Insurance Agent Forum

[dvd493]

Has anyone heard about this yet?

January 11, 2006

Please help us get this information into the hands of as many people as possible by forwarding it to your entire email list of family and friends.

Senate Tired of Your E-mails, Phone Calls; Expected to Pass Bill that Will Keep You From Getting Needed Information.


Dear David,


Without a doubt, this could be the most important letter I have written you.

The U.S. Senate is poised to pass Senate Bill 1 (Section 220), which would effectively keep AFA and every other pro-family organization in America from providing you information on bills in Congress. Under Senate Bill 1 (Section 220), we would only be able to provide you information on a bill at a high cost and at great danger of being penalized by Congress.

To put it bluntly, members of Congress are tired of getting your e-mails and phone calls, and Senate Bill 1(Section 220) is designed to keep information from you that might inspire you to call or write your senator.

Click Here to read AFA's review of Senate Bill 1 (Section 220).

The new Democratic Senate thinks that if it can keep you from getting information—which is what Senate Bill 1 (Section 220) would do—then it will not be getting e-mails and phone calls from you.

Senators favoring this bill are simply tired of hearing from you. That is the bottom line. They don’t want to hear from you. They don’t want you to be informed. They want to silence you. How? By simply keeping you from receiving information that AFA provides.

I know that language is strong, but Senate Bill 1 (Section 220) will do exactly what I’ve said.

Take Action
1. Send an e-mail to your two senators now!

2. Call your two senators at 202-224-3121. (Simply ask for one senator. Then call the other one at the same number. Ask your senators to vote against Senate Bill 1 (Section 220).

3. Please forward this to your friends and family. It is vitally important that they know what members of the Senate are trying to do.

4. Print this information, and share it with members in your Sunday School class and church and urge them to send an e-mail and call.


If you think our efforts are worthy, would you please support us with a small gift? Thank you for caring enough to get involved.

Sincerely,



Donald E. Wildmon, Founder and Chairman
American Family Association

P.S. Please forward this e-mail message to your family and friends!

[salpro22]

Interesting reading. Without getting into a religious discussion about the influence of large religious organizations on the voting public , interested people can see the entire bill here http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquer...:@@@D&summ2=2&

[dvd493]

Originally Posted by salpro22

Interesting reading. Without getting into a religious discussion about the influence of large religious organizations on the voting public , interested people can see the entire bill here http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquer...:@@@D&summ2=2&

Influence of large religious organizations on the voting public. What influence? They have been clamped down by the I.R.S. and the A.C.L.U. from speaking about politics. The non profit 501c3 organizations, mostly churches are the only people who have been effectivly muzzled from free speach in America. Look at the decay in society since it happened. I think we need more free speach from 501c3s, not less.

Article 1 of our constitution says: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

It sounds like we are getting another law that will stifle the free exercise of religious values again as well as stifle our ability to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. This can only lead to a faster unraveling of Americas moral fibre.

Our family system has broken down over the last 40 years. History shows us that as the family goes, a nation goes. I think this is a very bad law. I sure hope people pay attention.

[salpro22]

Influence of large religious organizations on the voting public. What influence?

An interesting read (http://www.theocracywatch.org/) discussing the changing roles of democrats and the new republican party.

They have been clamped down by the I.R.S. and the A.C.L.U. from speaking about politics.

The IRS has no legal control over any organization. Their "sole" purpose is to enforce tax laws and collect taxes. As for the A.C.L.U, look at what state their HQ's is located in (knowing they are not known to be conservative) and this link http://www.aclu.org/pizza/.
Kinda amusing how far some people take things.

The non profit 501c3 organizations, mostly churches are the only people who have been effectivly muzzled from free speach in America. Look at the decay in society since it happened. I think we need more free speach from 501c3s, not less.

I agree and take it a step further. Every "citizen" has the right to free speech.

Article 1 of our constitution says: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Quite true, but you forgot libel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_A...ivate_ac tion

It sounds like we are getting another law that will stifle the free exercise of religious values again as well as stifle our ability to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. This can only lead to a faster unraveling of Americas moral fibre.

We need to focus more on educating people. Here is an interesting link (http://www.informatics-review.com/FA...rehension.html)
That I came across that illuminates a possible direction our country is going.

"Well-designed materials provide information that is easy for audience members to understand and to relate to their own interests and needs. Research tells us that to communicate effectively with a general audience in the U.S., we need to write at a 6th-8th grade reading level.

The last line is what I find astonishing! Type in "history" and "warning labels" for some exciting late night reads.

Our family system has broken down over the last 40 years. History shows us that as the family goes, a nation goes. I think this is a very bad law. I sure hope people pay attention.

Would you be kind enough to expound on what qualities of a family have broken in the last 40 years?

[dvd493]

Yes,

The traditianal family defined as one man and one woman who are married and stay together until death. They raise a family and do things together. They go to church at least once a week. The Father teaches the sons how to be a man. The Mother teaches the daughters how to be a woman and to remain virtuous until married. I'm sure some people will read this and laugh. That should be enough to show you how far we have degenerated as a family in America.

Divorce rates are over 33%. The 50% divorce rate is a myth. A lot of families are a mother raising the kids alone. Any boys in the mix means he won't get the benefits of what only a father can give him, a passage to manhood. I know the mom does everything she can to provide but she can never replace a dad.

The same holds true with a girl being raised by a father. He can never give her what only a mother can give her, a passage to womanhood. He will give her all he can because he loves her but he can never replace a mom.

Look what is trying to be passed off as a family today. Two men or two woman raising children and they are trying to have society call that normal. That only compounds the problem. What we used to shun in America some are trying to promote as normal and healthy. If we reached this level of degeneration in only 40 years. Where will we be in another 40 years.

Some clergy are even adjusting to this new trend and apparently ignoring the Bible that has never changed. How can the clergy be the moral backbone of society if it bends to the whims of societies morals. Are they not supposed to be the ones that really hold it together for the families and put them back on track when they falter.

I see what has happened in the last 40 years and wonder what will happen in the next 40 years. I also wonder what it will take to put us back on track to a healthy America again. How can you reasemble scrambled eggs? Where do we go from here? Who will have the courage needed to start us on the right track again? We need another Martin Luther King for Americas moral compass. We need someone who will give everything even unto death or until things start changing back again. I fear for our countries future if we don't change!

[healthagent]

Remember that in the 50's/60's our parents thought is was the end of civilization when Elvis was grinding his hips and the Beatles had long hair.

It's amazing that the Brady Bunch was the first sitcom to show a husband and wife in the same bed and that was a big stink.

The huge deal in the 80's was the LA Law with the lesbian kiss. That eposide was banned in several states

I guess my point it that here it is - 2007 and I don't see any huge problem. All the people who see a huge problem now where the same people who saw a huge problem with Elvis gyrating his hips back then.

[James]

Originally Posted by john_petrowski

Remember that in the 50's/60's our parents thought is was the end of civilization when Elvis was grinding his hips and the Beatles had long hair.

It's amazing that the Brady Bunch was the first sitcom to show a husband and wife in the same bed and that was a big stink.

The huge deal in the 80's was the LA Law with the lesbian kiss. That eposide was banned in several states

I guess my point it that here it is - 2007 and I don't see any huge problem. All the people who see a huge problem now where the same people who saw a huge problem with Elvis gyrating his hips back then.

Ummm, I thought it was "I Love Lucy" showed Lucy and Ricky was the first? Now I'm not sure but that was the day when "I Love Lucy" was consider a show on the edge!

[healthagent]

Got my info here:

http://www.snopes.com/radiotv/tv/marykay.htm

Guess I was wrong. Interesting to me from reading this that the Brady Bunch never showed a toilet in the bathroom. That's hilarious since many scenes were filmed in the bathroom.

[salpro22]

The traditianal family defined as one man and one woman who are married and stay together until death. They raise a family and do things together. They go to church at least once a week. The Father teaches the sons how to be a man. The Mother teaches the daughters how to be a woman and to remain virtuous until married. I'm sure some people will read this and laugh. That should be enough to show you how far we have degenerated as a family in America.

An equal balance between a husband and wife is more appropriate.

Divorce rates are over 33%. The 50% divorce rate is a myth. A lot of families are a mother raising the kids alone. Any boys in the mix means he won't get the benefits of what only a father can give him, a passage to manhood. I know the mom does everything she can to provide but she can never replace a dad.

Here are two links that you might find of interest.

http://members.aol.com/cohabiting/tables.htm

http://www.bsos.umd.edu/socy/vannema...s/divorce.html

The same holds true with a girl being raised by a father. He can never give her what only a mother can give her, a passage to womanhood. He will give her all he can because he loves her but he can never replace a mom.

What specifically are you talking about in regards to "things" that only a man or woman can give their daughter or son.

I see what has happened in the last 40 years and wonder what will happen in the next 40 years. I also wonder what it will take to put us back on track to a healthy America again. How can you reasemble scrambled eggs? Where do we go from here?

Would you please explain to me in your eyes what signifies a healthy America?

[dvd493]

A traditional family structure is what defines a healthy America. As the family goes, the country goes. If we can get the traditional families back together again enmasse, our country will be healthy again.

[James]

Originally Posted by john_petrowski

Got my info here:

http://www.snopes.com/radiotv/tv/marykay.htm

Guess I was wrong. Interesting to me from reading this that the Brady Bunch never showed a toilet in the bathroom. That's hilarious since many scenes were filmed in the bathroom.

Never would of guess that one.

[James]

Originally Posted by salpro22

What specifically are you talking about in regards to "things" that only a man or woman can give their daughter or son.

Obviously there is a disconnect here, obviously a child needs the role of both parents for a well rounded upbringing. While it can be done it can not be argue that the bringing up a child with just one parent is better and all to often not healthy. My child a boy of 9 has friends, I can tell real quick when his friends come over if they are a family with no father figure. There is two I know well, neither know how to respond to men and tend to be out of control, not to say rude behaviour but have serious lack of control of obvious social skills. Yet I can't remember any not having a mother figure? So I am not going to respond to that but I'm sure just using common sense there are problems there also.

[Steve]

I won't get into this much, because there are valid emotional opinions on both sides of the equation. I see no need to provoke argument on emotional opinions.

There is a need for my son to have activities involving me. We do things together differently than my wife and he can, and can discuss things differently than my wife and he can. Likewise, my wife can have discussions with my daughter in a different manner than I can. To the kids, there is indeed a difference between us, and they need both. Not better or worse, just very different.

I am not making a criticism against anyone elses family structure. I am simply stating what is a fact in our household.

[healthagent]

I'm not against anyone doing anything they want as long as it doesn't adversly affect someone else. Gay men and women living to together or even getting married is their own business and doesn't affect anyone else. However, bringing a child into the picture - as in adoption - does indeed affect someone else and I personally think is a selfish move for gay couples to make. Two gay men raising a girl cannot possible give the type of emotional support a women could and two gay women raising a son cannot provide the male role model boys need.

[James]

Sometimes I'm against the idea of adoption by gay couples, other times I'm not. If we are talking non infants, which we have way to many I would think being adopted by a gay couple is better than the alternative which is likely being bounce from on foster home or foster center to the next.

Yet if the break down of the family in America which is only worst in the Black community the main political problem is that dang "One Man, One Vote" idea, I never understood how it is good for otherwise disconnected people to vote. Lets face it the idea of one voting themselves goodies is not a good idea! Lets face it, people dependent upon financial assistance don't need to be voting, I mean can anyone guess that they have a direct financial gain kind of like a "Conflict of Interest".