President Obama Pledges to be Champion to Gays

America was a country founded on Christian principles. President Obama campaigned as a Christian man wanting to be the leader of a country of Christians. America is not a Christian nation, we are a nation of Christians.

Because of that many of our laws are based in Christianity. The Bible says, "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable." (Leviticus 18:22)

If you hold that the Old Testemant no longer applies because of the coming and sacrifice of our Lord Jesus Christ, the New Testemant offers its words as well:

"Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders....will inherit the kingdom of God." (1 Corinthians 4:1)

God did not created homosexuals, though they like to champion that argument despite the fact that many do not believe in God. Homosexuality is a sin in the eyes of God, as well as many men and women.

While it is a sin, homosexual men and women should be protected from discrimination. You wouldn't keep a man who committed adultry from a job based on that fact alone, neither should you refuse a homosexual man a job.

This agenda is being forced down the throats of the American people day after day. The media portrays this as a natural thing and something that should be seen as normal.

President Obama said, during a White House meeting with gay leaders, that "I want you to know: You have our support. I will not only be your friend, I will continue to be an ally and a champion and a president who fights with you and for you."

He continued, "I know many in this room don't believe that progress has come fast enough. And I understand that," Obama said. But he added: "I expect and hope to be judged not by words, not by promises I've made, but by promises that my administration keeps."

While I do not hold anything against a person for being homosexual, I hate the sin, and love the sinner, I do not expect my President to be a champion for a cause he claims to be against by labeling himself as a Christian.

Should homosexuals be afforded the same rights as other people? In most cases yes, but not in all. They want to change the definition of marriage, the definition of a word that has been unchanged for thousands of years. I cannot, and will not stand by that. If they are affored the benefits of marriage then the slide down the slippery slope begins. The next thing to go is the man who wants 6 wives, then the man who's in love with a horse, then the man who loves children.

I am glad that I live in a nation of Christians. A nation that is open to the idea of loving their fellow man. The founding of this great country was based on Christian principles, but none of our laws require you to be a member of that religion. That is the beauty of the country. We love everyone, everyone is welcome to practice what they believe, but you must adhere to the laws of the country or you must suffer the consequences under the law.

We also have a Republic that respects the right of the individual. Too often, though, the case has been that unless you are a member of a special interest group, or a minority your opinion is invalid. That is not something that can stand in this country. We are ruled by a government of the people, by the people and for the people. The only problem now is that the people are the ones being left out of that equation.

Thank you!!

While the resolution passed in the House of Representatives and moves on to the Senate, I want to say thank you to the 212 members of the House of Representatives that voted no on H.R.2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, or better known as Cap & Trade. This bill would amount to the largest tax increase on businesses in U.S. history.

Congress is essentially using the environment to place taxes on the amount of carbon emissions that are produced by businesses in the United States. The science of global warming is not fact, the debate should still be going on.

I'm not going to get into the debate right now over whether global warming is man made, or a natural cycle (my opinion), but I do want to thank the men and women who stood up against this horrendous tax increase, especially the ones who represent the State of Oklahoma.

They are Representatives Dan Boren (D), Frank Lucas (R), Tom Cole (R), Mary Fallin (R). Those men and women show that it's not about the letter after your name. It's about whether the issue is right or wrong. I will be sending a letter to each of the Representatives in my state and I encourage you to do the same.

Supreme Court Overturns Sotomayor Case Against New Haven FireFighters

In a move that should have come as no surprise, but may have been to some, the Supreme Court has ruled in favor of the New Haven Fire Fighters in their discrimination case against the city. Initially, judge Sonia Sotomayor ruled in favor of the city saying they were justified in throwing out the test scores of 17 white and 1 hispanic firefighter on the grounds they weren't qualified for promotion. The city threw those scores out because there were not enough minority candidates that scored high enough on the test for promotion.

The 18 firefighters sued the city for discrimination and lost. They appealed to the Supreme Court and the decision was overturned essentially meaning those men were right and they should have been considered for promotion. I agree whole heartedly with that decision. You cannot refuse someone promotion based on their race or ethnic background, which the City of New Haven had done.

The one point that really stuck out to me in the Supreme Court's decision was the dissenting opinion by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg:

"The white firefighters who scored high on New Haven's promotional exams understandably attract the court's sympathy," she said. "But they had no vested right to promotion."

Essentially she is saying the men, even though they performed all the necessary requirements for promotion did not have the right to be promoted. How in the world can that opinion be justified? I would assume, and rightly so, that if I were going for a promotion in my job and was given a list of requirements that if I performed all the necessary items on the list that I would be given the promotion that I deserved. If I am the most qualified candidate, which these men were, I should be given the job that I seek.

The Equal Opportunity Employment Act and the Civil Rights Act were established during a time when people were not given the proper opportunites and they were created to help advance those abilities. If the only people applying for a job are white then the best candidate for the job should be given the job. If there are candidates from multiple ethnic groups the best candidate should be given the job regardless of their color.

I think the box on applications regarding race should be removed completely. It's not necessary in today's society to know the race of a person because it should not be a factor in the decision. Those acts mentioned above were necessary at one point in our history, which is regrettable, but they are outdated and too often used as a crutch to further a person's agenda. They are used to give minorities an edge they no longer need, or quite frankly deserve. You aren't better for a job because you're a certain ethnic group. You're better for a job because your qualifications say you are, not the color of your skin.