November 3, 2017 Radio Commentary

Military Restricts Religious Freedom

Radio Commentary, 90.7, 91.7 New Life FM, November 3, 2017 – By Sue Ella Deadwyler

The National Campaign to Stop the War on Religious Freedom in the Military is circulating a petition that should be signed by U.S. citizens who want to reverse the unconstitutional restrictions made during the Obama administration.

For example, the Pentagon launched a campaign to make it a crime for service members (including military Chaplains) to share their faith.

That campaign was counteracted on May 4 this year, when President Trump issued his Executive Order requiring all federal departments, including the Department of Defense, to “vigorously enforce” federal religious liberty laws, so Christians in the military are “free to practice their faith without fear of retaliation by the federal government.”

Although Christians face many problems in the military, we’ll consider only a few more:  In 2011, the Bible was banned from the premises of Walter Reed Military Medical Center, untila fierce public backlash forced them to put it back.  Continue reading

October 27, 2017 Radio Commentary

Down the Slick Slope

Radio Commentary, 90.7, 91.7 New Life FM, October 27, 2017 – By Sue Ella Deadwyler

On October 5th California’s Governor Brown signed an “LGBT Senior Bill of Rights,” that slaps a $1,000 fine and a year in prison on anyone failing to use the “preferred gender pronoun” of seniors in nursing homes.  While not using preferred pronouns for senior citizens in California could mean a year in prison, the penalty for infecting another person in California with HIV has dwindled to six months.  Does that mean California, finally, acknowledges the obvious connection between those two situations?

The California law is a frontal attack on the freedoms of speech and religious expression BECAUSE sexual morality is defined in the Bible.  The California gag order flies in the face of the Constitution that deals with fact, not preferential pronouns.  People with different opinions are forced to keep their mouths shut or use lip-service to affirm biologically false sexual identity.

The California senator who authored the “LGBT Senior Bill of Rights” said “religious views don’t hold weight in public areas, [and added] …The LGBT Senior Bill of Rights is an important step in the fight to ensure all people are treated equally regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity.”  Please note that his bill is only a STEP toward forcing everyone to use “preferred pronouns” for sexual identity, regardless of fact or age or circumstance. Continue reading

October 20, 2017 Radio Commentary

Q. Do you want freedom to worship or religious freedom?

Radio Commentary, 90.7, 91.7 New Life FM, October 20, 2017 – By Sue Ella Deadwyler

Today, I have a question: Do you want freedom to worship or freedom of religion?  If you said “freedom to worship,” you might be surprised that politically correct advocates would agree with you, because worship suggests a place where people gather in reverence to a chosen deity.

Since I brought up “politically correct,” I’ll quote Webster’s New World College Dictionary definition of it: “Politically correct means conforming or adhering to what is regarded as orthodox liberal opinion on matters of sexuality, race, etc.”  So, political correctness is used to eliminate conservative thought and action.

However, the term “politically correct” cannot be fully understood unless we realize that political, actually, refers to government, the state, or politics, which leads us to this conclusion: The pressure to be politically correct in all dealings with God, family and country, actually, is pushing everyone to confine religious expression to the inside of churches.  But when we’re not in church, we are expected to walk and talk in lockstep with liberal/radical attitudes about God and everything else. Continue reading

February 20, 2017 Newsletter

Casino Embedded in “Immediate Action Needed!

Threat Percolating under the Gold Dome; Will Georgia get two casinos or six?
S.B. 79 and H.B. 158, as introduced, authorize two casinos.
S.R. 249 proposed constitutional amendment authorizes SIX!

S.R. 249, a proposed constitutional amendment dropped in the House hopper February 17th to be officially introduced February 20th, authorizes the General Assembly to license “no more than six” destination resorts (with embedded casinos) “at any given time.” Six casinos are three times the number of casinos authorized in the original versions of S.B. 79 and H.B. 158.

S.R. 249 prohibits all other forms of casino gaming, stating that the prohibition will be enforced by law. Proceeds from licensing, regulation, and taxing of casinos will be used for education after pay-outs, operating expenses, and addictive gambling prevention programs are funded.

Legalizing Casino Gambling could authorize Indian¹ Casinos in Georgia
The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act is a 1988 U.S. federal law that establishes the jurisdictional framework governing Indian gaming. There was no federal gaming structure before this Act (Pub. L. 100-497, 25 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.), that established the following three gaming classes:
Class I gaming is defined as (1) traditional Indian gaming, that may be part of tribal ceremonies, and celebrations, and (2) social gaming for minimal prizes. Class 1 gaming regulatory authority is vested exclusively in tribal governments.
Class II gaming is a game of chance commonly known as bingo and, if played in the same location, includes card games that are played exclusively against other players rather than against the house or a player acting as a bank. The Act specifically excludes from the definition of class II games slot machines or electronic facsimiles of any game of chance.
Class III gaming is broad. It includes all forms of gaming that are neither class I nor II. Games commonly played at casinos, such as slot machines, blackjack, craps, and roulette, clearly fall in the class III category, as well as wagering games and electronic facsimiles of any game of chance. Generally, class III is often referred to as casino-style gaming. For Indian tribes to establish and operate casinos, the following conditions must be in place:
(a) Class III gaming must be permitted in the state.
(b) The tribe and state must have negotiated a compact with approved regulatory procedures.
(c) The Tribe must have a tribal gaming ordinance approved by the commission chairman.
A 1976 U.S. Supreme Court decision was interpreted to allow states to address only “crimes and civil disputes” in tribal issues. That ruling opened the gates for the Indian gaming industry to become the most widely successful economic initiative on reservations across the country.

ACTION – OPPOSE S.B. 79 and S.R. 249. Vote expected by Thursday, February 23rd. Call Regulated Industries and Utilities Committee Senators Jeffares, Ch., 463-1376; Ginn, V-Ch., 404 656-4700; McKoon, Sec., 463-3931; Cowsert, 463-1366; Gooch, 656-9221; Harbison, 656-0074; Henson, 656-0085; Hill, 656-5038; Kennedy, 656-0045; Lucas, 656-5035; Miller, 656-7454; Mullis, 656-0057; Shafer, 656-0048; Unterman, 463-1368.

  •  To read the rest of this newsletter in PDF format, please click here.