Shooter at Joel Osteen’s Texas mega-church, a Transsexual and active member of the LGBTQ Community had ‘Free Palestine’ written on rifle

/0 Comments/in /by

The person who opened fire at Joel Osteen’s packed Houston-area mega-church on Sunday has been named as Genesse Ivonne Moreno, 36, according to the Houston Chronicle, as authorities revealed that “Free Palestine” was written on the weapon used in the attack.

Moreno entered Lakewood Church just before a Spanish-language service was due to begin at 2 p.m. with a boy, believed to be about 4 or 5 years old, and opened fire as hundreds of people were taking their pews.

Two off-duty officers working security at the church — a Houston cop and an agent with the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission — returned fire and fatally shot Moreno, Houston Police Chief Troy Finner said Sunday.




The boy was also shot and has been hospitalized in critical condition.

When asked whether the child was shot by an officer, Finner declined to speculate, but said, “That female, that suspect, put that baby in danger. I’m going to put that blame on her.”

His relationship to Moreno was not immediately known.

Moreno had a criminal history dating back to 2005 and was previously arrested under the name Jeffery Escalante, according to local station KHOU, raising questions over whether the shooter was transitioning before or at the time of the attack.

A 2022 photo taken when Moreno was booked into jail at Fort Bend County, Texas, listed her sex as female, according to the website Mugshots Zone.

One 57-year-old civilian bystander was also shot in the leg, authorities said, adding that the man was hospitalized and in stable condition.

While law enforcement told ABC about Moreno’s gun’s being daubed with “Free Palestine,” a motive in the shooting remains unclear, and police are still investigating.

Chilling video captured the start of a Spanish-language service suddenly being interrupted by a barrage of gunfire. Detectives said Moreno may have fired as many as 12 shots into the church before she was taken down.

Before Moreno died from her injuries, she poured an unknown substance on the floor and told officers that there was a bomb, but a search of the area by a hazmat team found no evidence of explosives.

Hours after the shooting, FBI agents and other law enforcement searched Moreno’s home in Conroe. Authorities said they have reason to believe there are guns, ammunition and explosive materials inside the home, according to a search warrant obtained by KHOU.

A car was also towed away from the home, the station reported.

Osteen, 60, said during a press conference Sunday that the tragedy could have been much worse had it happened during the earlier or later Sunday services, which draw larger crowds

“I could only imagine … if it would have happened during the 11 o’clock service,” he said at the scene.

The church, founded by Osteen’s late father, is attended by 45,000 people weekly, making it the third-largest mega-church in America.

This is a developing story, please check back for updates.

Minors can have sex changes

Leftist Trans “lawmaker” Spews Hateful, Anti-Christian Remarks at Republicans for Ban on Children Mutilating Their Body Parts

/1 Comment/in /by

EXTREME IRONY: Transgender Insanity Wants to allow the mutilation of Children’s body parts and tells Republicans, “you have blood on your hands”

On Tuesday, during a House of Representatives debate in Montana on amendments to Senate Bill 99, which sought to ban medical mutilation operations on children, Democrat State Representative Zooey Zephyr, a self-identified progressive, bisexual, and transgender individual who prefers she/her pronouns, directed anti-Christian comments at her Republican colleagues. 

Zephyr strongly opposed the bill and, during her closing argument, made a statement saying, 

“The only thing I will say is if you vote yes on this bill and yes on these amendments, I hope the next time there’s an invocation when you bow your heads in prayer, you see the blood on your hands.”

After Zephyr’s remarks, Majority Leader Sue Vinton (R) condemned the comments as “entirely inappropriate, disrespectful, and uncalled for,” emphasizing the importance of civil discourse and respect during debates.

In response, the Montana Freedom Caucus, composed of 21 conservative lawmakers, called for Zephyr to be censured by the House. The group issued a press release on Tuesday demanding that Zephyr, who represents Missoula’s House District 100, be censured for using inappropriate and uncalled-for language during a floor debate concerning Senate Bill 99, which supports a ban on mutation of minor children’s body parts.   The caucus accused Zephyr of attempting to shame the Montana legislative body.

Editors note: A child can not get a tattoo, buy cigarettes, buy alcohol, buy violent video games, enter movie theatre unattended by a guardian, but Liberals all want to allow them to irreversible mutilate their bodies and snuff out the human fetus in them without a parents consent. 

On Tuesday, the Montana Freedom Caucus issued a press release demanding that Representative Zooey Zephyr of Missoula’s House District 100 be censured by the House. The group cited Zephyr’s attempt to shame the Montana legislative body and her use of inappropriate and uncalled-for language during a floor debate on amendments concerning Senate Bill 99, which aimed to ban sex changes of minor children. The caucus also made a connection between Zephyr’s comments and the recent Covenant Christian School shooting in Nashville, which involved a transgender individual killing three children and three adults.

The Freedom Caucus asserted that remarks similar to Zephyr’s were indicative of a desire for some individuals to resort to violence due to political differences. The group called for an end to such behavior.

Conversely, the mainstream media supported Zephyr and placed the responsibility on Republican legislators for purposely misgendering their colleague, according to the Associated Press.

House Minority Leader Kim Abbott (D) expressed her support for Zephyr, denouncing the Montana Freedom Caucus for their disrespectful behavior. Abbott stated, “The language used by the so-called Freedom Caucus, including the intentional and repeated misgendering of Rep. Zephyr, is blatantly disrespectful and goes against their supposed ‘commitment to civil discourse.'”

Abbott also called out the caucus for their hypocrisy, as they demanded respect and civility while simultaneously misgendering Zephyr. In response to the caucus’s actions, Zephyr stated, “It is disheartening that the Montana Freedom Caucus would stoop so low as to misgender me in their letter, further demonstrating their disregard for the dignity and humanity of transgender individuals.”

Churches File Lawsuits against Newsom after CA bans singing in places of worship

/0 Comments/in , /by

Churches see double standard because of Newsom’s support of riots and protests

In the latest battle between Gov. Gavin Newsom and houses of worship over coronavirus restrictions, three Northern California churches sued the governor on Wednesday, seeking to overturn his ban on singing during religious services.

The suit, filed on behalf of Calvary Chapel of Ukiah, Calvary Chapel of Fort Bragg and River of Life Church in Oroville, seeks to block Newsom’s July 1 ban on singing in houses of worship to stop the spread of coronavirus because of an alleged double standard.

“Places of worship must, therefore, discontinue singing and chanting activities and limit indoor attendance to 25 percent of building capacity or a maximum of 100 attendees, whichever is lower,” new guidelines read as state health officials recommend churches have members sing online from their homes.

The suit, filed by attorneys who have previously led lawsuits against Newsom’s ban on in-person services, said the Democratic governor banned singing and chanting inside churches but not anywhere else. They also noted that the governor “has been unwavering in his support of massive protests” against police brutality.

OUTRAGE AFTER CALIFORNIA BANS SINGING IN CHURCHES AMID CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC

“On or about July 2, 2020, following implementation of the Worship Ban, when asked to explain whether people should heed Newsom’s mandate and avoid large crowds and gatherings, Newsom refused to place the same restrictions on protesters and explained ‘we have a Constitution, we have a right to free speech,’ and further stated that ‘we are all dealing with a moment in our nation‘s history that is profound and pronounced … Do what you think is best,’” the lawsuit stated.

The suit cites scripture to emphasize the importance of singing during worship– “singing and praying aloud as a body of Christ is an integral part of worship for believers and plaintiffs.”

“Let me be clear, the state does not have the jurisdiction to ban houses of worship from singing praises to God,” Robert Tyler, one of the lawyers filing the suit, said in a statement, according to the Sacramento Bee.

NEWSOM ORDERS CLOSURE OF INDOOR ACTIVITIES ACROSS CALIFORNIA AS CORONAVIRUS CASES INCREASE 

California faced a number of lawsuits alleging first amendment infringement after it mandated that houses of worship must close during the coronavirus pandemic, prompting the governor to allow them to reopen at a limited capacity on May 25.

After facing another spike in COVID-19 cases, Newsom announced this week that all bars across the state must close and that restaurants, wineries, tasting rooms, family entertainment centers, zoos, museums and card rooms must suspend indoor activities.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Some houses of worship had to shut down again, too. The governor announced that all gyms, places of worship, malls, personal care services, barbershops, salons, and non-critical offices in counties on the state’s “monitoring list” had to shut down under the new order. The order affects more than 30 counties which are home to about 80 percent of California’s population.

Fox News’ Andrew O’Reilly contributed to this report.

Black Trump supporter Bernell Trammell Likely Murdered by Anti Trump Leftists

/0 Comments/in , /by

July 25, 2020 | 12:37pm

Black Trump supporter and vocal Christian Bernell Trammell, 60, was shot and killed in Milwaukee on Thursday. Sources say the suspect or suspects were anti-Trump, possibly members of the Marxist radical Leftist group, Antifa.

The shooting death of the black Trump supporter in Milwaukee has state Republicans calling for a federal investigation. Democrats who usually very vocal and supportive when a polarizing black man is gunned down are silent so far.

Bernell Trammell, 60, a dreadlocked Conservative Christian activist known for carrying handmade signs through the streets reading “Vote Donald Trump 2020,” and posting them on his storefront, was gunned down by an unknown assailant on his sidewalk Thursday afternoon, police said. Sources close to Trammell believe the suspects were associated with Antifa or a Socialist BLM group. Anonymous sources say they witnessed Trammell being taunted and threatened by aggressive protesters in recent days caring signs that promoted both Antifa and BLM.

Black Trump Supporter Bernell Trammell, 60, was shot and killed in Milwaukee on Thursday.

“Because of Trammell’s well known political activism and the possibility that his murder could be politically motivated, I respectfully request that United States Attorney Matthew Krueger open an investigation,” said Andrew Hitt, chairman of the Republican Party of Wisconsin, late Friday.

“No American should fear for their personal safety because of where they live or their political affiliation,” Hitt added.
Trammell, who ran a small publishing company, recently had a public dispute with a young man over one of his Trump signs, said Reggie Moore, director of Milwaukee’s Office of Violence Prevention, in an interview with the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.

“He’s a black elder who didn’t deserve to die the way that he did,” Moore said.

Trammell explained in a video recorded on the morning of his death that Trump’s respect for rapper Kanye West and former aide Omarosa Manigault Newman made him worthy of support.
“I believe that Trump is the sign of the times,” Trammell told local blogger Armstrong Ransome.

Police had no suspects in custody Friday.

Black State Trooper Refusesd to Kneel

Black state trooper refuses to kneel at a Black Lives Matter protest: ‘I only kneel for one person’

/0 Comments/in /by

Georgia State Trooper O’Neal Saddler refused to kneel during a Black Lives Matter protest in Hartwell, Georgia, on Sunday, saying he “has much respect” but only kneels “for one person.”

Video was rolling after Saddler had apparently been asked by a protester to kneel during the demonstration out of respect for the black community.

“If I didn’t have any respect, I wouldn’t [be here],” Saddler began saying to a female protester. “I was supposed to be out of town this weekend with my wife. I took off today, this weekend, but I’m out here to make sure y’all are safe.”

“Don’t go there with respect, OK? I have much respect, but I only kneel for one person,” Saddler continued.

“And that’s God,” someone else from the crowd chimed in. Saddler affirmed the statement.

Protests and riots over George Floyd’s death have continued to erupt across the nation, moving from big cities into more rural areas of the country. In some instances, law enforcement officers have opted to kneel or march with protesters to show solidarity with them, but in other cases, officers have refused for a variety of reasons. Some protesters have even denounced the practice, calling it a PR stunt.

Saddler’s reason seemed to be good enough for the protesters in his immediate vicinity. You can hear some say “thank you” and “we know you have respect” as Saddler speaks.

(H/T: The Daily Caller)

Big Win for Religious Liberty Today

/0 Comments/in /by

By Carrie Severino • June 20, 2019 1:17 PM • Originally Published in National Review

Today the Supreme Court handed down its decision in American Legion v. American Humanist Association, the long-awaited case regarding the World War I memorial in Bladensburg, MD. The Court’s decision to stop militant atheists from tearing down the historic ‘Peace Cross’ memorial is a major win for religious liberty. Unfortunately, while Justice Alito’s majority opinion harshly criticized the Lemon test, he apparently did not have the votes to overrule it completely. Even as written, Justice Kagan refused to join the sections of the opinion most critical of Lemon.

Supporters of the memorial cross in Bladensburg, Md., gather outside the Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., February 27, 2019. (Lawrence Hurley/Reuters)

Several conservative justices wrote separately, further pointing out Lemon’s shortcomings. Justice Kavanaugh surveyed the types of Establishment Clause cases and showed that Lemon didn’t explain the Court’s jurisprudence in any of them, calling it“bad law.” Justice Gorsuch savaged the practice of allowing Establishment Clause challenges to proceed on the basis of mere offense to an observer while other First Amendment challengers have much harder standing requirements.  And Justice Thomas suggested taking a step even further back and reconsidering whether incorporating the First Amendment religion clauses against the states could be squared with the original understanding of the Constitution and its amendments. He also encouraged the Court to explicitly overrule Lemon, writing, “It is our job to say what the law is, and because the Lemon test is not good law, we ought to say so.”

What is even more concerning than leaving bad precedents on the books is that Justices Ginsburg and Sotomayor would have required the cross to be torn down, arguing that every cross displayed on public property presumptively amounts to an unconstitutional endorsement of religion. As liberal groups are at work compiling secret lists of potential Supreme Court nominees in hopes that a Democrat will win in 2020, Americans should ask whether those secret judges would be equally extreme in coopting the Constitution for an aggressively secularist agenda.


East Central University cross chapel tear down

After Pressure from Around the Country, East Central University Backs Off Tearing Down Cross on 60 yr old Chapel

/0 Comments/in /by

East Central University — a public institution in Ada, Okla. — has found itself immersed in a fight over a fake argument and misinterpretation of “separation of church and state” The clause Jefferson used ONLY to assure that no Government would MANDATE a religion. Liberals have been using this argument for years to tear God out of the public eye. Leftists and progressives have distorted the meaning of separation of church and state to meet their own evil intentions of rid God from society.


In July, after receiving a bogus complaint from the religious hate group, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, the university agreed to remove various religious symbols on permanent display in a Christian chapel on campus. Which makes no sense at all. Shortly after the decision, East Central University administrators when faced with strong criticism from citizens nationwide, politicians and religious leaders reversed their decision. Which is a great example that Conservatives and Christians need to start to be more aggressive, as the Left is, towards institutions and organizations who wish to wipe God out of our society.

For now, the university has stopped plans to remove the religious symbols, pending a further review of the issues. You can bet your bottom dollar that this is not over. leftists are persistent. Evil never lets up!

“While it is legal for a public university to have a space that can be used by students for religious worship so long as that space is not dedicated solely to that purpose, it is a violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution to display religious iconography on government property,” said the letter from Americans United for Separation of Church and State to the university. “Please remove or cover the religious displays and items.”

Specifically, the letter from the religious Hate Group cites the display of a Latin Cross and other crosses that are on permanent display in a way that the letter said “communicate[s] religious endorsement to members of the public by displaying religious items or messages.” The letter cited numerous court decisions about such displays.

Initially, the university said it would respond by removing the crosses. But then religious leaders started to speak out, saying it was fine for a public university to display crosses.

Randall Christy, founder of the Gospel Station Network, told The Tulsa World,

“It’s time for Christian people to take a stand for our history and heritage. The idea that the cross excludes people is not true — it’s the opposite. The cross represents that all are welcome, that people of all walks of life are loved by God.”

The university announced it was reversing course.

“We moved too quickly,” said a statement from Katricia Pierson, the university’s president. “We regret not taking time to pause and thoughtfully consider the request and the results of our actions on all of the students, faculty and community members who we serve … This requires a more thoughtful and deliberate approach to the request. That will be our next step.”

Via email, Ian Smith, a lawyer for Americans United, said, “The university has said that they will be taking a closer look and thinking about things. That’s fine — we gave them 30 days to respond, and the letter only went out on the 20th. Ultimately, though, we expect that they will make the same decision since the law is definitively on our side.”

A spokesman for the organization said many public colleges have chapels in which various student religious groups put up crosses and other religious objects during religious services or events. Americans United has no objections to such displays, the spokesman said.

pesecola cross taken down judge court florida cross bay view

Liberals Attack Christians Again: Pensacola Cross Ordered To Be Taken Down after 48 Years Standing – Due to 2 People

/0 Comments/in /by

The minority of Liberals win again.  Only 4 people complained that the cross was offensive.  What about the millions of heterosexuals offended by Gay Pride flags flying in every major city and paid for by tax payers?   Well, that is considered HATEFUL!  Liberals are liars. How can such a thing be ordered because only 2 people felt overwhelmed with offense due to the cross. A cross that has stood in Bayview Park near Pensacola, FL for the last 48 years must be removed within 30 days, a federal judge has ruled.

Even though thousands upon thousands of people have been blessed by the cross in Bayview Park for over 75 years, because just four people complained (two of whom we’re told have since moved to Canada), a federal judge has ruled that this 34-foot tall cross on public property in Pensacola, FL, has to come down. We have organizations like the American Humanist Association and the Freedom From Religion Foundation to thank for ridiculous changes like this. The Bible tells us that the cross is an offense. That’s because it represents the saving power of the Lord Jesus Christ who rose from the grave after three days to redeem us from the penalty of our sins. I agree with former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee—they could donate that spot and the cross there to an independent organization to keep it up. Or—Christians and churches in Pensacola could multiply that cross by 100x across that city and others. Even better yet, we could multiply the message of the cross by sharing the Gospel with everyone we know “for it is the power of God unto salvation.”

U.S. District Court Judge Roger Vinson ruled Monday that the cross in the city park violates the Establishment Clause of the Constitution and must be removed within 30 days.

The American Humanist Association, a group that works to protect the rights of humanists, atheists and other non-religious Americans, and the Freedom From Religion Foundation filed a lawsuit in 2016 on behalf of four Escambia County residents who said the cross at Bayview Park violated the separation of church and state.

Attorneys for the city of Pensacola and the American Humanist Association presented their oral arguments to Vinson on Wednesday.

Vernon Stewart, spokesman for the city of Pensacola, said on Monday that the city had received a copy of the order.

“We are currently in the process of reviewing this with our legal counsel,” Stewart said. “However, Mayor Hayward is traveling, and he will be the one to ultimately decide how to proceed.”

Monica Miller, senior counsel with the American Humanist Association’s Appignani Humanist Legal Center, said in a press release that she was pleased with court’s ruling.

“The cross was totally unavoidable to park patrons, and to have citizens foot the bill for such a religious symbol is both unfair and unconstitutional,” Miller said.

Arguments in the case came down to the “lemon test,” a three-part legal test established in the 1971 Supreme Court case Lemon v. Kurtzman.

The test states that a religious display on government-owned property must meet all three parts of the test to be constitutional. There must be a secular purpose for the display, the display cannot advance or inhibit religion and the display must not excessively entangle government with religion.

A cross has been in Bayview Park in one form or another since 1941. The Pensacola Jaycees, a civics organization for young men, built the current cross in 1969, and it has been maintained by the city ever since, according to court documents.

Judge Vinson, who said he was a member of the Jaycees in the 1970s, ruled that the “lemon test” did indeed apply in this case.

“Lemon is routinely criticized, but it is still the law of the land and I am not free to ignore it,” Vinson wrote in his 23-page opinion.

Vinson said there wouldn’t be an issue with people worshiping at the park using a temporary cross.

 

“However, after about 75 years, the Bayview Cross can no longer stand as a permanent fixture on city-owned property,” Vinson said. “I am aware that there is a lot of support in Pensacola to keep the cross as is, and I understand and respect that point of view. But, the law is the law.”

In addition to ordering the city to remove the cross, Vinson awarded $1 in damages to the plaintiffs — two of whom, Amanda and Andreiy Kondrat’yev, have moved to Canada  — since the case began. The other two plaintiffs are Andre Ryland and David Suhor.

In his ruling, Vinson cited several legal scholars who have criticized the current state of federal case law on the Constitution’s Establishment Clause.

“Count me among those who hope the Supreme Court will one day revisit and reconsider its Establishment Clause jurisprudence, but my duty is to enforce the law as it now stands,” Vinson said

seth clark graduation speech

8th Grader Seth Clark Banned from Reciting Graduation Speech Referencing God

/0 Comments/in /by

Todd Starnes, Fox News / Dave Urbanski, The Blaze

The small town of Akin, Illinois is the heartbeat of the heartland. It’s a place where the crops are bountiful and so are the patriots.
hey don’t even have a post office in Akin – but they do have a church. And around this part of the country, church is what folks do.
So you can understand the concern among townsfolk when the salutatorian at Akin Grade School was told he could not deliver his graduation speech because it was too religious.

Seth Clark, 13, was mighty proud of that speech. He referenced God and quoted from the Bible and even mentioned his Christian faith.
But just hours before graduation, Seth was told that he would not be permitted to deliver his remarks.

“As a public school, it is our duty to educate students, regardless of how different they or their beliefs may be,” a statement from Akin Superintendent and Principal Kelly Clark to the paper reads. “While students are welcome to pray or pursue their faith without disrupting school or infringing upon the rights of others, the United States Constitution prohibits the school district from incorporating such activities as part of school-sponsoakin graduation seth clark christian speechred events, and when the context causes a captive audience to listen or compels other students to participate.”

Enter Rickey Karroll — a friend of Seth’s family — who told WSIL-TV he offered his property across the street from the school so Seth could give his speech.

And that’s exactly what happened.

Right after the May 16 ceremony, Seth — still dressed in his cap and gown — marched across the road along with classmates and dozens of supporters, the station said.

He then stood on the front porch of the house on Karroll’s property and read his speech.

 

religion under attack

Trump Signs New Executive Order on Religious Liberty – Liberals are Furious

/0 Comments/in /by

Free Exercise Clause. Free Exercise Clause refers to the section of the First Amendment italicized here: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof… Historically, the Supreme Court has been inconsistent in dealing with this problem.The executive order President Trump is expected to sign Thursday will be focused on the Johnson Amendment and allow non-profit organizations to deny certain health coverage for religious reasons, administration sources told Fox News Wednesday.

The three main points of the executive order, according to a senior White House official, will declare “that it is the policy of the administration to protect and vigorously promote religious liberty,” direct the IRS “to exercise maxim enforcement of discretion to alleviate the burden of the Johnson Amendment,” and provide “regulatory relief for religious objectors to Obamacare’s burdensome preventive services mandate.”

The timing and contents of the order, which would come on the National Day of Prayer, are still “very fluid” and there are still several drafts, according to a senior administration official.

The Johnson Amendment, named for then-Senator Lyndon B. Johnson of Texas and enacted into law in 1954, essentially regulates tax-exempt organizations such as churches, and religious groups from being too politically involved.

Trump previously campaigned against the amendment, and in February said he would “destroy” the amendment that conservative groups claim restricted political speech by tax-exempt churches.

“I think how the president feels about Johnson amendment is that politicians and unelected bureaucrats shouldn’t have the power to shut up their critics just because they are church leaders or charities,” a senior White House official told Fox News.

In addition, sources tell Fox News the executive order will also allow non-profit organizations, hospitals, educational institutions, and businesses to deny certain health coverage for religious reasons,. That would entail protecting Christian groups like Little Sisters of the Poor from being forced to pay for abortion services.

An early draft of the order, leaked in February, would have established broad exemptions for people and groups to claim religious objections under strong language. Vice President Pence has been a proponent of the plan, and his office has been reportedly pushing for it for months.

While governor of Indiana, Pence signed a similar state law on religious liberty that stirred up controversy across the country, but was seen as a legislative win and rallying cry for social conservatives.

Progressive critics have argued the executive order would allow discrimination against the LGBT community at the federal level.

“The ACLU fights every day to defend religious freedom, but religious freedom does not mean the right to discriminate against or harm others,” Louise Melling, deputy legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union said in a statement Wednesday. “If President Trump signs an executive order that attempts to provide a license to discriminate against women or LGBT people, we will see him in court.”

A senior White House official however pushed back on the criticism saying the order “is not about discrimination.”

‘We don’t have any plans to discriminate, we’re about not discriminating against religious organizations,” the official said.

“Everything that is legal stays legal, everything that is illegal stays illegal,” the official added.

Fox News’ John Roberts and Serafin Gomez contributed to this report.