Brothers in Arms

There is a tight bond that ties men who served together in the military. Young men in their late teens and early twenties from different communities, different cultures, different religious backgrounds, different ways of life were put together for a primary purpose – to defend the United States of America. 

Veterans from 549th MP Company Ft. Davis/Coco Solo Canal Zone 1971-1976

Over a period of a few months, the men from diverse backgrounds became brothers in arms. Those few months in the lives of these men created a tight bond that would stand out uniquely for the rest of their lives. Continue reading

FacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Jay Powell

As a pastor, being around funeral homes is a part of the ministry. I have heard funeral directors sometimes comment, “they come in threes.”

Beth Slocum called me early yesterday morning and told me that her brother, and my friend, Jay Powell, died. Like everyone else who heard the news, it was a shock.

Jay was not ill. He was actively engaged in his law practice and as a leader in the Georgia Legislature. This came out of nowhere.

Beth and Jay’s father, A. J. Powell, passed away last September. He lived to be 100. That is one where family and friends grieve over a loved one but also understand that 100 years is more than most have on this earth.

In October, Beth’s husband, Jody Slocum, died after a very short illness. That one hit hard.

Beth and the whole family were leaning on Jay to work through all the legal matters of their father’s estate.

Now her little brother who also is one of the most respected leaders in the Georgia House of Representatives died of a sudden heart attack. The question that everyone asks at a time like this, “Why?”

The only thing that I could think was the old gospel song, “We’ll Understand it Better By and By.” As I write this, I am listening to a Bill Gaither Homecoming Vocal Band with the full audience singing that old song.

You may facing something that you don’t understand and find some comfort in this old song as well. Here’s the link.

I get a chance to travel around South Georgia and visit with farmers. Any time I was in Mitchell County, I made it a point to stop by Jay’s law office. If he was in, and not with another client, he always asked me to come back to his office to visit for a while.

The simple wooden table in his office usually had law books and papers stacked around with one set, in front of him, marked up with his notes. It may have been a deed, will, or a bill in the legislature that would impact millions of citizens of Georgia.

He never seemed too swamped or overwhelmed to sit and talk for a while. He shared observations on politics and always wanted my take on various matters. Rural Georgia will miss his leadership and advocacy. All of Georgia will miss his straight shooting.

Once he voted no on a bill than I advocated. I could not understand his vote and sent him an e-mail asking. He wrote back that he wanted to meet and talk about it. We did have a chance to talk a little while later.

There was no pounding the table, defensiveness, avoidance, or power play. He simply walked through several provisions in the bill that he felt were not thought through before passing.

We started the visit as close friends and ended it just as close, if not closer. I told him that I understood the particular concerns that he raised, but still felt that the bill was good and glad that it passed and was signed by Governor Kemp.

I recall one particular time that is still vivid in my memory. We had visited about several matters. I was serving on a state board at the time. The agency leaders were constantly rolling out new rules and I was pushing back.

In this particular visit with Jay in his law office, we talked about a lot of different issues but the agency matters were peripheral at most. As I got up to leave his office, he stopped me and simply said, “I want you to know that I appreciate you taking on the bureaucracy.”

I miss Jay and going through Camilla will never be the same. For family members, there are no words. The best I can offer is that we’ll understand it better by and by.

FacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

My Take on the Schiff Hearings

I have had several people ask me about the hearings that the House Intelligence Committee held over the past two weeks. I heard a lot of interpretations, understandings, and opinions from witnesses, but no facts that differed from the transcript of the phone call to the Ukrainian President that President Trump provided. 

The witnesses were all connected with the State Department or Intelligence community. They appeared to be disturbed over the call because the President did not follow their talking points or because he made the call at all. 

It was clear that Democrats set the rules to prevent Republican participation to the fullest degree possible.  When Republican Congressman David Nunes attempted to yield a portion of his time for questioning to Congresswoman Elise Stefanik, Schiff ruled her out of order because the rules, adopted just two weeks earlier, only allowed Nunes to yield time to the legal counsel.

One of the most revealing moments came when Republican Jim Jordan asked Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman to name the individual to whom he spoke about the call. Vindman had earlier testified that he spoke to someone in the intelligence community. 

Vindman had also testified that he did not know who the whistleblower was. When Jordan asked to whom Vindman spoke, Chairman Schiff immediately interjected that he was not going to allow the witness to identify the whistleblower.

Jordan pointed out the obvious logic that if Vindman does not know who the whistleblower is and Schiff had publicly stated that he did not know who the whistleblower is, then how was Vindman outing the whistleblower?

What happens next? It looks like the Intelligence Committee will make a recommendation to the House Judiciary Committee to proceed with formal impeachment hearings. 

The report will present the opinions of the unelected bureaucrats as the troubling proof that the President abused his authority and should be removed. I do not think that Republicans will be allowed to provide a minority report .

Since Democrats have a majority, the Schiff report will be treated as the gospel. Democrats in the House will wring their hands in anguish over this travesty by the President as the Judiciary Committee begins its hearings.

Democrats will wield the power in the House of the simple majority and try to find one Republican to join them. If they find just one Republican to join them, be prepared to hear the term “bi-partisan majority impeachment”  until you are sick of hearing it.  

The high stakes match up comes if Nancy Pelosi goes through with this for a full impeachment vote. Once the matter goes over to the Senate, the Republicans are in control and they will not be gagged. 

All of this going on here at Christmas time is the lump of coal in the stocking for the American people every time they turn on the news. There is a bright side to this though.

Given the dismal viewership ratings of the Schiff hearings, Americans won’t be watching the news. They will be too busy watching Hallmark Christmas movies and shopping.

FacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Trump Holsters Missile Strikes on Iranians

He had them in his sights. All he had to do was say, “Go.”

His generals estimated that within 30 minutes 150 Iranians would not go home alive. As hard as the military tried to avoid it, there may have been civilians killed in the strike.

They refer to that as “collateral damage.” That does not make it sound so bad. After all, this is war. 

In the United States, there is one Commander in Chief who makes the decision. President Trump figuratively had the target(s) in his sights and his finger on the trigger. He made a final decision to lower his weapon and re-holster it – for now. 

In an interview with NBC’s Chuck Todd for Meet the Press, President Trump explained his decision. For the average American watching, his explanation was very clear, logical, and simple. There was no Washington-speak. 

He made it clear that nothing was final up until the point that he made the final decision. “Nothing is green-lighted until the very end because things change.” 

I took a double-dose of Alka-Seltzer and forced myself to read and watch media clips on CNN, MSNBC, Washington Post, and New York Times. I wanted to see what kind of spin they would put on President Trump’s decision. 

As I expected, I saw headlines that included phrases like, “dangerous confusion”, “reversal”, “ordered attack, but called it off”, “sloppy handling”, Trump’s tale strains credulity.” The mainstream media, who just days before were clamoring that the President was bringing us to the brink of Armageddon,  were now saying that he was indecisive. 

It takes time to prepare for a strike, but a strike is not ordered until it is ordered. The mainstream media is intentionally misrepresenting what President Trump himself clearly explained. “Nothing is green-lighted.”

President Trump went on to explain to Chuck Todd that he weighed the response. “They shot down an unmanned drone, …. and here we are sitting with a 150 dead people that would have taken place probably within a half an hour after I said go ahead. And I didn’t like it, I didn’t think, I didn’t think it was proportionate.”

The mainstream media obviously cannot, or refuse to, understand plain language. The President prepared to respond and he easily could have responded. He made the decision that only he could make. 

It was a wise decision. The leaders of Iran need to understand what happened and be thankful that the President did not pull the trigger. He was fully justified if he had launched a retaliatory strike. 

In this case, he took another course of action. Iran knows what could have happened. 

Some say that now Iran will be more emboldened to act. I do not believe that is the case at all. Whether they ever publicly acknowledge it or not, Iran knows that they dodged a bullet and they have no one but President Trump to thank. 

Now, if Iran is wise, they will cease their mischievous behavior. This time, President Trump holstered missile strikes. They are foolish if they expect him to do it again. 

FacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Trump Wins Again – Mexico Acts Positively

Have you ever been in the grocery store and seen a parent, let’s say a mother, with a small child, let’s say a 3 year old boy. The little boy spots a bright shiny package of candy. The mother says, “you can’t have that, you need to put it back.” You know that this will go one of two ways and what happens next will reveal it all. 

One path could be that the little boy says, “yes ma’am” and puts it back as they continue to shop. End of story. 

Well, I try to keep my commentary short, but this is a little too short. Nowadays, unless the boy is shopping with his retired Marine Drill Sergeant uncle, that ending is a rarity. 

Here is the path this story more likely takes. After hearing, “you need to put it back,” the boy tightens his grip on the shiny package of candy, pulls it close to his chest and turns away from his mother. The mother says, “you know that candy is not good for you, so let’s put it back.”Little boy, “No.”

The mother, while still pushing the buggy down the aisle farther away from the candy, says, “well, you know that will give you a tummy ache and you won’t be able to sleep.” She extends her open hand toward the little boy to receive the package of candy. The little boy turns even farther away from his mother, pulling the candy even closer to his chest. He answers, even a little louder this time, “No!” 

Still pushing the buggy down the aisle and rounding the corner to the next aisle, the mother says, “Now, I’m not going to tell you again, we’ll have to put the candy back. I’ll tell you what, I’ll get a nice little toy for you. Won’t you give me the candy?” The little boy now shouts as other customers in the store turn and look. “No! I want this!” 

Fortunately for the mother, she was finished loading her cart so she continues the conversation with her little boy as she strolls to the checkout line. “You are making me sad and your father will be disappointed in you. Please give me the box of candy.” The little boy holds the candy even closer and twists farther away from his mother with another louder shout, “No! I want this!” 

Just before going through the line, the mother stops the buggy and walks to face the little boy as he has twisted far away from her. Now things are really serious. “Give that package to me now. I’m going to count to three. ………. One ………. Two ……….

Moments later, you see the mother pushing the buggy with everything checked and paid for heading out the door. The little boy is happily eating the candy and holding on to the new toy that his mother bought for him. 

This describes negotiations with other countries by the United States in recent history. China has cheated the world in trade deals and everyone knew it. It might be unfair to China to call it cheating since they were just going as far as they could go. 

Iran and North Korea defiantly developed nuclear weapons. The Obama administration made a deal with Iran that was so bad, it makes the mother in the story above look like a stern disciplinarian. 

Mexico, opened their doors for a pipeline of illegal immigration to the United States. Democrats in Congress refuse to support our Border Patrol to protect our citizens. President Trump declared an emergency and is building the wall in spite of the Democrat opposition. 

Then, Trump played another card to stop the flow of illegals through Mexico to the US. He told Mexico to change their behavior and act in a positive, responsible fashion. In other words, “put the candy back.” 

For decades, Mexico and all of these countries acted like the little boy in the grocery store. During those decades, Democrats and Republicans took turns playing the role of the mother. Predictably, every drama ended with the little boy happily eating his candy and playing with his new toy as they left the store. 

This time, Donald Trump is pushing the buggy. This time he set forth expectations and clear consequences that would take effect on June 10.

The mainstream media exploded with doom and gloom. Democrats and Republicans reacted saying that his move was a blunder. Like the 10 spies that Moses sent to the Promised Land, they were saying , “we became like grasshoppers in our own sight.” (Numbers 13:33 NASB)

Mexico, on the other hand, knew that Donald Trump would do what he said he would do. It would hurt them worse than it hurt the United States. 

Mexico deployed 6,000 troops to their Southern border with Guatemala. They took steps to stop the wide-open pipeline. They agreed to do more in a speedy fashion. 

Once again, Donald Trump put America first. The swamp denizens were shouting the equivalent of passages from the 1950’s child rearing advice of Dr. Benjamin Spock. Trump just looked Mexico in the eye and said the equivalent of, “you need to put the candy back.” 

After over two years with President Trump, Mexico knew what was about to happen. They chose to behave in a positive fashion. They put the candy back. Trump wins again!

FacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Mueller’s Hail Mary and Barr’s Interception

I watched Robert Mueller’s press conference. For over two years, I held on to a glimmer of hope that Mueller was trying to do a thorough investigation to find and report the facts. His press conference confirmed solidly in my mind that his entire investigation was not to find the truth but to find that President Trump committed a crime.

He could not find that President Trump committed a crime so he turned the foundational principles of justice on its head. With glaring hypocrisy, Mueller applied the principle of justice to indicted Russians when he said that he would not comment on their innocence or guilt because, “Every defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.”

In President Trump’s case, however, instead of reporting the facts that there was no evidence to charge the President with a crime, he turned the burden of proof upside down. While he extended the presumption of innocence to Russians, for President Trump he said, “if we had had confidence that the President clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so.”

This sounds more like the famous swimming test of a witch trial than American justice. In the swimming test, the accused would be bound with ropes and thrown into a lake. If she somehow managed to get to the surface for air, it was clearly through means of witchcraft. If she sank, then she must not have been a witch.

In the Russian collusion investigation, Mueller also attempted to plant a seed of guilt where there was none. He said, “there was insufficient evidence to charge a broader conspiracy.” Note the modifier, “broader.” He clearly intended to leave the impression that there could have been a conspiracy. It was just that if there was one, it was a county road conspiracy, not an I-75 conspiracy.

Mueller went on to say that he did not come to any conclusion because department policy prohibited charging a sitting President. He said, “we concluded that we would not reach a determination one way or the other about whether the president committed a crime.” Notice the careful use of words when he said that “we would not” not “we could not.”

Mueller’s argument on DOJ policy immediately raises a glaring question. If he was not going to come to a conclusion, then why did he waste millions of dollars over two years to write a 400 page gossip column?

Newt Gingrich quickly knocked down Mueller’s DOJ policy argument. He pointed out that Kenneth Starr’s report on the investigation of President Bill Clinton used the word, “guilty” eleven times with five of those being for obstruction of justice.

In an interview with Jan Crawford, Attorney General Bill Barr said that Mueller could have reached a conclusion. He and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein were both surprised when Mueller did not.

Barr went even farther by pointing out that Mueller’s statement saying that he could not exonerate the President was not DOJ policy either. Barr said that Mueller’s standard of exoneration, “of course is not the standard we use at the department. We have to determine whether there is clear violation of the law.” There was no violation of the law. There was no narrow violation. There was no broad violation. There was no violation.

Mueller also said that the DOJ policy held that the Constitution puts the responsibility on Congress to formally accuse a sitting President. Barr said that he was not sure what Mueller was suggesting but that “the Department of Justice doesn’t use our powers of investigating crimes as an adjunct to Congress. …we are not an extension of Congress’s investigative powers.”

Mueller concluded his press conference by saying that he would not take questions. He went on to say that he had no plans to testify further. Referring to his report, he said, “We chose those words carefully, and the work speaks for itself. And the report is my testimony.”

This raises another glaring question. If the report speaks for itself and is his testimony, then why hold a press conference?

There is a simple answer. Mueller was seeking to find that President Trump committed a crime. He could not because there was nothing to find. Bill Barr released the Mueller report six weeks ago. It was gaining no traction.

Mueller’s press conference was simply a Hail Mary pass. Bill Barr intercepted it in the end zone.

FacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Sonny Hits 50 States

Sonny Perdue in Soybean Field
US Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue

While news coverage focuses on investigations, hearings, subpoenas, and other madness in Washington, DC, one member of the President’s cabinet has been steadily and persistently doing the job to which he has been called.

This week, Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue visited his 50th state. In two years and a few weeks, he traveled to all 50 states plus Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and multiple foreign countries.

He made several RV tours, appropriately named, “Back to Our Roots.” Rolling down the back roads of rural America across multiple states he went to do something spectacular for which Washington, DC is not known. He went to listen.

His travels covered over 100,000 miles. He visited over 100 farms and held nearly 200 townhall meetings.

The people came to meet him. They gathered in barns, school gymnasiums, college campuses, churches, fields, town squares, cafeterias, processing plants, and the list goes on. Governors, members of Congress, State Legislators, County Commissioners, Mayors, farmers, ranchers, teachers, students, pastors, small business owners, homemakers, and small children came to meet Secretary Sonny.

Immediately after Sonny Perdue took the oath of office, President Trump directed him to head up a Task Force on Agriculture and Rural Prosperity. Ninety days later he completed the report with specific recommendations and action plans.

The top recommendation was to make broadband accessible to rural America. He compared it to the national investments in the 1930’s to provide electricity and telephone service to rural areas through the Rural Electrification Act and the Telecommunications Act.

Less than a week after he was sworn in, Sonny went to an elementary school in Virginia and announced that he was rolling back the onerous school lunch regulations of the Obama administration. School nutritionists, also known as the “lunchroom ladies” as he fondly recalled from his childhood, were spending more time trying to comply with rules than feed their students.

Even worse, they were helplessly watching as kids dumped their Obama Approved lunches in the trash. It didn’t take him long to trash the regulations and make school lunches great again.

He restructured the mission areas of USDA to focus on the customer. He slashed regulations. His top priority was opening markets for U.S. agricultural products. He told farmers, “if you grow it, we’ll help you sell it.”

Knowing that agriculture would be the prime target for retaliation by other nations against the President’s trade policy, he diligently worked with President Trump to provide some mitigation. No one likes what the Chinese and other nations are doing to U.S. agriculture but he stands with the President in addressing issues that have been swept under the rug for decades. Farmers, although hurt, are standing with the President.

Sonny took another step that is unheard of in Washington, D.C. He reached out to other agencies to coordinate efforts in overlapping responsibilities.

He was perhaps the most outspoken cabinet member calling on the EPA to get rid of the burdensome and intrusive Waters of the US (WOTUS) Rules. He worked closely with the Department of Labor to help farmers navigate the cumbersome H2A Visa process.

Where the Food and Drug Administration had legal responsibility for some areas of food safety, he worked with them to align USDA regulations. When it came to the farmers, he was like a protective mother bear. He bluntly made it clear that he did not want to have FDA inspectors, who knew nothing about farming, to be treating farms like a pharmacy inspection.

He made sure that USDA had a seat at the table to help shape rules in other agencies so agriculture’s voice was heard. HUD, Department of Energy, Homeland Security, Department of Interior, and more have the fingerprints of Sonny Perdue.

Sonny Perdue’s vision for USDA is that it is the most effective, most efficient, most customer focused agency in the federal government. Just as he did when he was Georgia’s Governor, that vision will come about.

He adopted a motto for USDA, “Do Right and Feed Everyone.” When these trade disputes are resolved and America’s farm products can start flowing in free and open markets, America will be sending food to all corners of the globe to help make that motto a reality.

Fifty states visited in two years. That is doing right.

Congratulations on that Mount Everest of a milestone. America is blessed to have you serve and Georgians are proud of you.

FacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

The Deception of the Equality Act

Last Friday, the Democrat controlled US House of Representatives passed H.R. 5, the Equality Act. That sounds like a noble title. We are a nation of laws and they should be applied in an equal manner.

As with many laws passed in Congress, the name is deceptive. It purports to provide protection against discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. The truth is that it is an assault on religious freedom and it directly attacks the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

If you live in Southwest Georgia, you may wonder how your Congressman voted. Sanford Bishop not only voted for it, he was a proud co-sponsor.

The Equality Act amends the 1964 Civil Rights Act to elevate sexual orientation and gender identify to the same status as “race, color, religion, or national origin”. It would now read, “race, color, religion, sex (including sexual orientation and gender identity), or national origin.” There are other significant changes to the Civil Rights Act.

The Civil Rights Act has a lengthy list of establishments where discrimination is prohibited. The Equality Act adds:

  • “stadium or other place of or establishment that provides exhibition, entertainment, recreation, exercise, amusement, public gathering, or public display.”
  • “any establishment that provides a good, service, or program, including a store, shopping center, online retailer or service provider, salon, bank, gas station, food bank, service or care center, shelter, travel agency, or funeral parlor, or establishment that provides health care, accounting, or legal services.”

It goes further to re-define the word establishment to include, “an individual whose operations affect commerce and who is a provider of a good, service, or program; and (2) shall not be construed to be limited to a physical facility or place.”

It expands the list of establishments and goods and services so that just about anything anywhere is caught in its net. A church or private school that has a gym or family life center would be included. Even broader is “public gathering or public display.”

Under the services it also expands the list by slipping in new ones. Among them are service centers, care centers, shelters, travel agency, and health care.

In Anchorage, Alaska in January 2018, Timothy “Samantha” Coyle, who identifies himself as a female, attempted to enter the Downtown Hope Center. It is a Christian shelter for homeless and battered women. They sleep on mats on the floor and take them up during the day to have room for other programs.

Coyle was drunk and injured from a fight. The Hope Center staff obtained transportation to the hospital for him. The next day he again showed up outside of the hours for overnight admission. Two days later he filed a complaint with the city’s Equal Rights Commission claiming that Hope Center, as a “public accommodation,” discriminated against him because of gender identity.

The Equality Act re-defines the term, “establishment” to include individuals. This is clearly targeting cases such as the cake baker, Jack Phillips, in Colorado. He designs custom cakes and declined to design a cake for a same-sex wedding. The state of Colorado charged him with discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. The Supreme Court ruled in his favor.

The day after the Supreme Court ruling, a transgender lawyer came to Phillips requesting that he design a cake to celebrate a gender transition. When Phillips refused, the state of Colorado again charged him with discrimination.

This time it was on the basis of gender identity. Phillips responded with a lawsuit against the state for harassment. Eventually the case was dropped.

Section 1107 targets the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act by name. It says that act “shall not provide a claim concerning, or a defense to a claim.”

This law has nothing to do with equality. We can already see the consequences of this law based on what has happened with similar municipal ordinances and state laws, such as Colorado’s.

Americans do not care to know about a person’s sexual orientation. They definitely have no interest in making a biological determination of someone’s gender. Neither do they wish to allow someone decide that they will “identify” as the opposite sex and invade the privacy of others.

The bill now goes to the Senate. I trust that Majority Leader Mitch McConnell will exile the bill to the island of misfit law where it belongs.

FacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Democrats on the Wrong Side of Life

House Bill 481, commonly referred to as the Heartbeat Bill, passed in the Georgia House and the Senate. Now it will go back to the House for approval with Senate Amendments.

With some specified exceptions, the bill outlaws an abortion when the doctor can detect the heartbeat of the unborn child. The votes in the House and Senate were both along party lines.

Republicans voted to protect the innocent. Democrats voted to allow the killing of the innocent.

I checked the votes of Democrat legislators from Southwest Georgia. What I saw was disturbing. 

On the Senate side, Democrat Ed Harbison Senate District 15 voted No and Democrat Freddie Powell Sims Senate District 12 voted No. 

On the House side, Democrat Winfred Dukes House District 154 Voted No. Democrat Camia Hopson House District 153 Voted No. Democrat Patty Bentley House District 139 had an excused absence from voting. 

All of these Democrats are African-American. The African-American constituency, especially in the church-going rural South, has been unapologetically opposed to abortion. 

I have worshiped with African-American congregations. We have worked together for our community. I have never heard a church member or pastor imply that abortion was an option. 

They all recognize that an expecting mother is carrying one of their children, nieces, nephews, grandchildren, or friends. They all know that God does not make mistakes and the pregnancy is no accident. They all recognize that this child in the mother’s womb is a precious gift that has a heritage and will one day leave a legacy. 

Every single Democrat in the Georgia Legislature from Southwest Georgia, with the possible exception of Representative Patty Bentley, voted in direct opposition to their constituency. How is it that elected Democrats can throw these foundational beliefs to the side of the road to follow a party line? 

They know that their constituents are pro-life. They hear the messages from the pulpit and in Bible Study week after week. They know what God says. They also know how they voted.

Instead of following the prophetic voice of righteousness, they followed the party line of wretchedness. My African-American friends, this is not merely a political issue. 

No matter what race you are, if Patty Bentley (404-656-0287), Winfred Dukes (404-656-0126), or Camia Hopson (404-656-0287), represents you in the Georgia House of Representatives, call them and tell them to stand up and vote for life.

You have an influence. You can stand for justice and righteousness by making a phone call.

Isaiah 5:20 says, “Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!”

Democrat Stacey Abrams called HB 481, “this abominable bill.” HB 481 is not an abominable bill. 

The cruel killing of unborn babies is the abomination – and Democrats in Southwest Georgia voted to keep it going.

Your vote is being taken for granted. For the sake of your unborn children, do not let them keep using you. 

FacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather