There is an ENORMOUS and imminent danger to our whole
way of life , of which the vast majority of Americans are totally
UNAWARE.

From Al Qaida, or other foreign-based terrorists?

To some extent, yes. But we're *aware* of *that* threat.

But **another** source of terrorism may actually be every bit
as dangerous, or worse.

THINKING people will read closely, and seriously consider
ALL of that which follows. (Don't be surprised if some UNthink-
ing people, and/or those who have no regard for out liberties,
don't. I invite you to read this article in its enirety, before
jumping to any conclusions prematurely. The points it contains
are presented in sequence, as building blocks for the overall
premise and the article's conclusions. Which may be very
surprising to some of those who read it.)

The cultic adherents of the "Religious" Radical Right ---

... just may be the BEST reminder that Americans have, that
2% of any given random population has an I.Q. of 62 and lower.

Because I'm betting that a very SUBSTANTIAL percentage of
the people who are best described as the automaton-like lemmings
of the RRR Cult -- the "Religious" Radical Right -- are to be found
in that category.

Just so no one misunderstands what I'm saying, this is in NO way
a slight to the folks who were born mentally-challenged. It is simply

a recognition of the primary characteristic that denotes intelligence:
the capability to integrate facts and information well, and draw solid
and rational conclusions from that data. The data being that which
is obvious AND that which is subtle, and often seemingly unrelated
to the subject being pondered. The more effectively a person is able
to do that, the more intelligent he tends to be.

On the flip side, there is a provable inverse correlation between
intelligence and gullibility. Even very intelligent people CAN be
brainwashed by disinformation, but that's peobably quite rare, per-
centagewise, unless they are in a position to be immersed in a
constant barrage of lies and disinformation, and for some aecane
reason *desire* ro subscribe to it. Then, some of those of high
intelligence *can* fall prey to it... as we see in the case of people
who have been enticed by the agendas of formal cults, and actually
are programmed to believe the cult's partyline to the point of a level
of brainwashing that many of them are never able to reject under
their own power. But, at bottom, any society's MOSTgullible people
are by definition those who can be most easily fooled by unsubstan-
tiated and factless disinformation.

And if there is one element that the cult of the "Religious"
Radical Right (i.e., the RRR cult, for short) LACKS, it is relevant
**factual** information.

The cult's constant whining is PRECISELY that: Whining.

And its leaders are ADEPT at doing that in many ways. Lying,
scare-mongering, propagandizing, hand-wringing, hell-fire-threat-
ening, disinformation-spewing and deceiving is what they are all
about. And they do it WELL.

It would be hard to imagine a BETTER fit for the end-times
prophecy in the Bible that False Teachers would come on the
scene and con many people. Of COURSE those teachers would
outwardly appear to be Christians. But they are wolves in sheep's
clothing who have precious little interest in evangelizing (i.e.,
spreading the gospel) while **calling** themselves evangelicals.
And UNDER the soft fleece is the steely hatefulness of bigotry
and an iron fist of sheer dedication to repression. REMEMBER
THIS: **No** False Teacher worth his salt would outwardly
APPEAR to be such. If he did, he'd fool NO one. We can just
be thankful that they are not fooling more than a minority of the
people.

If only those same leaders were as fanatically-dedicated to
STANDING UP for our personal liberties as they are to DENYING,
DISRUPTING, and DESTROYING them, America would have
very LITTLE to worry about in terms of an **internal** threat to
our freedom-cherishing society. We would still be threatened
by the more OBVIOUS terrorists, of course, such as Al Qaida.
But wouldn't it be nice if we didn't have to fight TWO **equally**
threatening terrorist enemies on TWO fronts?

Fortunately, we CAN put ourselves in the position of waging a
ONE-front war on terrorism -- simply by REJECTING, out of hand,
the agendas that threaten liberty from **within**... the leaders that
continuously promote them... and the blind and programmed follow-
ers ("lemmings") who parrot their lies, jargon, and propaganda.

The agendas put forth by the eight oligarchical leaders of the
RRR cult (and their upper echelon of supporting activists) are utterly
DEVOID of common sense, and are STEEPED in the most mindless
hatefulness and bigotry imaginable. (And when anyone points that
out about them, stuck pigs don't squeal any louder.)

The key leaders of this uniquely and dangerously transdenom-
national cult, which programs its lemmings WITHIN their own
churches and denominations, and leaves them IN PLACE there,
to influence their congregations,rather than calling them out into
a seperate and tangible organization (the way most other cults do)
are:

-- Jerry Falwell. (America's modern-day Benedict Arnold, in
in that he INSTIGATED this threat to our
society by starting the RRR Cult in the 1970s. He
called it the "Moral Majority," but it never was
"moral," nor did it ever even remotely constitute a
majority.)

-- James Dobson. (Head of "Focus on the Family")

-- Gary Bauer. (Former head of FRC -- The "Family Research
Council."

-- Chuck Colson. (Former Watergate criminal. If he'd only
become a compassionate Christian upon
emerging from that maelstrom, instead of taking
the course of being a liberty-hating zealot, he
would doubtlessly have channelled his energy
into far more positive and constructive ventures.
Such as his Prison Fellowship Ministries -- an
*actual* Christian endeavor, as long as it deals
with spreading the gospel. If he'd stuck only to
that, and avoided bigotry, he'd have been an
admirable citizen. But he hasn't done that. His
bileous "Breakpoint" commentary poisons the
airwaves daily from hundreds of the "Christian"
radio stations which serve as the RRR's primary
conduit for issuing its incessant stream of disinfor-
mation, marching orders, and call-to-action to its
lemmings.

-- Cal Thomas. Newspaper columnist and sometimes TV
commentator. Absolutely DEDICATED to
anti-personal-liberties agendas of hate.

-- D. James. Kennedy. Heads Coral Ridge Ministries.
Lives in the past, and clearly
would be *delighted* if someone could send him
back in time to hobnob with the Founding Fathers.
(For as long as it would take for him to discover
that they weren't really the religious fanatics that
he's conned himself into THINKING they were...
and keeps trying to con other people into believ-
ing they were.) His primary hangup, after the
usual RRR Cult bigotry toward Gay Rights,
access to abortion-on-request, gambling, and
support for censorship, is an incredible prejudice
against the very obvious and abundantly-docu-
mented process of evolution. If he could, he'd
have all schools teaching nothing but "creation-
ism", and thereby contribute significantly to the
dumbing-down of America by diluting science
with pseudo-science. (He has a RAFT of college
degrees, but can't comprehend the obvious: that
evolution and creation are 100% COMPATIBLE.

-- Donald Wildmon. Heads the American Family Assn.,
which he founded. He pusues all
the usual bigotries, but with this twist: he desper-
ately seeks to CENSOR the media, with a partic-
ular emphasis on TV. His montly magazine rates
TV programs on the basis of their perceived
support for Gay Rights (or as *he* and his cohorts
call it, "the gay agenda."). and abortion. Then
he provides full name and contact information
for the SPONSORS of the TV shows to which he
so prejudicially (and busybodyishly) objects, and
urges his lemmings to harass those sponsors until
they drop their support for the show. He probably
is the main reason (along with the antics of a
Texas dentist who turned out to be an RRR cult
leader's dream: a fanatical super-activist zealot)
for our no longer being able to tune in and enjoy
Phil DONAHUE's show. Wildmon is SO "wild,"
he's even targeted *manufacturers" for some
*very* ludicrous reasons, and called for actual
BOYCOTTS of them. Such as Levi Strauss, for
example -- merely because they decided to stop
making *contributions* to the Boy Scouts, due
to that organization's bigotry toward gays. (Can
you imagine *anything* more ludicrous than THAT?
To **boycott** a company merely because they
choose to stop giving VOLUNTARY contributions
to a cause oor organization?!?) In short, Wildmon
is the RRR's Clown Prince!

-- Beverly La Haye. Head of Concerned Women for
America. Its primary thrust has
been to promote the RRR cult's hate-agendas
toward Civil Rights Movement II (full access to
all of the EQUAL rights to which gays have always
been legally entitled -- which the RRR dishonestly
calls "special" rights.) Showing that they are as
ignorant about that as they are of the Balance of
Powers (i.e., checks-and-balances) provisions of
the Constitution, every time they refer to courts
who are doing their job RIGHT of defending our
liberties, as being populated with majorities of
"activist" judges. They even have President Bush
saying that! Which gives thinking people a lot of
concern: a **President**, who thereby heads one
of the three branches of government, who is
IGNORANT of the Constitution's system of checks-
and-balances that *apply* to those branches!

TV sets have knobs and remotes. And *now*, V-chips.
NO censorship and hateful threatening of sponsors needed!

There is NO such thing as a FACT that supports the DENIAL
to any woman of access to safe and legal abortion-upon-request,
and the facts that SUPPORT her right to that remedy are ABUN-
DANT. (To save space in this post, I've appended those, in
outline form, after this post's text.)

There is NO way that ANY opposite-sex married couple's
marriage would be negatively-impacted by a same-sex couple's
getting married.

The bottom line: Today's neocons/RRR cultists mindlessly
subscribe to VACUOUS arguments like a herd of lemmings.

Now let's see WHY all of this is every bit as dangerous to
America, INTERNALLY, as Al Qaida's terrorism is to us from
OUTSIDE of it.

This is VERY important, and what wee need to do to COUNTER
it is VERY **necessary**.

While such overt terrorism as we saw in 9/11, and by other
means which that brand of terrorist has yet to employ (and hopefully
will never have the chance to) is deadly-dangerous to American
society, the version of domestic terrorism being waged by the RRR
cult is no less potentially devastating to our way of life and to our
freedoms.

The single MOST dangerous threat to America from that quarter
can come from just ONE person. And he or she doesn't have to be
a leader a la "Big Brother" in George Orwell's "1984." The person
can be as seemingly innocuous as another Clarence Thomas or
Antonin Scalia. For the last few decades, the Supreme Court has
been precariously close to leaning away from defending our cher-
ished personal liberties, instead of toward defending them. The
loss of just ONE liberal-minded justice via either his/her demise or
retirement, to be replaced by a neocon sympathetic to the RRR's
agenda is all that it would take to do that.

Besides providing a framework for a stable and fair government
that can endure over time, the primary purpose of the Constitution is
to defend the many liberties of its citizens from tyranny and
infringement. Not being fortune-tellers, its writers were constrained
to accomplish that as best they could with the knowledge of society,
and the real and potential problems faced by society, as prevailed in
their day. Thus, they made the provisions as general as they could,
while still retaining sufficient specificity to be viably enforced.

Thanks to that, and to the checks-and-balances written into it
that made Marbury vs. Madison a very reasonable interpretation of
its intent, the Constitution -- and with it, our form of government,
and our most important individual liberties -- have survived for more
than two centuries. Two hundred years ago, as this is written, the
Marbury vs. Madison decision firmed up the legitimacy and legality
of the Supreme Court's capability to subject statutory laws brought
before it to judicial review -- testing the given law against the
wording of the Constitution to ensure that it does not conflict with
the supreme law of the land, and thus IS constitutional and there-
fore legitimate.

The decisions rendered by the Supreme Court rely upon the
Constitution's wording and provisions. And just as the Bible
contains some apparent conflicts, the same is true of the
Constitution. Therefore, the Supreme Court's justices can either
scour the Constitution with the *intention* of ensuring that a
statutory law does *not* infringe upon personal liberties -- OR they
can be *purposely slipshod* in that process because they want
the law to pass the judicial review test despite the fact that closer
scrutiny of the Constitution would likely provide a basis for over-
turning it, within the many guarantees of our liberties that it
contains.

Fair-minded and responsible justices would scour the
Constitution with a micron-diameter filter to do all in their power
to find the wordings that can be employed to keep a repressive
law from passing muster.

Irresponsible justices with little or no regard for some of our
liberties, however, *welcome* the arrival before their bench of
challenged laws that they support, so that they can have an
opportunity to give the court's imprimatur to repressive measures.

Thus, it is simply a matter of which type of justice comprises a

majority in the court at that time. If judges who are dedicated
first and foremost to protecting and defending our liberties, are in
the majority, they usually can find provisions in the Constitution
that will enable the repressive law in question to be struck down,
and then accomplish just that. Which has happened most of the
time over the last fifty years, since the landmark Brown vs. Board
of Education decision that spelled the beginning of the end for
segregation.

BUT-- if the majority of the justices were inclined toward
tyranny and repression (as per the agendas of the RRR cult),
then all it would take to sustain a law that would otherwise have
been demolished by one or more of the Constitution's more subtle
guarantees is for those justices to conveniently overlook the
provisions that could have been used to strike it down. When-
ever those provisions are not too obvious, that could be accom-
plished.

And a terrifying number of times, our liberties have come
within a hairs' breadth of serious infringement or outright loss,
by virtue of being upheld by the narrowest of margins: a 5-4
majority on the part of egalitarian and fair-minded justices.
Terrifyingly-close, for fair-minded Americans, but frustrating
near-misses to bigoted ones to whom repressive agendas
and control far outweigh their regard for personal freedoms.

The days to come during which egalitarians may be able to
continue giving sighs of relief may be frighteningly short.
Especially now, as this is written in mid-2004, with Election Day
looming only a few weeks in the future.

ONLY A **SMALL** WINDOW OF
OPPORTUNITY REMAINS

If you are reading these words during that time frame, then
you still have a chance to help America to avert unspeakable and
unthinkable disaster. It is clear that the election will be won
either by the incumbent President, George W. Bush, or by John
Kerry. Kerry's record, and that of his party, in general, indicates
that if he wins, he will be far more respective of our liberties than
would Bush, who is tucked firmly in the RRR's pocket, and regards
its cultists to be his base. Just as tigers can't change their
stripes, we can be just as sure that Bush's automatically having
become a lame duck -- upon election to his last possible term -- will
not suddenly become a sensible egalitarian, and reject the RRR's
agendas.

Between Jan. 2005 and Jan. 2009 (the next Presidential term),
it is almost a *certainty* that at least one Supreme Court justice
will retire, and the possibility exists for the replacement in that
manner for as many as three of them. Just **one** appointee by
Bush could spell disaster for America for decades, and possibly
generations, to come. Two or three appointments would be
incomprehensibly catastrophic.

We are incredibly lucky that Bush, effectively appointed by
his partisan cronies in the Supreme Court, didn't get a single
chance to do that during his first (and hopefully, only) term. If
he's elected in 2004 (or manages by some other nefarious meth-
odology to ascend to a second term (e.g., see the reference
pertaining to Diebold's voting machines, in the SIG, following
appended outline pertaining to abortion), America's luck almost
certainly will have run out. If that happens, and you happen to be
reading these words *after* the election, you'll have missed your
chance to help to head that off, and you well may be in the horrific
position at that point of being powerless to do anything but stand
back and watch as our society moves inexorably closer to the
likely-inescapable black hole of Orwell's nightmare scenario.

For those who find the Bible meaningful, the Tribulation Period
is prophecied to be horrendous without parallel in world history.
That would make it worse than Soviet Communism and the Siberian
gulags. Worse than the bloody conquest of China by Mao Tse-tung.
Worse than Pol Pot's killing fields of millions in Cambodia. And worse
than Naziism and the Holocaust. We may well be on the brink of that
unspeakable Tribulation Period. And if Americans don't **repudiate**
the RRR cult at the ballot box, on November 2nd, we are very likely
to be lighting the FUZE for it.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Please help to keep America free -- by reposting this, and
distributing copies of it, far and wide, as soon as possible.
I ask only that you include it authorship and address infor-
mation, intact, when doing so, and that you apply no alter-
ations or omissions to any of its content, including Appendix.

Thank you.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

APPENDIX

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
ANALYZING ABORTION-ON-REQUEST* in the USA
*(Abortion Rights as they have existed since 1-22-73)

Abortion terminates entities (z/e/fs: zygotes, embryoes &
fetuses, up until the 7th month of gestation) which have ALL
of these characteristics in common with sperm and ova:

-- Human
-- Unique
-- As a stage of development, indispensible to future birth
-- Have NEVER experienced conscious awareness
-- Alive

...which makes it hypocritical when abortion opponents
try to defend z/e/fs but NOT sperm and ova.

And the Bible, which is the primary moral authority for the
majority of Americans:

-- In NO way condemns abortion
-- Doesn't even MENTION abortion
-- By Jesus' day, abortion had been around for 1,000 yrs.
-- Contains NO defenses of s/o/z/e/fs
-- Reserves ALL of its protection for already-BORN people
-- That the Bible regards personhood to begin at BIRTH is
made clear by it's immense emphasis on the importance
of BIRTH order, and BIRTHrights.
-- In certain cases, condemned BABIES to horrible deaths
-- Never indicates that there is anything "special" about
fertilization
-- Thus making z/e/f and sperm & ova of EQUAL worth

Abortion-on-request enables women to:

-- Put their lives back on track immediately
-- Restore their well-being to pre-unplanned pregnancy levels
-- Vast majority of women are happy with this decision
-- Most women have no regrets
-- Restore their full range of future opportunities
-- Avoid physical difficulties of a 9-month pregnancy
-- Especially important for young girls, ~12-16
-- Statistically 6-10 times safer than carrying-to-term
-- Avoid the trauma of adopting-out, and wondering later
-- Avoid possibility of changing mind about adopting-out
-- Reduce likelihood of long-term economic deprivation
-- Avoid bringing child into less-loving home
-- Avoid bringing child into unstable environment
-- Wait until timing is better before having children
-- Who then are MORE likely to be loved
-- Who then are MORE likely to be in stable home
-- And thus are LESS like to have troubled childhoods
-- And therefore more likely NOT to become criminals
-- And thus are MORE likely to become successful

Legal abortion-on-request:

-- Is exponentially safer than illegal abortions
-- Thus saving the lives of hundreds or thousands of women/yr.
-- Has been available throughout the USA since early 1973
-- Between 1973 and 2000, 30 million women have had them
-- Between 1973 and 2000, 40 million abortions have been done

Other related facts include:

-- MOST women who have abortions go on to HAVE kids later,
when the timing is better
-- Those children would NOT have been born if the abortions
had not taken place earlier, because the same sperm and
ova would not have matched up.
-- Those "2nd-round" kids STARTED reaching age 13 in
significant numbers by 1988. By the early 1990s, millions
of those "2nd-round" kids were in their mid-teens by the
early 1990s.
-- Mid-teens is the highest risk age for crime, and this
continues into the early 20s.
-- As pointed out above, wanted and loved children are
LESS prone to criminal behavior.
-- By 1995, millions of "2nd-round kids" were entering the
workforce. Perhaps a million-plus MORE have entered it
every year SINCE. By 2000, the oldest ones had reached
the age where they could be getting quite successful.
-- Since the early 1990s, the rate of violent crime in the USA
has declined dramatically, and by 2000 was at 40-year
lows in many categories.
-- The decade of the 1990s, and the year 2002 to date, in
the USA, has been the most economically-dynamic of
any nation in the entire history of the world.

Although the exact figures may be impossible to derive, the
probability that abortion-on-request has SIGNIFICANTLY benefitted
all of America's society in terms of the crime rate and the economy
is QUITE strong, despite the temporary anomaly caused by the attack
on Sept. 11, 2001. And a strong U.S. economy benefits the entire
world.

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
By Craig Chilton E-Mail:

There is an ENORMOUS and imminent danger to our whole
way of life , of which the vast majority of Americans are totally
UNAWARE.

From Al Qaida, or other foreign-based terrorists?

To some extent, yes. But we're *aware* of *that* threat.

But **another** source of terrorism may actually be every bit
as dangerous, or worse.

THINKING people will read closely, and seriously consider
ALL of that which follows. (Don't be surprised if some UNthink-
ing people, and/or those who have no regard for out liberties,
don't. I invite you to read this article in its enirety, before
jumping to any conclusions prematurely. The points it contains
are presented in sequence, as building blocks for the overall
premise and the article's conclusions. Which may be very
surprising to some of those who read it.)

The cultic adherents of the "Religious" Radical Right ---

... just may be the BEST reminder that Americans have, that
2% of any given random population has an I.Q. of 62 and lower.

Because I'm betting that a very SUBSTANTIAL percentage of
the people who are best described as the automaton-like lemmings
of the RRR Cult -- the "Religious" Radical Right -- are to be found
in that category.

Just so no one misunderstands what I'm saying, this is in NO way
a slight to the folks who were born mentally-challenged. It is simply

a recognition of the primary characteristic that denotes intelligence:
the capability to integrate facts and information well, and draw solid
and rational conclusions from that data. The data being that which
is obvious AND that which is subtle, and often seemingly unrelated
to the subject being pondered. The more effectively a person is able
to do that, the more intelligent he tends to be.

On the flip side, there is a provable inverse correlation between
intelligence and gullibility. Even very intelligent people CAN be
brainwashed by disinformation, but that's peobably quite rare, per-
centagewise, unless they are in a position to be immersed in a
constant barrage of lies and disinformation, and for some aecane
reason *desire* ro subscribe to it. Then, some of those of high
intelligence *can* fall prey to it... as we see in the case of people
who have been enticed by the agendas of formal cults, and actually
are programmed to believe the cult's partyline to the point of a level
of brainwashing that many of them are never able to reject under
their own power. But, at bottom, any society's MOSTgullible people
are by definition those who can be most easily fooled by unsubstan-
tiated and factless disinformation.

And if there is one element that the cult of the "Religious"
Radical Right (i.e., the RRR cult, for short) LACKS, it is relevant
**factual** information.

The cult's constant whining is PRECISELY that: Whining.

And its leaders are ADEPT at doing that in many ways. Lying,
scare-mongering, propagandizing, hand-wringing, hell-fire-threat-
ening, disinformation-spewing and deceiving is what they are all
about. And they do it WELL.

It would be hard to imagine a BETTER fit for the end-times
prophecy in the Bible that False Teachers would come on the
scene and con many people. Of COURSE those teachers would
outwardly appear to be Christians. But they are wolves in sheep's
clothing who have precious little interest in evangelizing (i.e.,
spreading the gospel) while **calling** themselves evangelicals.
And UNDER the soft fleece is the steely hatefulness of bigotry
and an iron fist of sheer dedication to repression. REMEMBER
THIS: **No** False Teacher worth his salt would outwardly
APPEAR to be such. If he did, he'd fool NO one. We can just
be thankful that they are not fooling more than a minority of the
people.

If only those same leaders were as fanatically-dedicated to
STANDING UP for our personal liberties as they are to DENYING,
DISRUPTING, and DESTROYING them, America would have
very LITTLE to worry about in terms of an **internal** threat to
our freedom-cherishing society. We would still be threatened
by the more OBVIOUS terrorists, of course, such as Al Qaida.
But wouldn't it be nice if we didn't have to fight TWO **equally**
threatening terrorist enemies on TWO fronts?

Fortunately, we CAN put ourselves in the position of waging a
ONE-front war on terrorism -- simply by REJECTING, out of hand,
the agendas that threaten liberty from **within**... the leaders that
continuously promote them... and the blind and programmed follow-
ers ("lemmings") who parrot their lies, jargon, and propaganda.

The agendas put forth by the eight oligarchical leaders of the
RRR cult (and their upper echelon of supporting activists) are utterly
DEVOID of common sense, and are STEEPED in the most mindless
hatefulness and bigotry imaginable. (And when anyone points that
out about them, stuck pigs don't squeal any louder.)

The key leaders of this uniquely and dangerously transdenom-
national cult, which programs its lemmings WITHIN their own
churches and denominations, and leaves them IN PLACE there,
to influence their congregations,rather than calling them out into
a seperate and tangible organization (the way most other cults do)
are:

-- Jerry Falwell. (America's modern-day Benedict Arnold, in
in that he INSTIGATED this threat to our
society by starting the RRR Cult in the 1970s. He
called it the "Moral Majority," but it never was
"moral," nor did it ever even remotely constitute a
majority.)

-- James Dobson. (Head of "Focus on the Family")

-- Gary Bauer. (Former head of FRC -- The "Family Research
Council."

-- Chuck Colson. (Former Watergate criminal. If he'd only
become a compassionate Christian upon
emerging from that maelstrom, instead of taking
the course of being a liberty-hating zealot, he
would doubtlessly have channelled his energy
into far more positive and constructive ventures.
Such as his Prison Fellowship Ministries -- an
*actual* Christian endeavor, as long as it deals
with spreading the gospel. If he'd stuck only to
that, and avoided bigotry, he'd have been an
admirable citizen. But he hasn't done that. His
bileous "Breakpoint" commentary poisons the
airwaves daily from hundreds of the "Christian"
radio stations which serve as the RRR's primary
conduit for issuing its incessant stream of disinfor-
mation, marching orders, and call-to-action to its
lemmings.

-- Cal Thomas. Newspaper columnist and sometimes TV
commentator. Absolutely DEDICATED to
anti-personal-liberties agendas of hate.

-- D. James. Kennedy. Heads Coral Ridge Ministries.
Lives in the past, and clearly
would be *delighted* if someone could send him
back in time to hobnob with the Founding Fathers.
(For as long as it would take for him to discover
that they weren't really the religious fanatics that
he's conned himself into THINKING they were...
and keeps trying to con other people into believ-
ing they were.) His primary hangup, after the
usual RRR Cult bigotry toward Gay Rights,
access to abortion-on-request, gambling, and
support for censorship, is an incredible prejudice
against the very obvious and abundantly-docu-
mented process of evolution. If he could, he'd
have all schools teaching nothing but "creation-
ism", and thereby contribute significantly to the
dumbing-down of America by diluting science
with pseudo-science. (He has a RAFT of college
degrees, but can't comprehend the obvious: that
evolution and creation are 100% COMPATIBLE.

-- Donald Wildmon. Heads the American Family Assn.,
which he founded. He pusues all
the usual bigotries, but with this twist: he desper-
ately seeks to CENSOR the media, with a partic-
ular emphasis on TV. His montly magazine rates
TV programs on the basis of their perceived
support for Gay Rights (or as *he* and his cohorts
call it, "the gay agenda."). and abortion. Then
he provides full name and contact information
for the SPONSORS of the TV shows to which he
so prejudicially (and busybodyishly) objects, and
urges his lemmings to harass those sponsors until
they drop their support for the show. He probably
is the main reason (along with the antics of a
Texas dentist who turned out to be an RRR cult
leader's dream: a fanatical super-activist zealot)
for our no longer being able to tune in and enjoy
Phil DONAHUE's show. Wildmon is SO "wild,"
he's even targeted *manufacturers" for some
*very* ludicrous reasons, and called for actual
BOYCOTTS of them. Such as Levi Strauss, for
example -- merely because they decided to stop
making *contributions* to the Boy Scouts, due
to that organization's bigotry toward gays. (Can
you imagine *anything* more ludicrous than THAT?
To **boycott** a company merely because they
choose to stop giving VOLUNTARY contributions
to a cause oor organization?!?) In short, Wildmon
is the RRR's Clown Prince!

-- Beverly La Haye. Head of Concerned Women for
America. Its primary thrust has
been to promote the RRR cult's hate-agendas
toward Civil Rights Movement II (full access to
all of the EQUAL rights to which gays have always
been legally entitled -- which the RRR dishonestly
calls "special" rights.) Showing that they are as
ignorant about that as they are of the Balance of
Powers (i.e., checks-and-balances) provisions of
the Constitution, every time they refer to courts
who are doing their job RIGHT of defending our
liberties, as being populated with majorities of
"activist" judges. They even have President Bush
saying that! Which gives thinking people a lot of
concern: a **President**, who thereby heads one
of the three branches of government, who is
IGNORANT of the Constitution's system of checks-
and-balances that *apply* to those branches!

TV sets have knobs and remotes. And *now*, V-chips.
NO censorship and hateful threatening of sponsors needed!

There is NO such thing as a FACT that supports the DENIAL
to any woman of access to safe and legal abortion-upon-request,
and the facts that SUPPORT her right to that remedy are ABUN-
DANT. (To save space in this post, I've appended those, in
outline form, after this post's text.)

There is NO way that ANY opposite-sex married couple's
marriage would be negatively-impacted by a same-sex couple's
getting married.

The bottom line: Today's neocons/RRR cultists mindlessly
subscribe to VACUOUS arguments like a herd of lemmings.

Now let's see WHY all of this is every bit as dangerous to
America, INTERNALLY, as Al Qaida's terrorism is to us from
OUTSIDE of it.

This is VERY important, and what wee need to do to COUNTER
it is VERY **necessary**.

While such overt terrorism as we saw in 9/11, and by other
means which that brand of terrorist has yet to employ (and hopefully
will never have the chance to) is deadly-dangerous to American
society, the version of domestic terrorism being waged by the RRR
cult is no less potentially devastating to our way of life and to our
freedoms.

The single MOST dangerous threat to America from that quarter
can come from just ONE person. And he or she doesn't have to be
a leader a la "Big Brother" in George Orwell's "1984." The person
can be as seemingly innocuous as another Clarence Thomas or
Antonin Scalia. For the last few decades, the Supreme Court has
been precariously close to leaning away from defending our cher-
ished personal liberties, instead of toward defending them. The
loss of just ONE liberal-minded justice via either his/her demise or
retirement, to be replaced by a neocon sympathetic to the RRR's
agenda is all that it would take to do that.

Besides providing a framework for a stable and fair government
that can endure over time, the primary purpose of the Constitution is
to defend the many liberties of its citizens from tyranny and
infringement. Not being fortune-tellers, its writers were constrained
to accomplish that as best they could with the knowledge of society,
and the real and potential problems faced by society, as prevailed in
their day. Thus, they made the provisions as general as they could,
while still retaining sufficient specificity to be viably enforced.

Thanks to that, and to the checks-and-balances written into it
that made Marbury vs. Madison a very reasonable interpretation of
its intent, the Constitution -- and with it, our form of government,
and our most important individual liberties -- have survived for more
than two centuries. Two hundred years ago, as this is written, the
Marbury vs. Madison decision firmed up the legitimacy and legality
of the Supreme Court's capability to subject statutory laws brought
before it to judicial review -- testing the given law against the
wording of the Constitution to ensure that it does not conflict with
the supreme law of the land, and thus IS constitutional and there-
fore legitimate.

The decisions rendered by the Supreme Court rely upon the
Constitution's wording and provisions. And just as the Bible
contains some apparent conflicts, the same is true of the
Constitution. Therefore, the Supreme Court's justices can either
scour the Constitution with the *intention* of ensuring that a
statutory law does *not* infringe upon personal liberties -- OR they
can be *purposely slipshod* in that process because they want
the law to pass the judicial review test despite the fact that closer
scrutiny of the Constitution would likely provide a basis for over-
turning it, within the many guarantees of our liberties that it
contains.

Fair-minded and responsible justices would scour the
Constitution with a micron-diameter filter to do all in their power
to find the wordings that can be employed to keep a repressive
law from passing muster.

Irresponsible justices with little or no regard for some of our
liberties, however, *welcome* the arrival before their bench of
challenged laws that they support, so that they can have an
opportunity to give the court's imprimatur to repressive measures.

Thus, it is simply a matter of which type of justice comprises a

majority in the court at that time. If judges who are dedicated
first and foremost to protecting and defending our liberties, are in
the majority, they usually can find provisions in the Constitution
that will enable the repressive law in question to be struck down,
and then accomplish just that. Which has happened most of the
time over the last fifty years, since the landmark Brown vs. Board
of Education decision that spelled the beginning of the end for
segregation.

BUT-- if the majority of the justices were inclined toward
tyranny and repression (as per the agendas of the RRR cult),
then all it would take to sustain a law that would otherwise have
been demolished by one or more of the Constitution's more subtle
guarantees is for those justices to conveniently overlook the
provisions that could have been used to strike it down. When-
ever those provisions are not too obvious, that could be accom-
plished.

And a terrifying number of times, our liberties have come
within a hairs' breadth of serious infringement or outright loss,
by virtue of being upheld by the narrowest of margins: a 5-4
majority on the part of egalitarian and fair-minded justices.
Terrifyingly-close, for fair-minded Americans, but frustrating
near-misses to bigoted ones to whom repressive agendas
and control far outweigh their regard for personal freedoms.

The days to come during which egalitarians may be able to
continue giving sighs of relief may be frighteningly short.
Especially now, as this is written in mid-2004, with Election Day
looming only a few weeks in the future.

ONLY A **SMALL** WINDOW OF
OPPORTUNITY REMAINS

If you are reading these words during that time frame, then
you still have a chance to help America to avert unspeakable and
unthinkable disaster. It is clear that the election will be won
either by the incumbent President, George W. Bush, or by John
Kerry. Kerry's record, and that of his party, in general, indicates
that if he wins, he will be far more respective of our liberties than
would Bush, who is tucked firmly in the RRR's pocket, and regards
its cultists to be his base. Just as tigers can't change their
stripes, we can be just as sure that Bush's automatically having
become a lame duck -- upon election to his last possible term -- will
not suddenly become a sensible egalitarian, and reject the RRR's
agendas.

Between Jan. 2005 and Jan. 2009 (the next Presidential term),
it is almost a *certainty* that at least one Supreme Court justice
will retire, and the possibility exists for the replacement in that
manner for as many as three of them. Just **one** appointee by
Bush could spell disaster for America for decades, and possibly
generations, to come. Two or three appointments would be
incomprehensibly catastrophic.

We are incredibly lucky that Bush, effectively appointed by
his partisan cronies in the Supreme Court, didn't get a single
chance to do that during his first (and hopefully, only) term. If
he's elected in 2004 (or manages by some other nefarious meth-
odology to ascend to a second term (e.g., see the reference
pertaining to Diebold's voting machines, in the SIG, following
appended outline pertaining to abortion), America's luck almost
certainly will have run out. If that happens, and you happen to be
reading these words *after* the election, you'll have missed your
chance to help to head that off, and you well may be in the horrific
position at that point of being powerless to do anything but stand
back and watch as our society moves inexorably closer to the
likely-inescapable black hole of Orwell's nightmare scenario.

For those who find the Bible meaningful, the Tribulation Period
is prophecied to be horrendous without parallel in world history.
That would make it worse than Soviet Communism and the Siberian
gulags. Worse than the bloody conquest of China by Mao Tse-tung.
Worse than Pol Pot's killing fields of millions in Cambodia. And worse
than Naziism and the Holocaust. We may well be on the brink of that
unspeakable Tribulation Period. And if Americans don't **repudiate**
the RRR cult at the ballot box, on November 2nd, we are very likely
to be lighting the FUZE for it.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Please help to keep America free -- by reposting this, and
distributing copies of it, far and wide, as soon as possible.
I ask only that you include it authorship and address infor-
mation, intact, when doing so, and that you apply no alter-
ations or omissions to any of its content, including Appendix.

Thank you.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

APPENDIX

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
ANALYZING ABORTION-ON-REQUEST* in the USA
*(Abortion Rights as they have existed since 1-22-73)

Abortion terminates entities (z/e/fs: zygotes, embryoes &
fetuses, up until the 7th month of gestation) which have ALL
of these characteristics in common with sperm and ova:

-- Human
-- Unique
-- As a stage of development, indispensible to future birth
-- Have NEVER experienced conscious awareness
-- Alive

...which makes it hypocritical when abortion opponents
try to defend z/e/fs but NOT sperm and ova.

And the Bible, which is the primary moral authority for the
majority of Americans:

-- In NO way condemns abortion
-- Doesn't even MENTION abortion
-- By Jesus' day, abortion had been around for 1,000 yrs.
-- Contains NO defenses of s/o/z/e/fs
-- Reserves ALL of its protection for already-BORN people
-- That the Bible regards personhood to begin at BIRTH is
made clear by it's immense emphasis on the importance
of BIRTH order, and BIRTHrights.
-- In certain cases, condemned BABIES to horrible deaths
-- Never indicates that there is anything "special" about
fertilization
-- Thus making z/e/f and sperm & ova of EQUAL worth

Abortion-on-request enables women to:

-- Put their lives back on track immediately
-- Restore their well-being to pre-unplanned pregnancy levels
-- Vast majority of women are happy with this decision
-- Most women have no regrets
-- Restore their full range of future opportunities
-- Avoid physical difficulties of a 9-month pregnancy
-- Especially important for young girls, ~12-16
-- Statistically 6-10 times safer than carrying-to-term
-- Avoid the trauma of adopting-out, and wondering later
-- Avoid possibility of changing mind about adopting-out
-- Reduce likelihood of long-term economic deprivation
-- Avoid bringing child into less-loving home
-- Avoid bringing child into unstable environment
-- Wait until timing is better before having children
-- Who then are MORE likely to be loved
-- Who then are MORE likely to be in stable home
-- And thus are LESS like to have troubled childhoods
-- And therefore more likely NOT to become criminals
-- And thus are MORE likely to become successful

Legal abortion-on-request:

-- Is exponentially safer than illegal abortions
-- Thus saving the lives of hundreds or thousands of women/yr.
-- Has been available throughout the USA since early 1973
-- Between 1973 and 2000, 30 million women have had them
-- Between 1973 and 2000, 40 million abortions have been done

Other related facts include:

-- MOST women who have abortions go on to HAVE kids later,
when the timing is better
-- Those children would NOT have been born if the abortions
had not taken place earlier, because the same sperm and
ova would not have matched up.
-- Those "2nd-round" kids STARTED reaching age 13 in
significant numbers by 1988. By the early 1990s, millions
of those "2nd-round" kids were in their mid-teens by the
early 1990s.
-- Mid-teens is the highest risk age for crime, and this
continues into the early 20s.
-- As pointed out above, wanted and loved children are
LESS prone to criminal behavior.
-- By 1995, millions of "2nd-round kids" were entering the
workforce. Perhaps a million-plus MORE have entered it
every year SINCE. By 2000, the oldest ones had reached
the age where they could be getting quite successful.
-- Since the early 1990s, the rate of violent crime in the USA
has declined dramatically, and by 2000 was at 40-year
lows in many categories.
-- The decade of the 1990s, and the year 2002 to date, in
the USA, has been the most economically-dynamic of
any nation in the entire history of the world.

Although the exact figures may be impossible to derive, the
probability that abortion-on-request has SIGNIFICANTLY benefitted
all of America's society in terms of the crime rate and the economy
is QUITE strong, despite the temporary anomaly caused by the attack
on Sept. 11, 2001. And a strong U.S. economy benefits the entire
world.

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
By Craig Chilton E-Mail: