Telling the truth about Blacks (or Whites) is not a good career move since most people want to be comfortable and don’t want confrontation and conflict from anyone at any time. It seems black fanatics demand that they not be held to the same standard as Whites. That kind of thinking used to be known as racism. It still is.

It seems I am not “sensitive” to the feelings of others when I deal with famous black leaders. Political correctness requires us to not repeat facts, easily substantiated facts, if those facts might offend others, especially minorities. I refuse to play such childish games.

I have always been critical of civil rights leaders who seemed to be more interested in “a buck and a broad” (their term) than in equal rights while young idealistic acolytes lost their lives in the civil rights struggle. Many of those “reverends” (who seldom preached the Gospel and did not believe the Bible) used the ministry to con gullible Blacks to their cause. And at times managed to accomplish something positive. While it was past time for Blacks to have the same rights as Whites, it was not good that Blacks began receiving special treatment at the expense of white people. After all, if discrimination was and is wrong against Blacks (and it was and is) then discrimination against Whites was and is also wrong. But I’m not supposed to say that.

About this time the government forced its way into every business to enforce civil rights laws and began to regulate salary, benefits, working hours, hiring and firing standards, etc. Many think that was good for America; I think it was a major tragedy. The government has no constitutional authority to set any standards for business unless tax money was used to start the business. Yes, it did provide jobs for minorities but business owners lost the freedom to run their own business.

Preachers King and Abernathy did not believe the Bible they quoted, as their public statements and writings easily prove. Hypocrites such as Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton would have been tarred and feathered in earlier days. However, it seems to be prima facie evidence that my making the statements–that all informed people know to be true–proves racism!

When I took the position that forced busing of school children was insensitive, intrusive, and insane I was called a racist by Indiana Democrats and leftist Republicans. I said that it was an insult to Blacks to suggest that they would do better in school if they sat in the same classroom with white students.

When I said that abortion was killing a huge proportion of black babies and it would be devastating to black families I was right then, as I am now.

When I said that black students must stay in school, get a job, any job, work hard, get married and have babies, I was right. In 1965, 25% of black births were out of wedlock. Today, 72% of all black births in the US are out of wedlock! That is compounded by the Huffington Post reporting, “There is nothing ‘immoral’ or ‘pathological’ about deciding not to marry.” Even if one agrees (and I don’t) that making bastard babies is not immoral, then surely all sane people believes it is pathological.

When I suggested that black men should stop fathering illegitimate babies and stay faithful to their wives rather than selling dope, looting stores, and mugging others I was right. And black men have filled our prisons as a consequence.

Ben Carson is a fantastic example of one coming out of Detroit’s inner-city because of a concerned mother (a third-grade dropout who worked three jobs at the same time) who instilled character in him. If he can make it, then anyone can make it. Did I mention that Ben is black?

Non-thinking fanatics tell us that any criticism of Barack Obama is positive proof of racism but it might be that his policies are so leftist, they would make Marx, Lenin, and Stalin stand up and cheer.

I said that Attorney General Eric Holder was/is a wild-eyed racist dedicated to defend anything blacks do no matter how guilty they are. His replacement seems to be a female clone.

Even if decent people disagree with some political decisions mentioned above, no honest person, black or white, can defend the vicious racist tirade of Louis Farrakhan, head of the Nation of Islam–known as black Muslims. If a clown in the KKK had said the same thing about killing blacks that Louie said about killing whites, the KKK member would not put on his sheet for many years because they don’t have sheets in the pokey. Where are the media on this?

Our nation has experienced many unnecessary conflicts between police officers and young black men with too many blacks being killed. In every incident a death would not have occurred had the young man obeyed police orders. That problem is not a police problem but a home problem. Obviously parents are not teaching their children to obey them, school officials, or the police resulting in chaos in the home, in our schools, and in our streets.

It is also interesting that in every case, the dead youth is touted by family and friends as a “good” boy, “kind,” and “gentle.” But then the police record reveals that he was more of a thug than an eagle scout who has committed himself to lifetime celibacy, poverty, and working with lepers in the world’s last leper colony in Romania.

America’s homes–black, white, Hispanic, etc.—are all in trouble. However, single parent homes statistically are in worse condition because of the lack of disciple. Of course, a dash of Bible training in home, church, and school would be a major improvement. Sure couldn’t hurt.

Folks, it is time for honesty, to treat all people with kindness, respect, and equality. It’s time to hold ourselves to a standard of personal honor, excellence, duty, kindness, tolerance, and not question the motives of those who disagree with us.

It’s still shocking to know that Ben Carson is a black man!

(Boys’ new book, The God Haters was recently published by Barbwire Books; to get your copy of The God Haters click here . An eBook edition is also available.)

Rev. Anthony Evans noted that his group that represents almost six million Blacks is “simply standing on the Word of God within the mind of Christ. We urge our brother and sisters of the PCUSA to repent and be restored to fellowship.”

Pastor Evans added that the PCUSA’s decisions was a universal sin against the entire church and can no longer call itself a Christian entity in the body of Christ. He added, “No church has the right to change the Word of God. By voting to redefine marriage PCUSA automatically forfeits Christ’s saving grace. There is always redemption in the body of Christ through confession of faith and adhering to Holy Scripture.”

“In this case, PCUSA deliberately voted to change the Word of God and the interpretation of holy marriage between one man and one woman. This is why we must break fellowship with them and urge the entire Christendom to do so as well.”

Wow! A large group of black pastors representing 34,000 churches has taken a courageous stand that should be emulated by numerous other church leaders–most of them white.

It is noteworthy that the Black spokesman not only disagreed with the PCUSA but called upon them to “repent and be restored to fellowship.” It is one thing to disagree with and disengage from a group but to demand repentance is astounding. Isn’t that a little “uppity” of those black leaders? How dare they condemn, challenge, and chastise their “betters!”

Of course the Black preachers are correct to state that no church has the right to “change the Word of God.” However, that has been going on for decades with modern translations that display little loyalty to the inspiration, inerrancy, and infallibility of the Word. Added to that, there are the changes in church creeds, seminary training, ordination qualifications, etc. All these corruptions are to satisfy the culture, after all culture is constantly changing; however, that is the point: mankind needs a standard that does not change. God does not change; neither does His Word!

Recently many high profile evangelical leaders have shifted with the culture on same sex “marriage” but the Bible has not shifted. These “leaders” are pathetic individuals who never knew or forgot that the church of the living God is not to move with the culture but to move the culture!

The culture shifts toward abortion so the churches do, after all a woman has a right to choose but of course the unborn child has no choice.

There is shift in the culture toward sexual immorality so the churches shift and even welcome fornicators and adulterers into membership without requiring repentance.

There is a shift in the culture on gambling so the churches move to the left and even take groups to Vegas and Atlantic City as church groups–even some independent Baptists!

There is a shift in the culture toward drinking so the churches shift even to the point of providing booze during church services!

The culture shifts toward immodesty in dress so now even professing Christians shift with the culture; after all, pastors argue that they would rather have them in church dressed like scantily clad “stars” at Hollywood premiers than not have them in church at all.

However, it is even more shocking because the black leaders also suggested that all other denominations follow their example! Of course, all the major denominations have been dancing around the homosexual issue for decades and many have not shown any commitment to the Word of God or to common decency.

Church leaders should have fled their denominations like their hair was on fire in obedience to II Cor. 6:17 that clearly commands us to “come out from among them” and be separate. A few churches in various denominations have done this but not in massive numbers. These black brothers are good examples for others to leave corrupt denominations.

We have seen an abundance of “tolerance” where anything is accepted if enough people demand it and if it is followed by a media blitz supporting that “tolerance.” Americans are willing to tolerate anything; after all, right is not always right and wrong is not always wrong. It depends on the circumstances or so they say. There is a plethora of talk about rights but very little talk about what is right. These black pastors are calling attention to right and their right to declare what is right according to the Bible. I am delighted to stand with them.

Let me be clear: the Bible can never mean what it was not written to mean and if the homosexual juggernaut continues then America will become Sodom with electric lights, television, cell phones, smog, and Interstates.

Maybe these Black clergymen will help stem the tide and delay God’s judgment.

http://bit.ly/1iMLVfY  Watch these 8 minute videos of my lecture at the University of North Dakota: “A Christian Challenges New Atheists to Put Up or Shut Up!”

Revealing the very crass, crude, and corrupt King would destroy the hero worship of most Americans. King is not held to the same standard of “lesser” men; therefore preachers, pundits, and politicians refuse to tell the truth about him! Is that not black privilege? Moreover, have other black leaders assumed that they too have a right not to be judged by a high standard of civility, godly living, and personal conduct–Oh, all right, how about simple honesty?

Some King defenders excused his very close association with Communist activists such as Abner W. Berry, Bayard Rustin (who spent time in jail for public homosexual acts), Hunter Pitts O’Dell, Stanley Levison (bag man for the Communist Party in the U.S.), Robert Williams, and Carl and Anne Braden (convicted of conspiring to bomb the home of a Black and place the blame on “white segregationists.”) All the above were vile Communists dedicated to the overthrow of our government, but King climbed in bed with them. He was defended by his followers and since his mission was so sacred, he was forgiven. Black privilege on steroids.

Attorney General Robert Kennedy warned King to sever connections with the Communists that surrounded him but he refused to listen. Finally, President Kennedy told King: “They’re Communists. You’ve got to get rid of them.” Even then, King discussed, delayed, and dissimulated.

King’s many grammatical errors and plagiarism were admitted by King’s family and the plagiarism was characterized by King defenders as “textual appropriation.” King was “only doing what Blacks do.” That is a slander of all black scholars. Others identified his thievery as “borrowings,” “voice merging,” “resonances,” “intertextualizations,” “blending,” “alchemizing,” and other whoppers. King stole 66% of his Ph.D. dissertation at Boston University from another author but the university did not revoke, recall, or repudiate his degree! No white student would have been treated so kindly. It all translates: Black privilege. Special rules for special people.

Had I been a member of King’s church or a preacher in his movement, I would have charged him with heresy, tried him in a religious court, and stripped him of his religious credentials. He provided evidence of his heresy and heresy is not cancelled out by Black privilege!

King’s graduate paper titled “What Experiences of Christians Living in the Early Christian Century Led to the Christian Doctrines of the Divine Sonship of Jesus, the Virgin Birth, and the Bodily Resurrection,” let the kitty out of the sack as to his heresy. King declared, “But if we delve into the deeper meaning of these doctrines, [Christ’s deity, virgin birth, and physical resurrection] and somehow strip them of their literal interpretation, we will find that they are based on a profound foundation. Although we may be able to argue with all degrees of logic that these doctrines are historically and philolophically [sic] untenable.” So the early Christians had no other reason to believe He was deity? What about His miraculous birth? What about walking on water? What about raising the dead? What about giving sight to the blind? What about rising from the dead? What about Christ’s declaration: “I and my Father are one.” No, no reason at all!

Returning to the divinity of Christ, King concluded: “So that the orthodox view of the divinity of Christ is in my mind quite readily denied. The true significance of the divinity of Christ lies in the fact that his achievement is prophetic and promissory for every other true son of man who is willing to submit his will to the will and spirit og [sic] God. Christ was to be only the prototype of one among many brothers.” So all men have the potential of being divine! King was not a believer and any honest Bible scholar of any persuasion will admit that that statement alone would disqualify King being recognized as a Christian, let alone a leader in any Christian group.

He makes much of Mark’s Gospel not dealing with the virgin birth but a seminarian surely understands that the argument from silence is a very weak argument. No one says that all four gospels deal with the very same incidents or deal with them from the same perspective.

In a paper titled “The Sources of Fundamentalism and Liberalism Considered Historically and Psychologically” King wrote: “The fundamentalist is quite aware of the fact that scholars regard the garden [sic] of Eden and the serpent Satan and the hell of fire as myths analogous to those found in other oriental religions. He knows also that his beliefs are the center of redicule [sic] by many.”

He closes his paper with: “Others [sic] doctrines such as a supernatural plan of salvation, the Trinity, the substitutionary theory of the atonement, and the second coming of Christ are all quite prominant [sic] in fundamentalist thinking. Such are the views of the fundamentalist and they reveal that he is oppose [sic] to theological adaptation to social and cultural change. He sees a progressive scientific age as a retrogressive spiritual age. Amid change all around he is willing to preserve certain ancient ideas even though they are contrary to science.” King was saying that you are a dummy if you believe the Bible to be the very Word of God.

As to the atonement of Christ, he wrote, “First we may say that any doctrine which finds the meaning of atonement in the truimph [sic] of Christ over such cosmic powers as sin, death, and Satan is inadequate.” He added that to transfer guilt and punishment to another is “bizarre.” He goes on: “Moreover, no person can morally be punished in place of another. Such ideas as ethical and penal substitution become immoral.” Any white Baptist preacher would be drummed out the ministry for such heresy but King had special privilege.

As to the Second Coming of Christ, Day of Judgment and resurrection of the body King wrote that these teachings taken literally “are quite absurd….It is obvious that most twentieth century Christians must frankly and flatly reject any view of a physical return of Christ.”

He clearly asserted that the book of Jeremiah was not infallible. He also espoused the heretical view that non-canonical books were as good as or better than the Old Testament books! “To my mind, many of the works of this period were infinitely more valuable than those that received canonicity. The materials to justify such statements are found mainly in the Apocrypha and the Pseudepigrapha. These works, although presented pseudonymously, are of lasting significance to the Biblical student.” Any study of those books will easily confirm the fact that they are forgeries, foolishness, and fraudulent and did not come close to the canonical books which were inspired, infallible, and inerrant.

Throughout his writings, King scorns Bible-believing Christians and praises unbelieving liberals, but that is not surprising since he did that all his life.

A Black preacher encapsulated King’s theology and philosophy better than anyone else: “It is as though Socrates, Thoreau, Hegel, and Jesus were all dumped together into one philosophical bowl like tossed salad.” Then Gandhi was tossed in to add additional spice to the muddle!

When King received the Nobel Peace Prize, the youngest man to receive it, he said: “I am a minister of the Gospel.” He was an ordained minister but not of the Gospel of Jesus Christ! He preached “another gospel,” and his Black privilege did not guarantee him a place in Heaven.

Moreover, I cringe to hear him called a “Baptist.”

http://bit.ly/1iMLVfY Watch these 8 minute videos of my lecture at the University of North Dakota: “A Christian Challenges New Atheists to Put Up or Shut Up!”

I resent historians and media who refuse to deal with truth whether it is about Nixon, Reagan, Bush, Clinton or Obama. Or, about preachers whether it be Billy Graham, Rick Warren, Joel Osteen, Bennie Hinn–or King. It is astounding that many conservatives refuse to acknowledge the historical record but emphasize only a small but commendable portion of a hero’s life. Therefore, they don’t feel cowardly in their very selective stand.

For the record, Johnson was a thief, liar, and foul-mouthed fornicator. The best thing he did for America was not run for reelection. That is not to say that he did not accidently accomplish some good during his stint in office. Moreover, it is a fact that Blacks were often intimidated and refused voting rights in some southern states and it is good that that has been corrected. However, one should not then leap to the conclusion that it is discrimination to demand that everyone prove citizenship when voting. That is not discrimination but common sense. Nor is it wrong to reject any ploy that permits a person to vote multiple times in various districts or makes it easy to commit voter fraud. In our desire to do good, we must not do stupid.

King was a social worker who used the ministry to accomplish his mission and let me be clear that there were many wrongs that needed to be righted. Most of the young people who faced the white bullies with dogs and clubs were heroes. Some of them even lost their lives to white thugs. King was an opportunist who accomplished some good. However, because King was black and was killed by a white racist who should have been executed within a few months of his crime, most media and academia refuse to research, recognize, and report the truth about King. I do so because I don’t worship anyone and try to hold everyone to the same standard.

Many reading this, including most conservatives, will be offended at the suggestion that King might not have been a Christian. But then a person is not a Christian because he professes to be or because he belongs to a “Christian” Church or because he is baptized. According to the Bible, one becomes a Christian when he or she exercises faith in the atoning death and resurrection of Christ. King, according to his own words was not a believer!

We can know much about a person if we study what he has written, and I have spent many hours reading King. His seminary papers are very revealing as to what he believed and what his motives were. The King papers are courtesy of the King family and those papers prove that he was not only an unbeliever but far from being a scholar! Since no one else will do so, I will try to set the record straight.

I can live with my motives and I hope you can live with the truth. Some of this information is from my eBook Martin Luther King, Jr.: Judged by His Character Not His Color available at amazon.com with documentation. Please note that I will not deal with King’s philandering, plagiarism, politics, or partying.

Today, my main interest is to look at the evidence for proof of King’s salvation, not whether he was an accomplished community organizer and admired civil rights leader.
King received his B.D. from Crozer Seminary then started to work on his Ph.D. at Boston University. All the following information is from that time period.

King’s seminary and university papers show his taking a scalpel to excise the core doctrine of Christ’s physical resurrection from the Bible and from history: “From a literary, historical, and philosophical point of view this doctrine raises many questions. In fact the external evidence for the authenticity of this doctrine is found wanting.” No, it is King who is found wanting after being weighed in the balances. Of course, King was aware that all four Gospels clearly teach the physical resurrection of Christ as do many of the epistles, but that is not good enough for King: the resurrection of our Savior is “found wanting.” Furthermore, there are scores of carefully documented books that support Christ’s physical resurrection. Any scholar would know that.

Regarding the virgin birth King wrote: “it seems downright improbable and even impossible for anyone to be born without a human father.” Of course, it is improbable but improbable does not mean impossible, especially with God! King further wrote: “First we must admit that the evidence for the tenability of this doctrine is to [sic] shallow to convince any objective thinker.” King was not objective and in my opinion not a deep thinker.

In a paper at Crozer titled “The Humanity and Divinity of Jesus,” his professor rebuked him suggesting that it would be good if he proofread his papers before turning them in! He was given a B+ by his professor. In this paper he misspelled “Samaria,” “learned,” “agonizing,” “omniscient,” “omniscience,” “reliance,” “orbit,” “warmest,” “intimacy,” “inadequate,” and others. That was graduate work! I would have given him a D, if he rewrote the paper maybe a C.

King wrote, “They realized that if they wanted to get an objective standard of reference they would they would [sic] have to go beyond the pages of the old [sic] testament [sic] into the path that lead [sic] to that locked door.” King was favoring the position that the Old Testament is not a reliable historical record. King was like all unbelievers who jump at the opportunity to denounce, deny, and denigrate the Word of God and praise, promote, and protect paganism.

King concludes his paper dealing with archeology and the Old Testament: “If we accept the Old Testament as being ‘true’ we will find it full of errors, contradictions, and obvious impossibilities–as that the Pentateuch was written by Moses.” Surely he blushed to write about errors since his papers and books are riddled with errors or all kinds. When he purloined pages from other authors he also stole their mistakes!

In one of King’s papers at Crozer on the “Light on the Old Testament from the Ancient Near East,” I discovered eight spelling, punctuation, and composition mistakes in nine consecutive lines! Maybe I will do another column on his astounding number of mistakes.
No, the “contradictions” were in King’s life, not in the Scripture and he clearly denied the deity of Christ, His virgin birth, His resurrection, and the veracity of Scripture. By any objective standard King was not a Christian. Therefore, on January 15 I will be working as usual then have dinner with friends at our favorite Chinese restaurant. After all, because it is also my birthday, the dinner of steak, shrimp, and Peking duck is free.

You can honor King as a crusader if you please, but not as a legitimate Christian leader. A Christian he was not.

http://bit.ly/1iMLVfY  Watch these 8 minute videos of my lecture at the University of North Dakota: “A Christian Challenges New Atheists to Put Up or Shut Up!”

It seems race only matters to the racists–white and black. Of course, fools, frauds, and fanatics tell us that Blacks cannot be racists! (Here is the appropriate time to explode in raucous laughter and hold your sides as you roll on the ground.) People should be treated like people not black people, white people, etc.

The results of Ferguson are tragic on many levels: robbery, riot, and rebellion with the loss of Michael Brown’s life; Wilson’s reputation, job, and future; and loss of income and business properties; but the longtime distrust between the races, and the distaste and disdain (contempt) for rioters will take years to dispel–and now death of innocent cops. And it was all unnecessary but was promoted by the racists in low places: Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, and even in high places: Obama, Holder, and de Blasio.

It is astounding that President Obama, “the most powerful man in the world” would meet with protesters before a verdict was reached! Obama, Holder, Nixon, de Blasio and others “poisoned the well” of justice and are partly responsible for the mayhem that is taking place across America. They have played a worn race card one time too many and now innocent, unsuspecting cops are being slaughtered as a result.

Darren Wilson may be one of the most maligned men in America. He simply did his job, defended his life, was mauled by a bully, and now his life will never be the same. Racists, white and black, have used him as bait for the haters. The fact that Blacks take the side of Blacks and Whites take the side of Whites whatever the facts is indication that racists come in all hues and are without character. Decent, honest, kind, thoughtful people want justice for everyone.

Wilson has been slandered by lesser people such as Holder, Obama, Nixon, Jackson, and Sharpton, ad nauseum who don’t deserve the right to polish his badge or his shoes. If I had my way, that’s what those jerks would be doing.

There was no way the grand juries could look at the facts and find the two police officers as villains and the two Blacks killed as innocent victims. As a result of the two decisions there is a massive reaction by people who have been looking for an excuse to riot.

It is commendable that some police officials and others are trying to calm the tempers, cool the hotheads, and contain the troublemakers. However, many people are determined to vent their hate while calling it justice and innocent people will pay as they have in the past.

Detroit, Newark, Los Angeles, Chicago and New York could burn. And maybe Dallas, Denver, and Dayton, also. If you live in a large city, it might be wise to go visit grandma in the country for a few days.

The political riots following the murder of Martin Luther King, Jr. on April 4, 1968 in at least 110 cities were a nightmare as rebellious, rampaging, and racist Blacks took revenge against what they perceived as the white establishment. Washington, D.C., Baltimore, and Chicago experienced the worst, primarily in black urban areas.

In Washington, things deteriorated quickly as the White House sent about 13,500 federal troops to assist the District police force. The city was a war zone as Marines set up machine guns on the steps of the Capitol while the Army guarded the White House. Newspapers reported that rioting took place within two blocks of the White House. By Sunday, April 8, twelve people had been killed, about 1,097 injured, and over 6,100 arrested along with 1,200 buildings burned. Damages were estimated to be $27 million.

In Chicago, it was another nightmare of violence. The Chicago Tribune blared, “City Erupts.” The day following King’s death, huge mobs of men, women, and children lunged from store to store, breaking plate-glass windows and taking what was not screwed down. The Tribune reported, “Television sets, clothing, food and liquor were carted away from largely white-owned businesses.” Some black businesses escaped damage by writing “soul brother” on their windows.

About 210 buildings were burned to the ground, 11 people (all black) were killed with 500 injured. Mayor Richard Dailey ordered police “to shoot to kill any arsonist or anyone with a Molotov cocktail in his hand . . . and . . . to shoot to maim or cripple anyone looting any stores in our city.” An astounding 10,500 police were sent to protect the fire fighters, and were soon joined by 6,700 Illinois National Guard troops. That was followed by 5,000 federal troops ordered by President Lyndon Johnson. No mayor has issued a “shot to kill” order since.

During the last six years Obama has presented himself as the savior who provides whatever is needed or wanted, be it cell phones, foot stamps, housing, etc. Add to that, the “entitlement” attitude that many Americans (white and black) have and you have a dangerous, explosive situation when such freebies are threatened.

Justice for Wilson was a shock and an affront to the black agitators who flocked to Ferguson like swallows returning to Capistrano and buzzards flocking to Hinckley, Ohio. Especially the buzzards.

Look for more fires to rage, stores to be looted, police and firemen to be killed during the “Brown and Garner protests.” “Protests” sounds better than “riots.” Thousands could be arrested; however, if the norm takes place, few violators will go to the slammer for arson, looting, and rioting.

Man has been on a slippery slide since his disobedience in the Garden of Eden. Riots manifest that fact following the declaration of innocence of Wilson because of the failure of the rioters’ homes, schools, and churches to inculcate them with Christian, or even civilized, values.

Rioters have no respect for self and no respect for others so violence is a natural result. They are ready prey for the radical agitators. The rioters and looters have been trained to hate, kill, loot, and burn. The innocent always suffer when parents, teachers, and preachers fail to do their jobs.

Furthermore, look for white police officers and firefighters to refuse to enter black areas where they are hated and may be killed for trying to help! After all, black protesters can’t have it both ways: if a white officer can’t be trusted to properly do his job then maybe those black areas should be protected by black officers. White officers will police white areas and Black officers will service black areas. Is that our future? Or maybe there will be mass resignations of police!

I hope, I pray that I am wrong, but don’t count on it.

http://bit.ly/1iMLVfY  Watch these 8 minute videos of my lecture at the University of North Dakota: “A Christian Challenges New Atheists to Put Up or Shut Up!”

Another black man has been killed during an altercation with white police. The death of anyone is tragic since it is permanent, but it is worse if it is unnecessary and much worse if it was premeditated. The basic facts of the Eric Garner death: Garner, a 43 year-old black man died in an altercation with white cop Daniel Pantaleo for selling untaxed, loose cigarettes. Up front, it is nauseating that a man would die because of such a petty crime. But we must look at the full story to make a decision as to where to place our anger and blame and what action to take.

Black businessmen complained to cops about Garner selling cigarettes outside their stores and his arrest was ordered by a black cop, and supervised by a black female officer. Moreover, the police officers were acting under orders issued a few days earlier by Philip Banks, New York City Chief of Police (and a Black) to “crack down” on the selling of loose, untaxed cigarettes.

While Garner’s record had little or nothing to do with his death, it does put it in perspective to know he had been arrested 31 times for assault, grand larceny, marijuana possession, driving without a license, false impersonation, and selling untaxed tobacco (eight times). He feigned surprise when he was accosted for selling loose, untaxed cigarettes! He was not a Sunday school teacher at Bethel Baptist Church where his funeral was held.

There were five police officers present so Garner was a fool to resist and the police officers should have had little trouble arresting him. It seems that Garner was not violent so it appears that at least poor judgment was used by the arresting officers but poor judgment does not equal systemic racism in the police department.

Garner should not have died and there is no proof that Officer Pantaleo intended to cause his death. In fact, does any honest person, knowing the facts, believe that the officer would have done anything differently if Garner had been lily white? I maintain that it is racism (and terribly unfair) to suggest that possibility.

Garner died because he was fat (350 pounds, some reported 400 pounds), six feet four inches tall, in poor health, and resisted arrest. If he had not been breaking the law, even a trivial law, he would still be alive. If he had obeyed the officers he would still be alive. If he had not resisted arrest, he would still be alive. But some will say that the officers used excessive force but what is excessive force? Should the police have disobeyed orders and smiled at his crime? Yes, a silly law, but what about other laws? He did not die for selling untaxed cigarettes but for resisting a lawful order.

If progressive Whites and Blacks continue this crusade against police we are going to see mass resignations of police officers and/or refusal to do their duty. A police officer must perform his or her job as per their training and should never have to wonder, “If I do what is necessary to arrest this person, will I lose my job, my reputation, my retirement, my home, and maybe my freedom?”

Since we cannot look into the mind of Officer Pantaleo we cannot be sure that he did not use excessive force, but even so, no one can charge intent to harm. Pantaleo was doing his job even if we think he was enforcing a stupid regulation but he believed he had to subdue Garner in order to arrest him. That was his job. Since no one can prove harmful intent, the grand jury could not find him guilty.

Professor Eugene O’Donnell of the John Jay Criminal College of Criminal Justice wrote in The New York Daily News: “As a practical matter — on the basis of past cases — the grand jury would likely indict only if it found malice or some intention to hurt Mr. Garner or that a gross disregard for Mr. Garner’s well-being is what created the tragic ending during this routine arrest. Finding that the officer was careless or that the arrest was bungled will not rise to the level of a crime.” Therefore, there could be no indictment by the grand jury.

Even if the grand jury was wrong, it does not mean that racism was a motivating factor. Even Garner’s own daughter told CNN that it was not racism but police abuse. Moreover, 14 of the 23 grand jury members were white, the rest were black or Hispanic.

Everyone seems to be talking about the “illegal chokehold” the officer is accused of using; however, the “chokehold” was not illegal, only banned by the New York Police department. Furthermore, some experts say that it was not a “chokehold” but a permissible submission hold taught to him at the police academy. And the autopsy declared that there was no harm to Garner’s windpipe or neck bones. He would have lived had he not been in poor health and resisted arrest.

In light of the above facts, irresponsible officials rushed in where even fools know better and declared this to be another example of a racist cop killing an unarmed Black man and a grand jury (with 9 non-Whites) refusing to indict the officer. After hearing the evidence the jury thought that the officer did not use excessive force and acted legally in carrying out his duties as he had sworn to do. Yet Eric Holder announced that the Department of Justice will conduct a civil rights investigation into the case. For sure, I would refuse to sit on a grand jury if I knew honest work I would do for very little remuneration would put me in the sights of federal jackboots.

The medical examiner determined that Garner’s death was a homicide but a homicide is not murder. Homicide simply means death at the hands of another person. He did declare that the “chokehold” contributed to Garner’s death. Of course it did. So did the fact he was fat and sick.

Do black leaders really believe that white police officers go to work each day with the intent to kill a black man? If so, they are prime candidates for a psycho ward. About 100 Blacks are killed by white officers each year but 300 Whites are killed by police during that time! Fact: more black men get into trouble with the law because they break the law far more than white men, but that’s another article. And writing it makes me a racist!

No, there is no epidemic of white cops killing black men but a case can be made for an epidemic of black men killing white men. But I suppose to make that factual case is an indication of racism! However, there is an epidemic of irresponsible black men rejecting education, refusing to work, resisting arrests, and repudiating marriage but producing numerous babies.

After doing their job of stirring the racist pot in Ferguson, the racists (black and white) again came out of the woodwork to denounce racism in the New York case when there is no support for such a claim. The president spoke of “concern on the part of too many minority communities that law enforcement is not working with them and dealing with them in a fair way.” Mayor De Blasio called for “action” suggesting that the incident represented the culmination of “centuries of racism.”

To think they killed a tree to print such tripe! The Garner incident is proof of an epidemic of generations of disrespect for authority, disobedience to the Scripture, and deterioration of the family. That’s what Blacks and Whites need to work on!
http://bit.ly/1iMLVfY  Watch these 8 minute videos of my lecture at the University of North Dakota: “A Christian Challenges New Atheists to Put Up or Shut Up!”

I had a very public record of fair treatment for everyone without cutting any additional slack for Blacks. I determined to treat everyone the same so I was against any affirmative action and had debated a black columnist and an Indiana University professor on the subject at Indiana University-Purdue University, Indianapolis (IUPUI). I won the debate!

I angered some black leaders and liberal politicians when I cast the lone vote against a “memorialization” of Martin Luther King, Jr. in the Indiana House of Representatives. I was the only “no” vote in the House and the senate. Same the following year! An AP reporter asked me why I voted “no” since the vote had no value and was only symbolic. I told her that I did not have time to go into detail, but it was a matter of principle. King was an admitted adulterer and had defended the Communist Viet Cong while Americans were dying in the rice paddies of Southeast Asia. My vote had nothing to do with race or civil rights. That House vote was long before leftists and other non-thinkers rammed a MLK national holiday through congress and clubbed Ronald Reagan into signing it into law in 1983.

In addition to being a member of the House of Representatives, I was also administrator of the Indianapolis Baptist Academy. And of course, we had some black students who had to meet the same standards as the white students. They easily did.

As school administrator I often had my new friend, the famous black preacher, speak at the school and even invited him and his wife to travel with us to Israel and the Middle East–free. I had taken groups to the Middle East for many years and when I organized the school we decided to take the senior class with us for their senior trip! No school, public or private had ever done that. I gave my “earned” tours to the class members and to the black pastor and his wife. He lectured us each night at our hotel after a long day of touring.

Over the years, he and I became friends although he persisted in calling me “Dr. Boys” even though I often chided him for doing so. We had a very normal, friendly, brotherly relationship with never a hint of any problem even though I had a very public reputation as a conservative.

From all indications he was also conservative. In one of our times together he told me of his conversation, maybe confrontation, with black leaders at a national meeting of the NAACP in St. Louis. He told one of the leaders, “Why is the group called the National Association of Colored People? Why not try to advance all people and since I am a part of all, it will advance me?” Those were not his exact words but similar and true to the facts. Well, that impressed me and I wished I had asked that question. So, I assumed we were in agreement on racial issues. I never felt a need to “walk softly” when we were together. He was simply a friend who happened to be black.

Then I spoke at a meeting of clergymen in an eastside suburb and my black friend spoke in the afternoon to the totally white congregation. I might add that he was treated with kindness and affection by the group that represented Indiana Baptist preachers. During his very eloquent (as always) message, he did something that many preachers do: he started chasing rabbits. He shocked us by saying, “You are very pleased to call me brother but fearful and hesitant to call me ‘brother-in-law’ or ‘son-in-law.’” That was the first time my friend had run off the racial rails to my knowledge.

At our lunch meeting a few months later, I asked, “Brother, do you think it is possible for me to believe that forced school bussing is stupid and unfair to Blacks and Whites and affirmative action is unfair and detrimental to Blacks and Whites, and that Martin Luther King was an admitted serial adulterer and did not believe the truths that all Christians believe, and then do you think that believing all that makes me a racist?” He hung his head and said, “Yes, Dr. Boys, I think that makes you a racist!” I was surprised, shocked, and speechless!

My friend is in Heaven now and no longer believes what he said. I am still alive and believe the same thing I believed in that restaurant in 1978. Time changes; circumstances change; people change; but facts remain: all people should be treated like people. No special rights because of race, religion, or gender.

If that makes me a racist in the eyes of some, I can live with it. But all sane, sensible, and smart people can identify the true racists who see everything through racist eyes.

http://bit.ly/1iMLVfY Watch my eight-minute videos of my lecture at the University of North Dakota on “A Christian Challenges New Atheists to Put Up or Shut Up!”

Copyright 2014, Don Boys, Ph.D.

I have never done this before, but this column is written with an “I told you so” attitude. All honest, informed people will now admit that Obama’s becoming President was the greatest mistake ever made in American history! Therefore, those Christians who voted for him should confess their sin and repent.

His anti-American, socialist/Marxist, racist, antibusiness actions are far more egregious than the litany of complaints that early American colonists made against the tyrant King George III. It is incredible that those early colonists rallied to revolution against King George while many present-day Americans still think Obama is simply a liberal Democrat. It is time to repent of the sin of gullibility and stupidity although I’m not sure one can be forgiven for stupidity. That will probably continue even after personal conversion.

I wrote the following in 2008 and reiterate it today.

Face it; if another candidate as inexperienced as Obama suggested that he was considering a run for the U.S. Presidency, he would be laughed off the stage. Why is Obama the exception? Why are not Americans rolling in hilarious laughter at his presumption? It is not because he is a Democrat or radical liberal or part of the corrupt Chicago political machine. It is because he is black; however, color (or race or religion) is not a qualification or disqualification for any office.

The thought that such an “empty suit” could even become a U.S. Senator is itself appalling and atrocious but a tribute to the effectiveness of the corrupt political system in Chicago. But for him to think he is qualified to take the gargantuan step to the Oval Office is arrogant, asinine, and audacious. Have Americans lost their minds to think this phony savior can actually fill the shoes of former Presidents like Ronald Reagan or Harry Truman?

It seems that Obama’s ambition has overrun his ability. He was in the U.S. Senate 143 days up to the time he started making noises like a national candidate. He has accomplished almost nothing except to get the reputation of being the most liberal senator in the nation! That alone should disqualify him for any office!

During the nine years that he was a “civil rights lawyer” he never handled a trial but “worked in teams of lawyers who drew up briefs and contracts” according to Obama: From Promise to Power.” While editor of the Harvard Review, he never published one article. That never happens!

As a state senator, he voted “present” 130 times! He didn’t seem to understand that he was not elected to sit in the senate but to represent his district by voting. As a U.S. Senator, he has missed more than 20% of the votes! What would happen if you missed that much work?

Obama is an impressive failure, but still a failure, and to present himself as presidential timber, is colossal egotism. He is like a 10-year-old Little League player who wants to play with the big leagues; however, he doesn’t qualify. Someone should say to Obama, “Young man, come back to see us in 10 or 12 years.” Obama needs to grow up. After he has actually done something, then the voters can look at him seriously, but today it is embarrassing that more than his family and a few close friends would even consider voting for him.

If American voters have seizures of stupidity and elect him President, he will drive this nation over the cliff at 100 miles per hour. [They did and he did!]

His wife has told us “He is going to demand that you…move out of your comfort zones…and that you engage. Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual….” Someone needs to remind her that he is not running as a king or dictator or Messiah. He will not rule, or reign but he will ruin the U.S. if he is elected. Moreover, he will not demand that I do anything and I will “engage” if I choose to engage. Furthermore, he will not tell me how to live my life.

Obama is like the rooster who struts out each morning thinking the sun had risen just to hear him crow! But a big problem is he can’t crow unless he is reading a script written by a hired hack. When he wanders away from the teleprompter, he does a great imitation of Elmer Fudd.

President of the United States of America? Surely this is a bad dream but if it becomes reality, it will become our worst nightmare.

I wrote the above in 2008 and am amazed how prescient it was; however, it was far too tame. Obama has made it clear that he is impatient with the constrictive presidency and prefers to dictate or rule. He disregards our constitution and form of government. He denigrates our country and her citizens around the world. He is trying hard to destroy America’s working middleclass. He hates free enterprise, independence, and our Christian foundation. On national television he referred to “My Muslim faith” until he was “corrected” by the host. He was born a Muslim to Muslim parents, trained in Muslim schools, and has climbed into bed with radical Muslims in total disregard of mainstream America. Is it an overstatement to suggest that Muslims are now in control of this once-great nation?

Obama, if elected again, will totally destroy our nation that is already reeling from past decisions by various presidents. Christian supporters of Obama should repent and get involved in the next election to keep Obama and what’s her name from within ten miles of Washington.

Anyone, even Elmer Fudd would be a better leader than Obama.

Copyright 2013, Don Boys, Ph.D.