I was just reading your response to the Anne Graham interview on the Early Show back after 9/11.
I'm sure you know by now that email was not completely accurate (http://www.breakthechain.org/exclusives/annegraham.html).
The same email is circulating again, now in regard to Katina (instead of 9/11).
To your response on that email . . . for people who do believe in God and that Jesus Christ is our Lord and Savior, Anne's answer was perfect for the question. There are 1000's of people in our great country and around the world, who believe in Jesus, claim to be Christians, but have turned away from Him. Why then should we count on his blessing and protection.
The same can be said for the shape our country is in. Our forefathers started this country as a place where people would be allowed to worship the way they wanted, without fear of persecution. But they also, ALL, had a firm belief in God. There is evidence to this in the preamble of every state [Constitution] in the union, in our Declaration of Independence, in the carvings on the Supreme Court building, on the capstone of the Washington Monument, etc.
As a country, we are pushing him away. There are people like Michael Newdow who want any mention of God taken from public view and mention.
It is not the separation of church and state that 9/11 or anything else is being blamed. It's the fact that we, as Christians have allowed that separation to be formed. We are are standing up for what we believe.
"We hold a definite view that being honest means you cannot reasonably conclude there is a God," Newdow said.
Jesus said, "Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed." -John 20:29 -- That's what FAITH is.
Have a blessed day,
I wouldn't dream of trying to change your mind about any of your religious convictions, and I am grateful for the clarification of what Miss Graham did and did not say. I had to go back and re-read what article you were talking about because it is from 2001, just after 9/11 happened. In her statement on The Early Show, Billy Graham's daughter Anne implied we were attacked because we'd turned away from God. The mass-emailing padded those sentiments considerably and made them sound like quotes from Anne, I understand that now. However, Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell made similar statements regarding 9/11, so the main points I was responding to were aimed at the religious community as a whole (as basically represented by those three) and was not meant to be an attack on Anne Graham in particular. The mass-email I reproduced in PCR #90 alleged several points and I answered them---and I stand by those answers, regardless of who wrote the original questions.
More recently, similar comments were made against New Orleans being "Sin City" and somehow deserving of being struck by Hurricane Katrina. And just days ago, Robertson said God turned against Dover, Pennsylvania, for taking Intelligent Design out of the biology curriculum of high schools.
Of course I don't agree with these people, but then I don't believe in God, either. What Michael Newdow is trying to do is take the phrase "under God" out of The Pledge of Allegiance citing separation of church and state. Even I don't think that's likely to succeed, but, hey, somebody had to try it sometime. What the government is terrifed of is that this will reach the Supreme Court where, possibly, Newdow will demand the offensive phrase be justified by asking the gov't to prove the existence of God. If his argument stands, all U.S. currency will have to be re-minted to take out all the "God" references that currently exist at tremendous cost and they certainly don't want that.
In my private fantasy of this confrontation, a "Miracle on 34th Street"-type scene plays out, substituting God for the Santa Claus in the movie.
To send an email to Letters to the Editor write to: Crazedfanboy1@aol.com. Any emails sent to this address will be assumed intended for publication unless you specifically instruct me not to. I can and do respond privately, if that is your preference. Frequently, it's both ways.---Nolan