stated that we had the incorrect paperwork, to proceed to the next window, and to come back after we had filled out the correct ones! She was requesting the paperwork that we had previously brought that she had turned us away for only a month prior! So, WE WENT HOME!

The third visit (4am, 300 people, dark, and cold); the same lady told us that we were missing documents and we were to get some more photos with the correct pose! We ran around the corner to a booth and got some more and they allowed us back in. While in the second waiting room (after 7 hours), I received a phone call from my 6 year old step son’s teacher. It was Mother’s Day at school, and he was crying because his mother (me) was unable to attend the Mother’s Day poem they were reading! After years of the boys receiving little of their own mother’s attention, I felt it was my duty to be there at this incredibly important day to my son! My husband and I jumped up, told one of the INS workers what was happening and they simply said, just come back when you can. We raced home at about 80 miles an hour for over 2 hours. I made it and the look on his face was worth every bit of it.
We finally made it back to the INS. I was now 7 months pregnant, and we lined up for 5 hours in the freezing cold rain and in the dark. I was ready to break down by the time I got in there. As I stepped up the window, the lovely lady looked at my husband and I and simply stated, “We are short staffed today and so we are only seeing half the people.” Then she closed the window in our face! We tried begging her through the glass, but she just shook her head. I broke down in the foyer and sat and sobbed! A police officer who had seen my husband’s badge several times upon entering the building over previous months told us to sit and wait. After just a few minutes, a manager came down, smiled sweetly, and took us to her office. She filled out our paperwork, and we were done in an hour! Now just wait for your interview, she stated.

A few weeks later (the day of our scheduled interview) I went into labor with our baby and was omitted into hospital with a very hard birth. My husband contacted the INS the very next day and they said that giving birth was one of the only accepted reasons for missing an interview and to only come back when I was up to the drive. About 2 weeks later, I was just about on the road to recovery after losing massive amounts of blood. We got a letter in the mail from the INS. It was ordering me to leave the country immediately! It demanded I waste no time in collecting belongings or visiting friends, and that I was to get to the nearest airport immediately. It said that if I didn’t, they would send an INS officer to evict me by force! I was distraught and could barely breath. I had thoughts of being separated from my 2 week old baby and my husband. Caeleigh would not even be able to come with me! My husband called his boss (the sheriff) and told him everything. He told him to be aware that he was fully intending to break the law and not send me home. The sheriff said, “Your damn right you’re not. Let me know if you need our help.” My husband advised the sheriff to expect a gun fight should they come knocking on the door to take me! The sheriff said, “I’ll do what I can to help protect you.”

We got petitions from all our friends and colleagues. We put together all the e-mails that we had ever written to each other (about 150). My husband contacted all the local politicians and senators. We got massive amounts of support and letters. My husband’s great uncle was very involved in the Republican party, and the walls of his house were lined with photo graphs of the president with personally signed letters from the White House. His uncle made a few phone calls and within about a week, we had a letter of apology from the INS asking us if we would kindly go back for our final interview (not something you’ll often see). There was a personal note on the bottom from the manager that had helped us before requesting that we ask for her personally once we get there!

Although long winded, this letter cannot describe the trauma that we went through as a young married couple with children. Although I was not born and bred in the states, I get sick to my stomach to hear of all the illegals getting away ducking under the rules and still being allowed to stay. I am proud to say that I am here because I believed in something, and I fought for it tooth and nail. I did everything right, both morally and legally! I would fight for this country against all odds for my children and their children. I shall teach my children to do the same.

I moved to Arizona from Montana five years ago. At that time I knew very little about illegal immigration, but now I live with it every day as I am five miles from the Mexican border. I have seen first hand the human suffering at the hands of enablers of the open border lobby.

I became a minuteman; and for the first year or so, I didn’t tell anyone because we were cast as racist and vigilantes. I have worked very hard to secure our borders. I have spent literally a minimum of six months of my life sitting on the border at night to report illegal crossings.

A couple of years ago I started an email opinion piece called “On The Border – Connie’s Perspective”. I now have a readership in the thousands and send out information weekly about what is happening here where I live.

I refuse to whisper or be intimidated by those who are breaking our nations laws or enabling them. Those same people have not seen an illegal alien close to death, lost in the desert, dying. I have, and I am convinced we must put troops on the border if for no other reason than humanitarian. I am not, nor have I ever been a racist, and I am sick and tired of being called one.

I will not whisper anymore.

- Connie Foust
Former National Operations Director, Minuteman Civil Defense Corp and founder of the Granny Brigade.

I am a mother and grandmother and want a decent country to pass on to my family.

As a young 24 year old, I applied for a job at Devry University in sales as a recruiter. The pay they offered was good, along with a benefits package so of course it seemed a great fit. I had always thought of education as the bridge to a land of opportunity, and as a Christian I felt this position of helping others get into school would be very rewarding. My manager’s boss was an openly admitted lesbian, which I personally think is wrong, but I never judged her. In fact, I tried to get to know her and thought we worked well together.

I have never been shy about by own convictions as well. Both of my grandfathers fought in World War II, one as an artillery captain in the Aleutian Islands and the other as a Marine, leading a group of soldiers onto the beaches of Guam. I am the type of person that calls them each year on Memorial Day to let them know how privileged I am today for what they sacrificed for our country. This leads me to the point.

I had contributed to the Bush campaign, and as a contributor received a signed picture of George W. Bush and the first lady. I proudly posted it on my bulletin board in my office along with a verse from the Bible on perseverance. I often would have great conversations with many liberals in my office about conservative values. A week or so went by when my manager’s boss stopped in, sat down, looked me right in the eye and said, “What the hell is that?!!” pointing to the picture. I said, “It is a picture of our President.” “Take it down right now, “ she said. I responded that it is the President of the United States, and I am leaving it up and that she did not have the right to tell me what I can and cannot have displayed in my office. After a brief explosion of anger and hatred towards me and the military, she muttered some curse words and slammed my door.

I ended up reporting her to the home office of Devry and found that has not been the first time she has acted out like this. A month later I watched her pack up her things and carry them out in a box as she had been fired. Chalk one up for the good guys!

My daughter and I recently went to our local DMV in order for my daughter to receive her learner’s permit. Two forms of I.D. (SS# and birth certificate preferred) are required for either a permit or license. Reno, Nevada, like many localities, has witnessed a large increase in legal and illegal immigration. We were standing in a line of approximately twenty people to submit the paperwork and questions for the written test. There were two DMV employees with their stations opened for this line. Another DMV employee opened a third window and said something in Spanish. All of a sudden, six Hispanics throughout the line went to her window so they could submit their paperwork and take the test in Spanish (which I do not understand, how can one safely drive if one cannot read signs?)

I asked out loud (drawing everyones attention my way), “What gives? Why didn’t you take the next person in line?” The DMV employee ignored me, and I repeated the question. Shooting me a dirty look and answering in English (she was obviously bilingual), she said “Don’t worry about it.” Well, this escalated the situation. I said “Lady, this is nonsense. You should have taken the next person line no matter what language they speak.” Next thing I knew there was a security guard at my side asking “What’s the problem here?” I explained the situation and he said, “I don’t want any trouble, so just do your business and be quiet.” I stood in line until it was my turn. The clerk asked for our paperwork and started to carefully peruse it. After we were done with the process, I asked the clerk that took care of us (she did a good job) if I could speak with a supervisor. She asked if she did something wrong. I said “ No, i just want to talk to a supervisor.”

As I was waiting for a supervisor, the bilingual DMV employee continued to call Spanish speaking customers out of the line (in Spanish) no matter where they were in the line at the expense the non-Spanish speaking customers. The supervisor showed up, and I ran it down for her even pointing to a Hispanic that happened to arrive at the back of the line and walked passed us to the window with the Spanish-speaking DMV employee. There were fifteen people in line he cut in front of. The supervisor said, “Look these people have a difficult time dealing with the system; it’s not as easy for them.” I said it’s not about that. It’s about taking the next person in line. It’s obvious that the clerk is bilingual so she should take the next person.” The supervisor said, “ I think there’s something else going on here, sir. I think you don’t like Hispanics.” I said, “Wait a second, don’t try to brand me a racist. I’d say the same thing no matter who it was. I just don’t understand why she can’t take both Spanish speaking or Non-Spanish speaking by who is next in line.” The supervisor said “ I don’t appreciate your attitude.” I asked her for her supervisor and she asked why? I again asked for her supervisor and she gave me his first name only. I asked for his last name, and she finally gave it to me. I asked to see him. She replied, “He’s not in today” and then left.

I called the next day to make an appointment with the head supervisor. I recalled the whole situation, and all I got from him was a lot of “hmm’s” as he was taking notes. I asked him, “Do you think it’s fair that she didn’t take the next person in line?” He said “Well I wasn’t there so I don’t know what happened.” He said he would need to talk with both employees and would get back to me. I left five messages with him over the next month and never got a call back. I did receive a letter about two months later indicating that “The clerk acted appropriately in order to make the DMV experience accessible for all persons,” but that “ we will review our policy for the next person in line not based on language.”

Remember that when the Democrats start talking about national health care, this is the bureaucratic mentality that we’ll be dealing with.

My story is probably a little different then what most people are writing about, but it all comes back to the same subject – how giving your opinion in this country has become taboo, especially if you are religious and/or conservative.

My story relates to Invitro Fertilization. Due to the fact that my husband and I have been trying to have a sucessful preganancy for over 4 years now, we hear a lot about “Invitro”. The more I learn about the procedure, how it works, and what the doctors tell people, the more I realize how truly morally wrong it is and how we are using science, once again, to play God. The simple fact is the baby is created in a petri dish and inserted directly into the uterus. The doctors who perform this procedure will not fertilize less than 2 eggs, giving the chance of 4 babies. I have known 4 different couples who have gone through this procedure and were told directly from their doctor that if there are more than two fertilized eggs and the parents don’t want more than two children they will perform a “selective reduction”. I even had one of my clients who went through this procedure say to me, “Is it kind of like an abortion?” I wanted to say so badly, “It isn’t like an abortion; it is an abortion.” My sister in-law was told the same thing when she and her husband went through the procedure, and their response was, “Who cares? We will cross that bridge if we come to it.” It amazes me how the science community can sell this to so many couples. Talk about a moral dillema. Here you have a couple who has been trying to conceive and been unsuccessful, now they have conceived and they are being “encouraged” to eliminate one of the pregnancies. My biggest question is “how do you choose?”

The other fact about invitro, I found out this past weekend from my sister in-law who has twins from the procedure, is that you have the option of freezing eggs in case you want to perform the procedure again in the future. I had heard this and thought they are freezing just the egg, wrong! They take the egg and sperm, fertilize them and allow them to grow to 6 cells to make sure they are “viable”, then they stop the process and freeze them. The couple pays a yearly fee to keep the fertilized eggs frozen and if they want to perform the procedure again they give them 10 years to decide. I am Catholic and my belief is that life begins at conception so my question to my sister in law was, “What happens if you don’t do invitro again?” In my opinion those eggs are abortions. I could never say that to her or my family because they all think I’m nuts, but I have had two miscarriages in my journey to get pregnant and I know how hard it is to deal with when you miscarry. No one thinks of the moral implications of anything anymore. I have been told, “Science is there to help you and God created science”. I’ve also been told you should do whatever it takes to have a child no matter what. I tell them all thanks you for your input; we are putting it in God’s hands, at which time they look at me with this pathetic look like, “You poor Pollyanna. God isn’t going to help you; don’t you know we are the ones in control of everything?”

It is very disturbing to me where this country is headed. I struggle telling people I’m Catholic because all I hear are the comments about the Priests, the strict rules, and how antiquated the Catholic Church is. I am getting to the point where I don’t care who I offend anymore because they don’t care if they offend me. I definitely pick the time and place, but I’m getting stronger about speaking out.

In 1997 I was employed by a foster care agency. In 2000, our agency received the State’s Fostercare Contract. At this time, the CEO informed me that the previous contractor spent the money designated for the care of these children. I asked the CEO how the Department of Social and Rehabilitative Services intended to fund our contract now that we were responsible for the care of these children. The CEO simply replied, “They sent them home.”

In reports distributed to the legislature my worst fears were confirmed. Within one day (day one of the contract period) there was a drop of 1,400 children in the foster care system. Although the gentleman testifying seemed baffled by the significant decrease in the number of children in fostercare, no one stepped forward to seriously question the matter. I was absolutely astonished and quite frankly sickened by the solution to an unexpected “funding glitch.” I will acknowledge that all states have struggled for years trying to provide adequate care for children in fostercare. But how could we intentionally return 1,400 abused and neglected children back home and place them at risk for additional abuse? The Department of Social and Rehabilitative Services knew these children would come back into the foster care system. At this time the definition for a “new referral” changed. If a child was returned home but reentered foster care (for the second time) they are considered “new referrals” with new money attached to each child for their care. Where is the fiscal accountability? Who is looking out for the care and well-being of children in foster care?

Consequently, I reported my concerns to a Senator, not knowing that my actions would cost me my career, my financial stability, my physical health, my emotional well-being and most recently, my marriage of 23 years. To my dismay, my husband insisted that I should have turned my back and looked the other way when I discovered what had happened to the children in fostercare. Due to ongoing and blatant retaliation, I’ve been unable to secure employment (after applying for 60 different positions). My student loan with the U.S. Department of Education has tripled – climbing from $50,000 to $150,000! How will I ever repay such a debt? I reviewed the statutes and counted on the federal laws currently in place to protect me… but they failed me miserably. It was never my intent nor my desire to take-on state government. All I wanted to do was to protect 1,400 children in the fostercare system.

How can I be expected to repay the federal government when State Government has, and continues to, interfere with my employment? I encourage our senators and congressmen to consider introducing or strengthening legislation that will protect any individual who is willing to speak-up for children in the child welfare system. Children in fostercare are our most vulnerable citizens, and they need advocates to protect them while they are in the care and custody of the State. Without child advocates, these children are at the mercy of the State to protect them and to do what is right and just. Based on my experience, it remains clear that State Government continues to cut corners for children in fostercare whenever and however they wish. I can personally assure you that the cost is great for anyone who opposes their methodology.

I know that I did the right thing by speaking up for children in the fostercare system. I consider myself blessed to have a father and a mother that taught me to value honesty and integrity. Over the years I have discovered that maintaining these values comes with a price. I am willing to pay the price if it means protecting our nation’s children. However, I fear that many advocates like myself will refuse to speak up for children in fostercare for fear of retaliation. This simply cannot continue.

First of all, what a great book! It is well written, full of facts and figures, and thought provoking.

I grew up in a very liberal household surrounded by many liberal friends. Any conservatives we came across we considered very strange. From my earliest days, I was enlisted in the Presidential campaigns of Lyndon Johnson, Eugene McCarthy, George McGovern, and Jimmy Carter.

However, when I went off to college in 1976, I started to seriously evaluate liberal orthodoxy and its impact on society. Despite being a member of the Young Democrats, I started to question why liberal social policies and the liberal worldview seemed to be doing far more damage than good to society plus weakening our nation.

Instead of trying to bring me back to liberal positions based on merit and rational discussion, my liberal friends reverted to repeating McCarthyism attacks against anyone who disagreed with them. They called thoughtful moderate or conservative Republicans racists, hate-mongers, religious whack jobs, or war-mongers.

At this point, I was entering my early 20s. I had reached the conclusion that Americans with differing opinions from mine were not inherently evil. As I turned away from liberal orthodoxy, many of these liberals turned their back on me. My former friends wasted little time turning the vicious name calling in my direction in an attempt to silence someone from the inner ranks of liberalism questioning liberal orthodoxy.

It was a moment of great clarity. Friendship to liberals was not based on respect for independent thought or opinions. It was not based on a personal connection. Friendship to liberals was based on a lock step belief in the liberal ideology that takes no prisoners.

I heard Senator DeMint on Dennis Prager, and I had to offer my small piece of “culture changing” behavior. As a black woman, wife, and mother, I know first-hand the consequences of promiscuity and being raised without a father. In light of my mental, emotional, spiritual, and intellectual transformation, I no longer attend baby showers if the mother-to-be is unwed. When I am asked, “Why?”, I ask, “Do you want the truth or just a quick response?” Most people are bold and say they want the truth. So I tell them about the importance of a baby having a married mother and father, that teenagers/single people should not have sex out-of-wedlock, and I list some of the social, spiritual, and economic consequences. Sometimes I get some flack, but I’m no chump and so it goes. I do want to end by saying that I often give a modest gift once the baby is born, and I have volunteered (for about 4 years) as a counselor at a crisis pregnancy center (which I still support). I am the best testimony for most of the people, young and old, that I talk to and I love it. I thank God for my transition and the gift of clear thinking and courage.

I teach 8th grade literature at a local middle school, a place that I now find it very difficult to speak fondly of America, its culture, and its history. I discuss our struggles as a nation through the inspiring stories that our forefathers and friends have left behind for us. I teach them to learn about how to fight for freedom and democracy, even if their voice shakes. I inspire them to have integrity and to learn from the lives of others. Despite this, my spirit is challenged every day with kids that sit during the Pledge of Allegiance and kids that right F-America on bathroom walls. I fight each day because I have chosen my path.

My path led me to further my career, so I decided to get a second credential in the social sciences in order to teach both literature and history. In my current course, I am challenged to speak out in defense of all the conservatives that I know exist yet seem so far away. Last class session, the teacher proposed that it was horrible and ethnocentric that we, those living in the United States of America, coin ourselves ‘American.’ How dare we use this word since we have Central America, North America, and Latin America (even though no other nation or country seems to have wanted the name for themselves). The professor went on to comment how the United States is always is in the center of the world on maps. I wondered, what is the alternative? Perhaps Iran should be showcased instead?

Today in class, gender roles were discussed. All the students were commenting about giving small toddler boys dolls to play with. I raised my hand and said that I would prefer not. I elaborated by explaining that I have the choice to raise my family in a traditional setting with mom in her traditional domestic role and my husband at work. Students were ready in their seats to fire back at such “close-minded” ideology. Students then made the claim that it is disappointing to see men who don’t even know how to change a diaper. Give me a break – They can’t change a diaper because they never played with a doll?

I continued to argue that just as they have the right to raise their children in the realm of gender neutrality, I have the right to promote traditional roles in my home. Little did they know that I have been through the whole college thing, heard the liberal propaganda, smelled the incense and granola from some hippie sitting next to me, witnessed marriages destroyed from lesbian affairs, and seen families saddened and ruined by homosexuality. I have lived in San Francisco, and I see where gender neutrality gets us – confusion, chaos, and depression – the things that people never seem to want to talk about.

I am currently finishing my last year in Political Science at Clemson University. As one who is regularly submersed in the college realm, I feel the responsibility to give readers just a glimpse of the present state of higher-level education in our universities.

My story dates back to the second semester of my freshman year at Clemson. I was attending my first class of Western Civilization, a required history course for most college majors. It did not take long for me to realize that the professor, a well-known and respected intellectual, was readily using his right to educate as a mandate to indoctrinate from the pulpit of anti-Christian and liberal dogma.

Within minutes of beginning class, my professor addressed all Christians in the room (being in the Bible Belt, I guess he figured there was quite a few). He announced that Christianity was a religion for weak-minded individuals, that it was simply a false way for insecure people to find meaning and purpose in life. He proceeded to say that universities were not an appropriate place for Christians because ultimately they would always choose faith over reason. Because of this, he stated that Christians in his class were, as quoted, “wasting a seat that a more enlightened individual could make use of.” He then suggested that all Christians who were interested in arguing his viewpoint drop the class for a more suitable one. I remind you that my professor was not speaking to religious people in general. He purposefully singled out Christians. It is necessary to note here that if any other religion had been singled out (i.e. Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, etc…), there is a good chance the professor would have been fired.

Well, as a Christian who loves a challenge, I decided to “waste a seat” and stay enrolled. I found the professor’s lectures to be very interesting throughout the course of the semester, and yes, there was usually a liberal opinion slapped onto every piece of historical fact. This I expected. However there was one particular lecture that I did not expect. It was on the philosophers of the 1600s, and Blaise Pascal happened to be the primary focus. The professor discussed how Pascal was a phenomenal physicist and mathematician but eventually came to the point where he was not satisfied with his scientific endeavors. Pascal argued that science was essentially lacking because it did not have answers to the most pressing questions of the human mind – Where did I come from? What is my purpose? What is my destiny? The professor went on to say how Pascal found the answers to his questions in the Christian faith and dedicated the remainder of his life to it. Now this was obviously a prime opportunity for the professor to insert his opinion, but he did not. In fact, he said something to the effect that Pascal made a good point, which really surprised me!

After much thinking and praying, I decided to send my professor a hand-written letter about the statement he had made. I pointed out that for every human need or craving there is some kind of recourse. For instance, thirst is quenched by water; hunger is satisfied by sustenance; the desire for intimacy is met by intercourse; and so on. I then proposed that since every individual at some point or another wonders what life’s purpose is and yearns for something greater than himself to reveal it, is it not possible that there is indeed a correct answer out there? I went on to quote John 7, “If anyone is thirsty, let him come to me [Jesus] and drink. Whoever believes in me, as the Scripture has said, streams of living water will flow from within him.” I followed with the thought that I believe Christ is the answer to these common questions that each person faces.

About one week later I received a two-page, single-spaced, typed letter from my professor. The following is just a small excerpt:

“Frankly, I don’t trust anyone who calls themself a ‘Christian.’ When someone tells me they are a Catholic or a Lutheran or a Methodist, for example, I know the cultural baggage they bring with them and I can talk to people like that. But generic ‘Christian’ implies to me a baggage of self-righteousness likely coupled with obsession and insecurity. Sadly, I usually find, when I dig a little, that it is also coupled with loathing. Pascal, who seems to have intrigued you asked ‘who am I?’ and ‘what is my fate?’ He of course was the odd one who understood science, rejected it, and threw himself back on superstition. The Enlightenment implied we stand on our own feet to find our answers; we do not need authority to feed it to us like pablum. I am a child of the Enlightenment – the principles, by the way, on which this country was founded and the religious crowd is doing its best to tear it down. You can say ‘I believe’ over and over, and if it comforts you, fine, go for it, but to me it is putting trust in false answers. If we ever have answers to such questions, the only ones that would satisfy me would have to come from science.”

The remainder of the letter included additional insults and personal attacks. I’ve learned that this is what a failure to whisper leads to in the world of academia. I find it ironic that the same voice which advocates religious diversity and moral relativism is often the very same voice that is so quick to condemn the Christian faith. The truth is, for them, relativism holds true in every situation except Christianity. When it comes to Christianity, absolutism prevails – that is, Christians are absolutely wrong. This is the message our universities are sending to the next generation. When we whisper, we’re telling them that they are right. It is time that more begin to stand firm and proclaim, they are wrong.

Back in 2003, my French IV class came into my room excitedly talking about a “documentary” by Michael Moore, Bowling for Columbine, a film condemning Americans’ right to bear arms.

The students had been across the hallway in a history class where the film was shown. I put my French book away and spent the hour discussing what constitutes a documentary. By the time the hour was over, I had lost a whole class to discussing politics instead of the literature of medieval France, but I hope they had gained at least some perspective on how liberal educators dupe them. I don’t know if they ever told their history teacher about our class; he never spoke to me about it.

I had never brought up politics in class, so no one before that day knew how I thought. I was tired of other teachers getting away with the liberal indoctrination of kids, so I felt the need to expose an alternative viewpoint. My hope is that the students will look at all sides with a questioning eye now. That was my message.

Thanks for the opportunity to tell just one of many stories like this!

Senator, I heard you speak today on my local NPR radio station. I also heard that you wanted to hear from your listeners. At the outset let me say that I have been a Democrat for most of my life and a Roman Catholic, and yet I find myself agreeing with virtually everything you say.

I recall reading somewhere that morality is the foundation of law (i.e. without morality there can be no law). Our morality has been virtually destroyed by “relativism”, which says each of us decides for ourself what is right or wrong given his/her situation. The problem that then arises is the idea that you cannot “legislate” morality. Thus, the prospects for our present situation do not seem good.

Part of the solution is the fact that we labor under what I consider to be a misconception about the Constitution’s position on religion. Our forefathers were keenly aware of the bitterness experienced by their European ancestors over the subject of who loved God the most and how it was to be done. They decided that it was the individual’s choice as to how he or she would relate to their Creator, NOT that they should NOT relate to their Creator. At the Constitutional Convention, if I am not mistaken, all meetings were opened with a prayer and a supplication for God’s blessing on their work. To suggest that such men would endorse the denial of our Judeo-Christian roots is an absurd distortion of the truth. It is my humble opinion that they did not want to force any of us to be a Presbyterian, or a Baptist, or a Catholic, or an advocate of the Jewish faith, or a Methodist, etc… However they would have heartily endorsed and encouraged each of us to choose some form of worship of the Almighty, and yes, we also had the right not to believe in God.

I suppose the essence of my attitude is the feeling that the pendulum has swung too far in the direction of the protection of individual rights and too far away from individual responsibility. They are in fact two sides of the same coin. The way to restoring morality in our country is through the exercise of self-restraint. And for those who deny God’s existence, I might suggest that they try following His rules, which ultimately call for a peaceful coexistence of rights and responsibility.

I do fervently hope that the good citizens of South Carolina keep returning you to office until you decide to quit, for as the Senator Adlai Stevenson of Illinois once said – their are “too many politicians and not enough Statesmen in Congress.” You sir are a Statesman, and our country is in desperate need of more men like yourself.

May God bless you, Senator!

I work for a federal agency. I am originally from Long Island, New York but have recently transferred to Kentucky. During my stay in New York, we were told that we could not say things like Merry Christmas or Happy Hanukkah to our patrons as someone might find it offensive. Well that stuck in my throat, and I went out of my way to make sure I did exactly the opposite. It was refreshing to know and make note that many of our patrons appreciated the well wishes.

I have often wondered as to why the Left wants us to say Happy Holidays. What seems to escape them is that the phrase is derived from the words Happy Holy Days.

My personal feeling is that anyone that is offended by what I might have to say regarding my religious beliefs is the one with a problem and is truly the bigot.

I believe the words of Winston Churchill that “democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.” The most fundamental tenet of democracy is that anyone and everyone enjoy the right to speak their mind at any time, in any place and on any subject. The important part of free speech, moreover, is not the “speech” part but the “free” part. Americans must never be subjected to government restrictions on their speech, particularly their political speech.

The South Carolina Senate, to my great chagrin and disappointment, will soon consider a piece of legislation that will require individuals that band together in order to engage in political speech to register with the government. Senate bill 714, if enacted, would require anyone supporting an advocacy group by donating $100 or more to that group to give the government their name and address.

The idea that a non-profit organization that gathers the collective voice of concerned citizens on a particular subject should be forced to give over the names and addresses of their supporters reflects the sort of oppressive government that Americans have spent the better part of two centuries fighting against, both at home and abroad.

The bill would require a businessman in Anderson who donates to a non-profit organization that supports lower taxes and spending limits to give his name and address to the government. It would require a mother in Lexington who donates to a non-profit organization that advocates school choice to tell the government who she is and where she lives. It would require a pastor in Beaufort who supports with his own resources an organization that advocates traditional marriage to register with the government, like a felon has too (And if he does not he could go to jail, just like a felon).

This bill eviscerates advocacy efforts on both ends of the political spectrum. A doctor who donates to a group that lobbies for universal health care must inform the government that he did so. People who give money to a group that seeks a ban on public prayer or greater gun control must put their personal information on a list to be held by the government. I disagree with these particular initiatives, but I repel at the suggestion that people should have to fill out forms and have a file with the government before they can express themselves.

The only explanation for gagging speech is fear of the message. I do not know what message the proponents of this legislation fear, but I do know that once we thwart the constitution by limiting speech, the rest of our rights will fall like dominoes.

The pity of this attempt is that it reveals the desire of too many elected officials to avoid open debate and hard decision-making. It mirrors the so-called “campaign finance reform” at the federal level which many observers correctly labeled the “incumbent protection act.” The McCain-Feingold Act prevents political speech critical of someone running for office within 30 days of the election. The passage of S. 714 foretells such preventions here in South Carolina. If the government succeeds in forcing you to sign up before allowing you to speak, they can just as easily stop you from speaking altogether because once a right is removed from the status of “inalienable”, there are no limits to its abrogation. As Thomas Jefferson noted, “Law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.”

We, as free citizens, should demand that government listen to the people instead of requiring us to register before we speak. We, as free citizens, should expect our public officials to endorse or reject our hopes and expectations, not use our desire to speak as a weapon against us. We, as free citizens, must preserve our freedom to speak to our government and not allow our government to become the arbiters of when and where and how we can speak. Once we allow government to suspend one of our rights, the next ones will go more quickly.

Thomas Jefferson further proclaimed, “The force of public opinion cannot be resisted when permitted freely to be expressed. The agitation it produces must be submitted to. It is necessary, to keep the waters pure.” Senate bill 714 highjacks our most basic freedom, that of free speech. I will fight the contamination of our politics by the usurpation of our right to speak. I hope you will join me.

I am a member of the American Psychological Association and its affiliate, Society of Humanistic Psychology (Division 32). I am a conservative and an Evangelical Christian. I approach psychology from an existentialist and phenomenological perspective. These philosophical orientations have a long history rooted in Christianity including the works of Blaise Pascal, Soren Kierkegaard, and Edmund Husserl. I had participated in Division 32’s listserv for almost 4 years. Until this past summer, I had enjoyed pointed but respectful discussions with a number of people who disagreed with me on particular religious and political issues but with quite a bit of agreement on basic methodology.

This past summer, a number of new people became active along with a new moderator. Suddenly, I was viciously attacked personally and reprimanded when I attempted to answer point-by-point the scurrilous comments directed against me—at this point primarily because I am a Southerner. I was told by the new moderator that my comments simply stating that Southerners tend to behave in certain well-known ways impacted some people adversely. Consequently, she said that speech had to be suppressed. In other words, she was assuming a Critical Theory view of free speech and was unilaterally and without warning imposing a speech code.

I was defended by a few members of the group, and the problems seemed to clear up. Then a few weeks later, a speech code was announced. It was also announced that anyone who posted messages on the listserv would implicitly be accepting the restrictions on free speech.

I immediately criticized the speech code as inconsistent with classical liberal notions of free speech. I said that I assumed that the restrictions would not be enforced with a politically correct attitude. No response was posted to my objection.

Then in October of 2007, after a running debate on social and political issues with another member, I was told to “tone down” my comments. What precipitated this command from a “helper” of the new moderator was my question concerning the seeming insensitivity of many on the Left to the moral distinction between the guilty and the innocent.

After what I perceived as a threat of impending censorship, I resigned from the listserv. I also have chosen not to renew my membership in the Society.

My husband and I were interested in adopting a child. We had been married for over 8 years. We had never been though a divorce and came from good, strong families. We both had good jobs and were active in the community. We are a mixed race couple and wanted to adopt an infant of a minority background.

When I called the Luthern adoption agency they told me that because I didn’t go to church, I would not qualify to adopt an infant. This is an organization that received federal money – my tax dollars.

The Lutheran adoption agency was not whispering, and if they were, it is only because they wanted to keep it quiet that “Faith Based Initiative” does discriminate in who they provide services to. That could hurt their bottom line.

You see, too many of us have had experiences where we find the Religious Right has been all too comfortable speaking up and acting on the exclusion of those that don’t toe the traditional line. Senator DeMint, I understand that you are in favor of inclusive dialogue and I applaud you for that. However, I think there are stories that illustrate that exclusion is occurring on BOTH sides.

I served almost ten years in the United States Air Force and seven years working as a civilian employee at the Marine Corps Logistics Base (M.C.L.B.) in Yermo, CA. I’ve always believed that our Constitution and Bill of Rights would protect me. I never in my wildest imagination would have thought that the challenge to my rights would come from the elements of my own government.

In 1998, I was working at M.C.L.B. during the height of Clinton’s corruption. I was working on a report for my degree to resolve a fierce labor/management conflict that was raging at the base. The Marines and their civilian counterparts refused to give me any information for the study. I filed F.O.I.A. requests to get the information. Shortly thereafter, I had my life threatened. I had my personal property at my home damaged. I had my tuition reimbursement cut off.

The F.O.I.A information lead to more irregularities at the base. I had the secret service come to my home, and they said that I had been accused by base personnel of threatening the president. I was removed from civil service after seventeen years of faithful service.

Moral of the story: Don’t even whisper. Keep your mouth shut!

I was working for the California State Education Department in 1998 and taking law classes at night school. I told my co-worker, a graduate of Columbia University and an outspoken homosexual, that the right to bear arms should be protected according to the United States Constitution.

She slandered me to the division director telling him that I had threatened to bring a gun into work. I was fired and lost $10,000 that year. Furthermore, I was forced to sign a contract stating that I would not return back to the Education Department or else I would be fired from working for the State of California in any department.

Many people in the department did not agree with the reason for my dismissal. However, I am still not permitted to return.

We got a new manager in the corporate department where I worked. Within a week he announced that he was going to start holding prayer meetings in his office each morning before work. Attendance was voluntary and the meeting would end before the start of work. Some people began attending; most did not.

A few weeks later a new project was announced. Several of us had worked for months laying the groundwork for it and were looking forward to working on it. However the team that was assigned to the project were all members of the prayer group. Over the next few months, all good assignments went to prayer group members while those who did not attend (now being referred to as “heathens”) got no new assignments.

Several of the holdouts began attending the prayer meetings. Unlike the kind, loving discussion that we were told took place, we found ourselves challenged to renounce our “false beliefs” and embrace the doctrine of the manager’s specific denomination. If our enthusiasm seemed lacking, we were pushed to make stronger and stronger statements. We were quizzed on assigned bible readings and encouraged to go to church with the manager.

At this point, several of the people who had not joined the prayer group, and a couple who had, found their contracts terminated. As contract employees, they had no recourse.

Slowly these people were replaced by new contract workers. All of the new workers were members of the manager’s denomination. It became painfully clear that anyone who was of the “wrong religion” or no religion would not find further opportunity with this manager in this major US corporation.

I stopped attending the prayer meetings the same day that another man told the manager that he would no longer attend because a rabbi told him not to. Both of our contracts were terminated within days.

My story happened several years ago. My husband and I own 40 acres of ground, 20 acres of it being a pond. We signed an agreement that it was in perpetual keeping with the Federal Wildlife so that it could not be drained. We were guaranteed the rights to farm it and control hunting. We are strong advocates for wildlife and made our pond and upland into a private preserve for all wildlife. We planted trees, shrubs ,and did different things to benefit the pheasants, ducks, and deer. I also bought and raised Canadian Geese so we could have them return each year to our beloved pond.

Another part of this same pond is owned by a party who fell into financial trouble and wanted to sell his half of the pond. This would automatically designate the pond as meandering water. The wildlife boys planned to make it public hunting that would allow hunters in boats to come on to our land and shootthe game we were protecting for reproduction.

This is where I cam in. I had petitions made up by a lawyer, circulated them around the country, had all my neighbors sign them, and took it to the Wildlife Headquarters. An agent from the Wildlife Feds came to our house and told me the papers for the sale of the pond were out in Denver ready to be signed, and I could do nothing about it. I tried to talk to him. Each day I would get on the phone and ask to talk with him, and I was persistently told he was out. I eventually told his secretary to tell him I would bring a sleeping bag and sleep out on the doorstep of his office until he talked with me. He again told me I was barking up the wrong tree. Well to make a long story short, I called our local newspaper. A Mr. David Kranz came to our place, took pictures of the geese and our pond, and then interviewed me. The article brought about a lot of comments in our favor.

I proceeded to call our two Senators, Mr.Tim Johnson and Mr.Tom Daschle, and we successfully convinced the Feds to back off the sale. To this day, we continue to enjoy our lovely pond and our protected wildlife. This is evidence that one person can accomplish whatever they believe in.