At the beginning of the article he says that if every school principal would give this speech at the beginning of the next school year, America would be a better place.  I wholeheartedly concur.

To the students and faculty of our high school:

I am your new principal, and honored to be so. There is no greater calling than to teach young people.

I would like to apprise you of some important changes coming to our school. I am making these changes because I am convinced that most of the ideas that have dominated public education in America have worked against you, against your teachers and against our country.

First, this school will no longer honor race or ethnicity. I could not care less if your racial makeup is black, brown, red, yellow or white. I could not care less if your origins are African, Latin American, Asian or European, or if your ancestors arrived here on the Mayflower or on slave ships.

The only identity I care about, the only one this school will recognize, is your individual identity — your character, your scholarship, your humanity. And the only national identity this school will care about is American. This is an American public school, and American public schools were created to make better Americans.

If you wish to affirm an ethnic, racial or religious identity through school, you will have to go elsewhere. We will end all ethnicity-, race- and non-American nationality-based celebrations. They undermine the motto of America, one of its three central values — e pluribus unum, “from many, one.” And this school will be guided by America’s values.

This includes all after-school clubs. I will not authorize clubs that divide students based on any identities. This includes race, language, religion, sexual orientation or whatever else may become in vogue in a society divided by political correctness.

Your clubs will be based on interests and passions, not blood, ethnic, racial or other physically defined ties. Those clubs just cultivate narcissism — an unhealthy preoccupation with the self — while the purpose of education is to get you to think beyond yourself. So we will have clubs that transport you to the wonders and glories of art, music, astronomy, languages you do not already speak, carpentry and more. If the only extracurricular activities you can imagine being interesting in are those based on ethnic, racial or sexual identity, that means that little outside of yourself really interests you.

Second, I am uninterested in whether English is your native language. My only interest in terms of language is that you leave this school speaking and writing English as fluently as possible. The English language has united America’s citizens for over 200 years, and it will unite us at this school. It is one of the indispensable reasons this country of immigrants has always come to be one country. And if you leave this school without excellent English language skills, I would be remiss in my duty to ensure that you will be prepared to successfully compete in the American job market. We will learn other languages here — it is deplorable that most Americans only speak English — but if you want classes taught in your native language rather than in English, this is not your school.

Third, because I regard learning as a sacred endeavor, everything in this school will reflect learning’s elevated status. This means, among other things, that you and your teachers will dress accordingly. Many people in our society dress more formally for Hollywood events than for church or school. These people have their priorities backward. Therefore, there will be a formal dress code at this school.

Fourth, no obscene language will be tolerated anywhere on this school’s property — whether in class, in the hallways or at athletic events. If you can’t speak without using the f-word, you can’t speak. By obscene language I mean the words banned by the Federal Communications Commission, plus epithets such as “Nigger,” even when used by one black student to address another black, or “bitch,” even when addressed by a girl to a girlfriend. It is my intent that by the time you leave this school, you will be among the few your age to instinctively distinguish between the elevated and the degraded, the holy and the obscene.

Fifth, we will end all self-esteem programs. In this school, self-esteem will be attained in only one way — the way people attained it until decided otherwise a generation ago — by earning it. One immediate consequence is that there will be one valedictorian, not eight.

Sixth, and last, I am reorienting the school toward academics and away from politics and propaganda. No more time will devoted to scaring you about smoking and caffeine, or terrifying you about sexual harassment or global warming. No more semesters will be devoted to condom wearing and teaching you to regard sexual relations as only or primarily a health issue. There will be no more attempts to convince you that you are a victim because you are not white, or not male, or not heterosexual or not Christian. We will have failed if any one of you graduates this school and does not consider him or herself inordinately lucky — to be alive and to be an American.

Now, please stand and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of our country. As many of you do not know the words, your teachers will hand them out to you.

Sweden is, in fact, a constitutional monarchy with a parliamentary system of government and a highly developed economy.  It ranks first in the world in The Economist’s Democracy Index and seventh in the United Nation’s Human Development Index.  It is the third largest country in the European Union in terms of area, and it has a total population of over 9.2 million.

Yet Sweden has just taken away a freedom from its citizens that many here in the US exercise on a daily basis.

Sweden outlaws home schooling
by Pete Chagnon
OneNewsNow
8/19/09

The founder of the Home School Legal Defense Association says home schooling in Sweden will soon be banned altogether, with a few minor exceptions.

Mike Farris says that Sweden will ban all home schooling except for children with medical exemptions and foreign workers with the appropriate work visas.

“That’s it. People who have religious convictions or are home schooling for religious reasons will not be given one of these very rare exemptions,” he points out. “And so for all intents and purposes, home schooling is going to be banned in Sweden. They’re following the German statute, following the German model.”

In Germany, parents face stiff penalties if they are caught illegally home schooling their children. The Romeike family recently left Germany and is seeking asylum in the U.S. after facing stiff fines and the potential loss of custody rights for home schooling their children. The Home School Legal Defense Association is offering them legal help.

Having complete control over the education of the youngest members of the State is always an integral part of controlling a population.  The 20th Century is littered with examples of State run indoctrination of the youth. 

Believe it or not, this is exactly the sort of thing many people want to do here in the US.  There has been much talk over the past several years of outlawing home schooling and forcing parents to subject their children to government controlled education.  You see, the powerful, who do not wish to give up power or who wish to control the destiny of a nation, know that they must control the minds of the youth in order to control the nation tomorrow.  In such an environment there is nothing more dangerous to the powers that be than parents who teach their children at home where the indoctrination cannot take hold.

I’m sure many think this could never happen in the United States, but they are wrong.  It could.  We must always be mindful of the possibility and we must always refuse to let our freedoms be taken from us without a fight.

The information comes from The Pray In Jesus Name Project which is spearheaded by Gordon James Klingenschmitt.  Klingenschmitt was once a chaplain in the Navy.  Klingenschmitt was honorably but involuntarily discharged from the Navy in 2007 after facing court-martial for praying “in Jesus name” in uniform.  Congress later vindicated him, but it didn’t do anything to save his military career.

The information below is concerning a bill that the Democrats can’t pass so they’re going to attach it to a “must pass” bill as an amendment in the hopes of sneaking it through Congress.  I encourage you to read all of it because it’s very scary and very real:

“PEDOPHILE PROTECTION ACT” WILL SNEAK INTO SENATE AMENDMENT

 
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), added the “Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act,” (which is better known to conservatives as the “Pedophile Protection Act,”) to his short-term legislative list Monday, by saying he was “committed” to a Senate vote on hate crimes legislation before the August recess.  The pro-homosexual newspaper Washington Blade reported the vote could happen as early as this week, but staffers at Senator Kennedy’s office denied that claim, giving us a few more days to act. 

The pro-homosexual, anti-faith bill, sponsored by Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) and pushed hard by the Obama Administration, was until recently labeled S. 909 “Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act.” But it faced such strong resistance by conservatives (including threat of filibuster or faith-protecting amendments by pro-faith Senator Jim DeMint, R-SC), so instead Democrats have announced they will soon hide the bill as an amendment to another “must-move” bill, denying committee hearings, and completely side-stepping the Republicans right to debate and amend.

547 SEXUAL DEVIANCES TO BE PROTECTED BY FEDERAL MARSHALS

 
The forthcoming “poison pill” amendment will mirror a House bill H.R. 1913, already passed 249-175 along strict party lines, which makes “sexual orientation,” “gender,” and “gender identity” into federally-protected classes under the law, and codifies federal protection of up to 547 types of sexually deviant behaviors, including:

* Incest – sex with one’s offspring (a crime, of course)
* Necrophilia – sexual relations with a corpse, also a crime
* Pedophilia – sex with an underage child, another crime
* Zoophilia – a crime in numerous states
* Voyeurism – a criminal offense in most states
* Fronteurism – a man rubbing against an unknown woman’s buttocks
* Coprophilia – sexual arousal from feces
* Urophilia – sexual arousal from urine

Attempts by House Republicans to add amendments stating “pedophilia is not protected as a sexual orientation” were specifically blocked and defeated by House Democrats.  Lesbian Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) expressed opposition to excluding pedophiles from the bill, and Democrats voted with her to strike any child-protection amendment. She claimed that pedophiles would not be defined within “sexual orientation,” but wouldn’t put that in writing, and refused to define that phrase “sexual orientation,” which according to the American Psychiatric Association includes all 547 sexual deviances listed in their DSM-III manual of clinical psychoses, including pedophilia, so now thanks to most Democrats, child molesters will be protected by federal law. 

QUOTING THE BIBLE IN CHURCH WILL BE PUNISHED

 
Not only will sexually deviant behaviors gain legal protection, this legislation also lays the legal foundation to investigate, prosecute and persecute pastors, youth pastors, Bible teachers, and anyone else whose speech and thought is based upon and reflects the truths found in the Bible. How will this legislation over-rule the First Amendment? 

PASTORS NOT PROTECTED BY FIRST AMENDMENT

 
S. 909 broadly defines “intimidation,” thus a pastor’s sermon could be viewed as “hate speech” if heard by an individual who then acts aggressively against persons based on any “sexual orientation.” The pastor could be prosecuted for “conspiracy to commit a hate crime” or for “inciting violence against gays” simply by quoting the Bible in church.  And the First Amendment won’t automatically protect pastors, since speech accused of “inciting violence” is not protected, and is punishable, under precedent of Supreme Court rulings. In 1993 Wisconsin v. Mitchell, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a “hate speech” law providing enhanced punishments for violent crimes based on racial motives as revealed by speech of the accused, (which would now apply broadly to punish any “anti-gay motives” in the speech of accused pastor “co-conspirators.”) But pastor, if a crazy person in your audience commits a crime against a heterosexual, don’t worry, you’ll get a comparative discount in your prison time. 

IS PRAYER IN JESUS’ NAME A “HATE CRIME?”

 
Any public prayer against the sin of homosexuality could be construed as “inciting violence” by easily offended listeners, especially if those prayers are offered “in Jesus name.”  When I served our country as a former Navy Chaplain, for example, I was told in writing by Chief of Chaplains Rear-Admiral Louis Iasiello, that “any chaplain’s continued insistence on ending public prayers ‘in Jesus’ name’…could reasonably tend to denigrate those with different forms of faith.”  His policy prohibiting prayers “in Jesus name” was enforced against me at court-martial, before it was later rescinded by Congress in 2006.  But this year I’ve already been falsely accused of “inciting violence” because I quoted verbatim from Psalm 109 in my public prayers, (for which secular activist Mikey Weinstein literally requested an FBI investigation against me!) Just imagine more anti-Christian aggression by law enforcement officials AFTER this hate-crimes bill becomes law.

IS PREACHING AGAINST SIN A HATE CRIME?

 
As a former Navy Chaplain who was punished (in writing, three times) for quoting the Bible in chapel during optionally-attended worship, I know exactly how they’ll come after us. The enemies of religious liberty will simply declare certain gospel phrases “hateful” and “offensive” like my commanding officer who punished me for quoting John 3:36 in chapel, and was supported by government lawyers for “protecting” easily offended listeners from the “offensive” gospel of salvation through Jesus Christ.

Congressman Louie Gohmert (R-TX) agrees with me, saying pastors, rabbis, or imams could be charged with encouraging or inducing a “hate crime” if they preach against homosexuality.  “Every preacher of the gospel, unless you cut out parts of it; every imam who mentions anything with regard to sexual immorality – they could be pursued, and in other countries they have been,” says Gohmert.  (Congressmen Gohmert is my personal advocate, with whom I preached last year at a pro-faith rally in Texas…and we both agree the gospel of freedom from sin really is “love speech” not “hate speech.”)

FREE SPEECH SUPPRESSED IN NORWAY

 
Hate crimes laws protecting homosexuals from criticism are already silencing pastors in Norway, where these dangerous laws specifically empower law enforcement officials to prosecute “intimidation” of homosexuals.  For example, Congressman Gohmert warned “I was talking to a guy from Norway who was telling me that people are even afraid to say Mary was a virgin, because just bringing up sexuality at all can raise problems with law enforcement.”

FREE SPEECH CRIMINALIZED IN SWEDEN

 
In Sweden, Pastor Ake Green received a one-month jail sentence last year under a Swedish “hate crimes” law that forbids criticism of those who participate in homosexual behavior.  The Goeta Appeals Court later overturned the decision.  The government demanded the pastor be punished by appealing the case to the Swedish Supreme Court, which ruled the law unconstitutional.  Yet here in America, the Reid-Kennedy-Obama trio is pushing to pass and enforce this same type of “anti-free speech” law, despite their acknowledgment that any such enforcement would be unconstitutional in America too. (They why pass the bill in the first place?)

FREE SPEECH CRIMINALIZED IN CANADA

 
In Canada, where “hate crimes” laws already passed, the Alberta Human Rights Tribunal actively forbid evangelical pastor Stephen Boisson from expressing his moral opposition to homosexuality. The tribunal also ordered Boisson to pay $5,000 “damages for pain and suffering” and apologize to the “human rights” activist who filed the complaint. His crime? In 2002, the pastor wrote a letter to the editor of his local newspaper in which he denounced the homosexual agenda as “wicked” and stated that: “Children as young as five and six years of age are being subjected to psychologically and physiologically damaging pro-homosexual literature and guidance in the public school system; all under the fraudulent guise of equal rights.”  The Canadian government tribunal ordered the Christian pastor to “cease publishing in newspapers, by email, on the radio, in public speeches, or on the internet, in future, disparaging remarks about gays and homosexuals.”  (This “re-education commission” reminds me of Big Brother from Orwell’s 1984.)

FREE SPEECH CRIMINALIZED IN PENNSYLVANIA:

 
Can’t happen in America?  It already has.  In 2004 my friend Michael Marcavage was arrested along with ten other Christians (including two elderly grandmothers), and charged with violating Pennsylvania’s “hate crimes” laws, because they carried signs conveying God’s love at a Gay Pride rally. One member of “The Philadelphia Eleven,” Arlene Elshinnawy, 75 year-old grandmother of three, was holding a sign: “Truth is hate to those who hate the truth,” before she was hauled off to jail by police officers.  They were literally threatened with 50 years in jail for preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ on a public sidewalk, because it offended gays.  That hate crimes law was so outrageous it was later found unconstitutional by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, but now Ted Kennedy and Barack Obama want to pass essentially that same discredited law nationwide.

WE CAN STILL DE-RAIL THIS TRAIN

 
But together, we can still stop them.  We’ve identified 16 Democrats below, who are NOT YET committed as co-sponsors of S. 909, so please call them today, asking to OPPOSE AND FILIBUSTER any amendment to any bill that resembles S. 909.  Sadly two Republicans (Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, R-ME) have joined 43 Democrats by co-sponsoring this pro-homosexual bill, so call them too, and ask them to switch.

• Blanche Lincoln D- AR 202-224-4843
• Byron L. Dorgan D- ND 202-224-2551
• Herb Kohl D-WI 202-224-5653
• James Webb D- VA 202-224-4024
• Jon Tester D- MT 202-224-2644
• Kay Hagan D- NC 202-224-6342
• Kent Conrad D- ND 202-224-2043
• Mark Pryor D- AR 202-224-2353
• Mark Warner D- VA 202-224-2023
• Max Baucus D- MT 202-224-2651
• Michael Bennet D- CO 202-224-5852
• Robert C. Byrd D- WV 202-224-3954
• Russ Feingold D-WI 202-224-5323
• Ted Kaufman D-DE 202-224-5042
• Thomas Carper D- DE 202-224-2441
• Tom Udall D- NM 202-224-6621
• Olympia Snowe R-ME 202-224-5344
• Susan Collins R-ME 202-224-2523

If you want to know more about this issue or about other issues like this you might want to check out The Pray In Jesus Name Project and maybe even take part in the services they offer (fax blasts mostly).

Hilton, who’s real name is Mario Armando Lavandeira, Miss California whether “every state” should legalize “same-sex marriage.”  Prejean’s response was (in part) this:

“In my country, in my family…I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anybody out there, but that’s how I was raised and that’s how I think it should be – between a man and a woman.”

Needless to say, Hilton didn’t like her answer.  In fact, he gave her a zero for a score.  That would have been bad enough considering her answer didn’t deserve a complete zero (no matter if you agreed with her or not).  Hilton, however, took it way past the score on the card which likely cost Miss Prejean the title (she was runner-up).  Afterwords, Hilton got in front of the television cameras and publicly called the pageant contestant a “dumb b****”.

Ralph Reagan has written a great article on the whole thing called Perez Hilton: The foul face of ‘gay’ activism which I recommend you read.  It gives more details than I’m giving now.

The point I’m getting to is the heart of the issue really.  We all know that Perez Hilton is a loud mouth basher who is a gay activist and we expect he will do things that many of us don’t agree with.  But at what point do we start calling a spade a spade and say that this man went well past the point where we can just give him a free pass because he’s Perez Hilton?

The media largely agreed with Hilton, it seems.  Many of the stories leaned towards defending his point of view some even claiming that the 70% of Americans who think that marriage should be between a man and a woman are “bigots” therefore implying that Hilton had the right to lash out at Miss Prejean.

However, even if you were to agree with his point of view and say that Miss Prejean is bigoted and narrow-minded for her belief (despite the fact that most of the country feels the same way), how can you possibly defend Hilton’s actions after the fact?  Perez Hilton was a judge of the contest yet he let one part of his personal belief system (which is no bigger or no smaller than the part of Miss Prejean’s belief system that caused her to answer the question the way she did) determine that this woman would NOT win this contest.  He CHOSE to give her a zero based on her opinion which ultimately cost her the crown. 

Even worse, however, were his actions after the scoring.  Had Hilton left it at that we would have been left to argue his scoring never knowing for sure the reasons why he scored Miss Prejean so low for her answer (although we’d have a pretty good idea).  Yet, like a petty child, Hilton couldn’t keep quiet and couldn’t maintain any sort of professionalism or dignity in the matter.  He had to get in front of the television cameras and call Miss Prejean a vile name and then go even further later by stating that he was actually thinking of the “c” word instead of the “b” word that he used.  How much more vile and disgusting can a person get on a professional level before we cast him aside and are done with him?

By giving credence to his actions the media may have shown support for homosexuals but women’s rights just took a couple of steps back.  I can’t believe that more people from the feminist movement weren’t utterly appalled at what happened.  Oh, but then again, I guess I can.  Feminists would never stand up for a woman who was in a beauty contest and certainly not a Christian woman who spoke out against homosexual marriage.  So, instead, Perez Hilton goes on his way without even an ounce of remorse while those who support Christian morals and family values are once again silenced by a vocal and belligerent minority.

If you never felt pain,
Then how would you know that I’m a Healer?

If you never went through difficulty,
How would you know that I’m a Deliverer?

If you never had a trial,
How could you call yourself an over comer?

If you never felt sadness,
How would you know that I’m a Comforter?

If you never made a mistake,
How would you know that I’m forgiving?

If you never were in trouble,
How would you know that I will come to your rescue?

If you never were broken,
Then how would you know that I can make you whole?

If you never had a problem,
How would you know that I can solve them?

If you never had any suffering,
Then how would you know what I went through?

If you never went through the fire,
Then how would you become pure?

If I gave you all things,
How would you appreciate them?

If I never corrected you,
How would you know that I love you?

If you had all power,
Then how would you learn to depend on me?

If your life was perfect,
Then what would you need Me for?

I do not know the author of this poem.  If anyone knows, I would love to give proper credit.