Defending the Judeo-Christian Ethic, Limited Government, & the American Constitution
Sunday July 13th 2014

Self-Educated Man

lincoln family bible study


Read along with us; share your insights, ask questions, post a link that adds to the discussion


Federalist 58 by James Madison. 1. Under the proposed Constitution whose interests were represented by the U.S. Senate? Is it so today? If not, how might it be remedied & by what means? 2. How did the Constitution provide for updating representation in Congress? 3. Madison credits the U.S Constitution with assigning the greatest power, that of the “purse strings” to the U.S. House. In your opinion, how might the House assert that power to reduce the size & cost of government today? 4. Explain in your own words Madison’s warning against too many men serving in the House. How might his warning be applied today as calls abound for a more direct democracy & for scrapping the electoral college system? 5. Is democracy the form of government our Founders gave us or was it a republican form? Explain the difference.


TML is syndicated by:

Google News (Internet)

Newstex - No. 1 Rated Authoritative Content

2012 Victories: Abortion Pill Mandate Temporarily Blocked, Religious Liberty Defended

aclj protestMATTHEW CLARK, ACLJ

This is the latest installment in a year-end series looking back at a few of the hundreds of victories by the ACLJ in 2012.

Dozens of cases have been filed against President Obama’s abortion-pill mandate, which forces people of faith to pay for abortion pills in volition of their religious liberty.  Yet, just a few weeks ago, a federal appellate court for the first time temporarily blocked the mandate for one of our clients.

As this critical case move forward, our clients who own a business in Missouri will not be forced to violate their faith by paying for abortion pills.  We fully expect that the abortion-pill mandate will eventually be decided at the Supreme Court.  This temporary block on the mandate is an important step forward in this critical religious liberty litigation.

The ACLJ has already filed three challenges, including this one, to the HHS mandate and has filed briefs in over a dozen other cases around the country.  Our argument is simple: no American should be forced to violate their faith by paying for abortion pills.  We will continue to defend religious liberty against the nearly limitless resources of the Obama Justice Department, and this is an important victory in the fight for religious liberty.

To help the ACLJ continue to have the resources we need to make these victories possible and continue these fights, please consider making a tax-deductible donation to the ACLJ through our year-end Matching Challenge. Your gift will be matched dollar-for-dollar though the end of the year.


Matthew Clark is an associate counsel with the ACLJ in Media and Government Affairs.


Used with the permission of the ACLJ.