web space | website hosting | Web Hosting | Free Website Submission | shopping cart | php hosting



 By a Student, for the Students”
 FALL 2005


  It might be too long to read here, so I suggest you Print it (95  sheets needed):

  To Print: Go to File Then Press Print. Or better, save it to desktop then open it in
                 Microsoft Word, select View then Print Layout then Print from Word.
                 Do so while connected to the Internet, you MUST be connected online.
  To Save: Go to File then Press ‘Save As.’
  To Add to Favorites: Go to Favorites Then Press ‘Add To Favorites.’

  The best print can only come from the PDF found HERE or found here:

  www.threeq.com  or  Accommunity  or  www.truthseries.org  or  BUY IT HERE  or HERE

 (The current version must have the Notices)

: Oneil McQuick   ReadAbout the Author



Notices  :  Preamble   :  Table of Content  :  Back Cover 



This book is "as is" by using / reading / publishing / producing / distributing this book you agree to indemnify LIM and Mr. McQuick or anyone affiliated with the production or distribution, including websites, hosting and any other third parties, from any liability that might arise from it's use. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE WITH THIS STATEMENT DO NOT USE THIS BOOK or anything from LIM or Mr. McQuick; which is applicable to all "things" outputted by LIM or Mr. McQuick and is hereby universally known so. Thank you and God bless you.







"On the education of its people, the fate of this country depends" (Benjamin D'Israeli).














Liberation International Ministries Publishing (LIMP)



Fall 2005





 Uncut Edition By LiberationIM.org


Uncut means it has not been edited from being initial penned by the “author”, raw from off the potter’s wheel, grammar and spelling was checked though. It is also uncut because often times when copyediting the editor rewords what he thinks something should mean, while it might not mean that; especially with something as spiritually sensitive as biblical revelation. Me using scripture with bad grammar might come out to a whole different meaning when correcting the grammar by the copy editor. Though copyediting make the work flawless grammatically and other such wise, it might detract from the intended meaning and impact given from the author, who receive it from the Holy Ghost. This might not be the case for all books, but one such as this where something is delivered from the Lord (encoder) to the author (decoder) and the meaning is best preserve in its original state even if they are copyediting errors. Any errors that might be cited does not detract from essence or reading and what is sent exegetically is received. The publishing process is bypassed and the work uncut. Similar to having the real orange fruit as against a canned processed with saturated alternatives. The oranges can be peeled by you and you get the juice with all the 'ruffage'; as against it being peeled and manufactured for you with all the things added and done to it that give it less potency (e.g. changing tone). Take the time to peel your orange and eat your fruit. Such are the books published by LIMP, uncut for your spiritual health. Thanks for reading this.




IMPORTANT NOTICE:  All other copies, work-in-progress, unedited, unpublished versions, etc, prior to this copy is obsolete and should be treated as such. References can only be given from this copy, as it is the completion of much research and study. References can only be made “when we had finished our course…the will of the Lord be done” (Acts 21:7-14). This Important notice is encouraged to be on all copies.


COPYRIGHT NOTICE:  © Copyright 2004, 2005, etc, by Oneil McQuick; also in accordance with international regulations on Intellectual Property and Author's Rights. All rights reserved. The author grants permission to non-commercially and commercially distribute the book if you feel led to (please use tact and let it not be beyond affordability). You can do so by hard copies, soft copies, downloads, prints, photocopy prints, e-books and any format or method you wish, in any language, without my further permission. The only condition is that it is not altered in anyway, including the cover, titles and this copyright notice. This is not for profit; the sole purpose is spreading the truth. You are free to quote as much, copy as much, extract as much, make shorter booklets from chapters and other innovation in the way of distribution, only keep it un-altered. There is a free PDF copy online for you to do so; see threeq.com. Though I spent many hours and years in study, research, re-reading, re-writing and waiting on the Lord for revelations, you don’t even have to give me credit, just preach the word; “The Lord gave the word: great was the company of those that published it” (Psalms 68:11). Nevertheless, this Copyright notice should be on all copies at the front of the book, as to further give others the right to distribute the truth. Though I release the right to publishing the book and you have the right to do so, even commercially, “ there is a man whose labour is in wisdom, and in knowledge, and in equity; yet to a man that hath not laboured therein shall he leave it for his portion. This also is vanity and a great evil” (Ecc 2:21). So keep me in your prayers that God may sustain me financially. Nevertheless, I release the rights because I really want the truth distributed unhindered.


SERIES NOTICE:  Truth Series Evolution is the third and last installment of much truth. You have the Truth Series, Truth Series Expanded and then the Truth Series Evolution. Evolution from the dictionary simply means progression and advancements. It is a collection of all the other writings of Oneil McQuick given from God. This includes a wealth of research, articles, tracts, newsletters, magazines, WebPages, pamphlets, booklets and many other publications; mainly those not in the first two installment of the Truth Series. Some names include, “Sexuality Series,” “Bible and Technology Magazine,” “Student Manifesto,” “The Apostolic Voice Newsletter,” “ThreeQ.com,” “LIM Tracts” and many more. Remember, “Giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge” (2 Pet 1:5).


TESTIMONY NOTICE:  They are many testimonies to this work of God, The “Truth Series Evolution,” including the many already from the Truth Series and Truth Series Expanded. Here are just a few:


“Keep holding to the traditions that God gave us. Also please send us the tract…God Bless You” (Shirley and James).


“Thanks for the good advice. I am really enlightened by your research” (Rico Hostallero).


“Hello Beloved, Praise the Lord! I appreciate reading your publication each time. It has educated me in a way and such information” (Pastor Simonson).


“Your weekly newsletter has become a great blessing for me my family and my ministry” (Deacon Brown, Apostolic Holiness Church, Panama city, Panama-Central America).


“This article is outstanding, I agree with every word” (Pastor Upton, apostoliccongress.com).


“It is always nice to learn more and more literature of our Lord Jesus Christ and his coming” (Rita Tx).


True testimonies of the actual truth being done and accomplished is a sign that you are sent and doing the will of God; though it is not to be banked on by you. "He that hath received...[this] testimony hath set to...[My] seal that God is true. For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God" (John 3:33-34).






Many of the occurrences that transpired over the decade in our schools, seem sporadic or an inevitable 'evolution' of a changing society: That is, events such as prayer removal, bible removal, pro-homosexual literature, sustainability education and many more increasing non-traditional moves. However, what many people don't know, even the "traditional" advocates, is that these occurrences are expertly orchestrated. That is, these culminating events are the result of a strategic systematic plan that has been in existence for decades. In case you might think I 'm another conspiracy theorists or empty barrel, take a look at the actual quote for this agenda:


"Education is thus a most powerful ally of humanism, and every American public school is a school of humanism. What can the theistic Sunday schools, meeting an hour once a week, teaching only a fraction of the children, do to stem the tide of a five-day program of humanistic teaching?"


"The Humanist Manifesto calls for, and ultimately succeeds, in replacing God in America's public schools."  (Abstract from humanist manifesto 6/26/1933)


Isn't this what has taken place, stated in 1933? Yet many think it is just coincidental. Not only is "God" hammered out of schools in America, but even the traditional academia is subverted to mere brainwashing, pseudo-academics, socialization and paganism - stepping on the toes of the Christian majority and the purely academic "nay-say." In other words, the humanists have almost completed their agenda, as stated in the Humanist Manifesto. They are mostly non-theistic adherents to a cruel satanic scheme; as stated, mainly to be cultivated in our schools. Organizations such as the ACLU are a small fraction of thousands of organizations that make up a huge, financially powerful world organization: Mostly of fallen angels in flesh, thus they can be any and everybody - Judges, congressman, presidents, senators, bank owners, school board members, teachers, parents and even students. The same ones dating back from 1933 and beyond, up till now. See Part 1, section 14. "We wrestle not against flesh and blood," so the best methods are spiritual (prayer, fasting, etc). But action must also be taken!


The student manifesto intends to combat this wicked onslaught and call on all educators/persons to join in an educational reformation; to foster the best educational system in the world.


Disclaimer: The author, Oneil McQuick, is not carrying out indenture, representation or endorsement in the name of any institution or person. Where they may have been cited or mentioned is only experimental or expository that have been cited for examples and references, which is completely legal; as in mentioning ACLU, NEA, the community college I went to (BCC), President Bush, Darlene Williams or even the teachers that taught me. All Public figures or employed by the public (government) and decent Private individuals. The Student Manifesto is “Not For Sale” or a sole commercial output, where it maybe offered for sale online is done so you may get a paper back copy if you please, otherwise it can be freely downloaded and printed or reproduced unaltered. Any proceeds received are mainly to cover the cost of doing so, to the third party online publishers and book designer; the author receives no money as an author.






Section 1: Evaluation of teachers that taught me at Broward Community College (BCC)




Section 2: Group Grading Policy

Section 3: Essay Grading Policy

Section 4: Clothing Policy

Section 5: General Ed. Classes for Non-majors

Section 6: Video In Class Teaching

Section 7: Flexible Testing

Section 8: Flexible Video Learning

Section 9: Online learning

Section 10: Manual Back Up

Section 11: Christian Literature Mandate

Section 12: Student Handbook

Section 13: Commendations (BCC)

Section 14: Fallen Angelology




Section 1: Education Has Become Mainstream Humanism

Section 2: What is our Text Books Teaching?

Section 3: Bring God in America Again







Section 1: Uniforms for all Students

Section 2: Revival of Corporal Punishment

Section 3: Sex Education, Students and The Truth

Section 4: Public Libraries

Section 5: Home Schooling

Section 6: Mandatory Biblical Teaching and Christian Service

Section 7: Last Word and Prophecy                                                                                                BACK TO TOP


















“That God might manifest them” (Ecc 3:18)











Overall, the teachers were good; in fact, some were "world class." However, I see a lacking for teachers to care more. That is, to really be enthusiastic in striving to make the students learn and obtain a passing grade. Nonetheless, this is a problem that affects schools nation wide and probably worldwide. A quick demonstration in striving to "better a student" happened recently in a class by Mr. Stitsky. Though I never needed to take advantage of it, he made it available that if a student fails a test, he or she has the option of taking it over. Rather than the attitude of, "that's your final grade, you failed, bye!" That's the sentiment most of us often feel. That is, the teachers are here to prepare "cookie-cutter" students and those who don't fit that frame, get dropped. In a real world environment, not everyone can make the "cookie-cutter" student; and not everywhere demands a pre-built "stiff Jacket".


What teachers should strive to do is, with all empathy, make sure their students pass the class and learn at the same time. If both are not obtained, you as a teacher have failed. Caring, compassion, understanding and enthusiasm are needed. As a student, what would inspire me to go on is that the teacher really wants me to learn and better myself. With some teachers, I don't feel that. The sentiment that is held of teachers by most, is that they're here to stand before the class, say this, grade that and leave.


Different factors might cause this, example, an undesirable salary. An undesirable salary reduces motivation and dampens enthusiasm, except you really love to teach. This most often happens because many persons, now, are entering the teaching industry to obtain a secure employment, rather than the original motive of a passion to help and educate others. One saying goes like this, "Learning before labor before you grow old, because learning is better than silver and gold. Silver and gold will vanish away, but a good education will never decay." So if what you teach students will not decay it means that you are left with one of the greatest responsibilities of mankind (Prov. 22:6). For if you teach them foolishness, secular humanism, hate, ungodliness, etc., it will not decay, if God doesn't allow it. So what they are taught is what they become, and they can't become anything than what they are taught. The responsibility of teachers are grossly underestimated, along with the curriculum they are given: And yet, "Modern cynics and skeptics...see no harm in paying those to whom they entrust the minds of their children a smaller wage than is paid to those to whom they entrust the care of their plumbing" (John F. Kennedy)?


In addition to the education needed to be teachers, they should be yearly mandatory courses on things like mediation, lay-counseling and such other courses. You'd be surprise how these would help improve what was mentioned above. For instance, the traffic violation class/video that is given when a traffic violation occurs is most effective. I thought it was foolishness, until I sat through one for allegedly speeding. I was changed in my view of drivers and driving - caution is really needed on the roads. Doctors spend years in training to operate on patients, so teachers shouldn't be trouble at added training; for what they are doing is more impacting the individuals in our society. Teaching is not just academics, but the influence a teacher has on a student can make or break them. They are also the ones who teach the doctors. Therefore, periodic psychological training can help our teacher/student relationship. For BCC, it shouldn't be an extra monetary burden; just use your own facilities, taught by your own psychologist, Dr. P. Nash. If needed, she can be paid to do more intense research and training, to teach the staff periodically. The same can be said for some other courses you may pay teachers to go on; example, computer competency - Just call Mr. Kingston (computer personnel) from downtown to do a class.


This added mandatory psychological training might push away the job seekers and the true educators will press through to fulfill his/her passion. Then reward those bountifully ($), so they can stick to it and receive the benefits due.


All necessary incentive must be put in place to ensure this in a college environment: Especially when students can feel they are being taken advantage of, because to them, their tuition is paying the teachers. Not saying that is entirely true, but as against other schools, college students are paying for their education and are in a position to demand higher standards. One student wrote:


Article from the Bcc Observer, Opinion Section.


In closing, I can't speak for the other curriculums (175 in total), but my experience in the BCC Graphics Technology Curriculum (A.S) was great. It is one of the best graphics curriculums, and I've looked around. I don't think other community colleges have the same high caliber of teachers and state of the Art Equipments and facilities. Good job! The next following pages will give the individual evaluation of each teacher that taught me, except the music classes taken: Along with the rest of Part 1 of this manifesto, other college commendations and problems will also be seen.


Clause 1

Teacher: Ms. Cabbasa

Class(es) Taught: Art Appreciation


This is another of those classes and teacher I appreciate greatly. If I could just have the time to even sit with her and glean from her vast knowledge - an expert in Art history and appreciation. And despite her age, her teaching methods and grading are commendable; and most of all understandable. In fact, as someone from the "old school", she uses videos in her class. The only thing is that many consider her a push over, and even attempt to cheat in tests and laugh about it. One person leaving the exam opted to give me an answer to which I refused. Then afterward and even before, commented that she was "easy." This is where I must caution you to protect the "ancients." Human teachers like her take years to develop and such knowledge should not be taken for granted or allowed to by anyone else. She is a great addition to the line of great teachers at BCC.



Scale rating of overall benefit to students:



Note: Scale ratings are not just based on teaching skills, but other things the teacher may contribute to the students. See part 1, section 1, clause 12.



Clause 2

Teacher: Ms. E. Solis

Class(es) Taught: Digital illustration


Although she was very adept in design, her inability to communicate effectively hampered 'us' from taking advantage of her skills. Most often I'm left to figure things out and could hardly understand when she speaks. However, I got enough from the class to know the tools and have workable knowledge of illustration and illustrator; producing some good original works and one integrated with some textbook works.



Scale rating of overall benefit to students:



Note: Scale ratings are not just based on teaching skills, but other things the teacher may contribute to the students. See part 1, section 1, clause 12.



Clause 3

Teacher: Ms. T. Hall

Class(es) Taught: Drawing 1


Though I probably had a negative view of her in class, I now realize that she was a good teacher, though plagued by “temperaments.” I guess she had those mood swings because she also taught school children and tried to equate us with them; which will not have good teacher/student relationship results. Adults need to be treated like adults. Nevertheless, it wasn't such a big problem that we couldn't learn, just something to note. I'd lost the art of Pencil drawing and regained it with her, as seen in my portfolio.



Scale rating of overall benefit to students:



Note: Scale ratings are not just based on teaching skills, but other things the teacher may contribute to the students. See part 1, section 1, clause 12.



Clause 4

Teacher: Mr. D. Roman

Class(es) Taught: Audio/Video Editing, Digital Imaging
                                and Typography


My best class with Mr. Roman was digital imaging. From that class I could give the best commendation of him. I learnt Photoshop, design techniques and I admired his design skills. In fact, his designs I emulate - simple, structured and aesthetic. He brought that same mood and presentation in class. In fact, he was the only teacher that gave a step-by-step handout of how to do something, and even that was designed visually appealing. After that class I embarked on various projects of my own, especially haven't done web publishing. This class was well taught and I learnt.


His other classes were also good, but lesser than the first. Probably because they were outside interferences that disrupted student/teacher relationship. Like stolen files, then some showing up again; for typography class. Or, deliberate corruption of my final video file - most often originating from outside hacking. I'd asked to do over the files in typography class, which were a lot, he said no. Yet, for the next project I finished two classes early before everyone, and had those two classes free (two weeks), doing nothing, while everybody was working. Then at the end of the course and everybody scrambling to finish the last project, he announces that if anyone wants to do over projects or fill in any, they can. Of course, I was appalled, with little time left to do nothing extra. The video class had problems too. Most often these were problems that arise from a productive program. He still remains a good teacher and artist, whose work I admire. But dealing with adult class related problems need to be worked on - especially when the problems arise from a good productive program - unavoidable. Overall, I learnt, especially Photoshop and adobe after effects (video editing), plus pass the classed; and that's what usually counts on the "records." Other things are not explainable.



Scale rating of overall benefit to students:



Note: Scale ratings are not just based on teaching skills, but other things the teacher may contribute to the students. See part 1, section 1, clause 12.



Clause 5

Teacher: J. Dietrich

Class(es) Taught: Desktop Publishing


She's qualified and very knowledge in desktop publishing. But I think I could get more from her; she cannot fully relate what she wants to say. She was too reserved and not as proactive as I desire my teachers to be. But she was a flexible teacher and I did learn the software, quark, and other desktop publishing etiquettes.



Scale rating of overall benefit to students:



Note: Scale ratings are not just based on teaching skills, but other things the teacher may contribute to the students. See part 1, section 1, clause 12.



Clause 6

Teacher: Mr. J. Elam

Class(es) Taught: Speech


The Elamite himself. I thoroughly enjoyed this class and learnt a great deal, more than I wish to learn; especially from the students. This is the perfect General Ed. In fact, it’s one of those textbooks that I didn't think to sell back, but kept it for reference. Speech class is more than just speech, it taught and touches on many aspects of communication. It thoroughly thrilled my soul, as I do a lot of communication and hope to do a lot more. The class and syllabus is one thing, but without an adept, outspoken, knowledgeable and interactive teacher like Mr. Elam, it wouldn't be great. The projects were also great, we did a news presentation and I got to use the overhead projector and laptop in one of my presentations. This class had everything facilitated, "structure and flexibility," interaction, bluntness, expression and a constant flow with everybody. There was even a session were food was involved, but I didn't get to take part in the "eatings" because of a fast. Mr. Elam's teaching skills really reflects his course - effective communication. The teachers should also be taught by him – on how to communicate what they intend to say to the students: Especially that the students are usually from a very diverse background. He himself got through to all the students in his class effectively, and in his class were White Americans, Black Americans, Iraquians, Jamaicans, Haitians, other Caribbeans and other backgrounds.



Scale rating of overall benefit to students:



Note: Scale ratings are not just based on teaching skills, but other things the teacher may contribute to the students. See part 1, section 1, clause 12.



Clause 7

Teacher: Ms. L. Yater

Class(es) Taught: 2-D Design


She's really a good teacher and very helpful. Somewhat epitomizes the harmony of "teaching, empathy, passion and enthusiasm." If her teaching skills are weak, her other attributes make her a valuable asset to the staff. I recommend her to other students, especially those seeking a degree in the arts. There's time when I feel I just couldn't bother with this class, but she motivated me and gave added instructions. That's what teachers should also do, bring out the best in the students. It shouldn't be purely mundane academics, but rather, a passion of theirs. Moreover, I learnt a few other skills, though I specialize in purely computer-generated works. One of my works was even hanged over the entrance near the student gallery exhibition at the Central Campus, in the winter term 2004. She's also knowledgeable, warm and uses the facilities (overhead projector, computer, steam roller, etc) to aid her teaching. Two thumbs up.



Scale rating of overall benefit to students:



Note: Scale ratings are not just based on teaching skills, but other things the teacher may contribute to the students. See part 1, section 1, clause 12.



Clause 8

Teacher: Mr. L. Stitsky

Class(es) Taught: Graphic Design 2 and

                               Introduction to Graphic Design


Exceptional teacher and very professional. Though some might say he's a bit mundane because of his intellectual interjections, I think it’s great. Students are in college and should entertain and use the language of the course professionally. Simple sentence should turn to complex sentences and a mastery of words achieved. Using what some called "big words" should then be welcomed and emulated. Knowing what you're doing is important, but communicating what you are doing is also important. He also does it in a way that what is said can be understood; that is, use the word and then explain it. There is also many other commendable teaching qualities he posses and he's very flexible; makes you feel he really wants you to pass or be successful. That's what is needed in teachers - that passion, enthusiasm and care. His class is also very clear and structured; the syllabus outlines what will be done each day. I guess his kind of expertisee comes with much experience, but it was a pleasure to have been taught by him. And my graphics language I.Q is up a little more, as well as much graphics fine tuning.



Scale rating of overall benefit to students:



Note: Scale ratings are not just based on teaching skills, but other things the teacher may contribute to the students. See part 1, section 1, clause 12.



Clause 9

Teacher: Mr. G. Esper

Class(es) Taught: General Biology


One of the most flexible teachers, especially as a rookie. His teaching skills are average and you understand what is being taught. The workload, testing and teaching is distributed fairly. Plus there is much class participation. In a non-traditional classroom located in a corporate area, we were able to go on an outside field trip; based on what was being studied. They were many visual aids used as well - projectors, internet search, PowerPoint and a huge microscope that was televised on a screen. Much fascination and learning, to my delight.



Scale rating of overall benefit to students:



Note: Scale ratings are not just based on teaching skills, but other things the teacher may contribute to the students. See part 1, section 1, clause 12.



Clause 10

Teacher: Ms. C. Mosley

Class(es) Taught: English (ENC1101)


A very enthusiastic and proactive teacher, who also demonstrates a mastery in the knowledge of English; and often times speak it fluently and succinct. However, she does relate to us in the mixed forms of English we speak. She is also well prepared for class and gives many helpful handouts freely. She also gives a listening ear, demonstrated by a liberal distribution of her phone number. Grading is flexible, as papers can be turned in again for better grades - this encourages learning. Other things could be said, but overall she's a good teacher.


One thing to note about the English classes today, they are frequent things called Journal entries. This is good as it causes the student to do impromptu writing and less writing out of class. But it also does something else. It records the allege thought patterns and psychological make-up of the individual – as a diary is alleged to do. However, what it does it invades and sets up the individual for future adverse implications. For instance, an “agent” might say and use as evidence that this person is a psycho-path from his youth, look at his class journal entries: When in fact, other things were the cause of this being brought up – things that cannot be accounted for humanly. The way you though in former years is not usually the way you are thinking now. If that be the case you might be mentally challenged. If at 30 you think like 13, you are developmentally impaired and have not grown. Journal entries and other personal writings can then be a weapon in the hands of a wicked person (s), seeking to undermine an individual; and most often it is twisted to do so.


However, the only pieces of writing that weren’t collected in this class was the journal entries, it was only briefly looked over for completion and given back to us on the spot.


Scale rating of overall benefit to students:



Note: Scale ratings are not just based on teaching skills, but other things the teacher may contribute to the students. See part 1, section 1, clause 12.



Clause 11

Teacher: Ms. P. Nash

Class(es) Taught: Psychology


A very vivacious teacher, who demonstrates by her "wholeness," that she not only teaches psychology but practices it. That is, looking healthy, radiant and a nice attitude. Not only that, but she has a mastery of the subject, which can be clearly seen in her orations. Not necessarily sprouting the lingo of psychology, but breaking it down to us that we may understand. I wish I could have more classes with her, but time doesn't allow: I'm in her flexible video learning class. I must also commend her for being able to co-author a book that is used as the class text, much accolades to BCC for having her.



Scale rating of overall benefit to students:



Note: Scale ratings are not just based on teaching skills, but other things the teacher may contribute to the students. See part 1, section 1, clause 12.



Clause 12

Teacher: Ms. A. Sobchak

Class(es) Taught: Graphic Dgn. Industry (Graphics Technology Industry)


I don't know how BCC did it, but she's a steal for the Graphics Technology Industry class. With her position as AIGA co-president, she can easily get contacts and tours to places others couldn't - people and places worth going to. High powered print shops and graphic firms, making the student in her class really exposed to the industry. In fact, in one of our tours to a rare books collection, I saw a bible dating from the 16OO's in Aramaic-Geez.


Apart from that, her teaching skills are fair and personality commendable. The only thing I didn't like with her class, is that I didn't get back my graded essay and my test paper wasn't given back for me to keep, for time to properly evaluate. I was told I got an 'A' for the class. That is good and definitely welcomed, but generally, how can a student know what made them get an 'A' or 'F' if they don't get back their paper to evaluate and reference. And in my case, I often write things that when reread, I think WOW, this is deep. This should not be hard to do, as teachers have a free copier to use; demonstrated in my English class where all papers are returned upon being copied. Nevertheless, she’s a new teacher, but has adjusted herself well.



Scale rating of overall benefit to students:



Note: Scale ratings are not just based on teaching skills, but other things the teacher may contribute to the students. See part 1, section 1, clause 12.



Clause 13

Teacher: Mr. F. McCa.

Class(es) Taught: Web publishing, Final Production

                                Advance Digital Imaging, Portfolio,

                                Ad and Promo Design and Digital Photography


He’s one the most outstanding of all the teachers. I'm not saying this because he's the program manager, and would expect not to with the *cluster charges, but fact is fact - he's good. Not only does he have a great knowledge and expertisee in the courses taught, but he can relate it to us better than most other teachers. Not only that, he often does it with a great sense of humor. A great length is put forward to ensure the program has the best equipments and facilities: Expensive cameras for students in the photography class, a photo studio, new iMacs and much software that aren't available at the central campus Mac lab. As can be seen with the classes taught above, he's very hardworking and multitasked; undertaking many classes each semester over and above his program manager duties. The best part is, I get to express myself in his class. We are encouraged to formulate projects and ideas, as we feel led - bringing out the creative individuals in us. Much info and materials are also given, and vital industry information is also often related. As I've said, I have learnt much from his classes - with his unique style of teaching and flexibility. His teaching skill alone gets a ten on the scale, not to mention the other stuff he brings to the students. Other things are not explainable.


Scale rating of overall benefit to students:



Note: Scale ratings are not just based on teaching skills, but other things the teacher may contribute to the students. See part 1, section 1, clause 12.  *could be bullied by... see Part 1, section 14.


Clause 14

Person: Mr. B. Kingston

Job: Downtown Center Computer Technician


If there is one person or position that is indispensable at BCC, downtown center, that person is Mr. Kingston. Hardly can you find someone who is extremely competent in both Mac's and PC's. Not just usage, but fixing, setting up and programming. Seeing that all things are computerize at BCC, especially at the Downtown center where the school administration is, Mr. Kingston is then essential to its "running." Without Mr. Kingston or his position (which can hardly be filled), the campus would shut down or couldn't run properly. If the computers can't work, none of the admin departments can function and many classes would have to be cancelled. I hope his pay reflects his weight, as someone like him can easily find a job anywhere. On the reverse side, see Part 1, section 10.


In addition, the LRC computer lab has computers that are always optimized. The needed softwares are always loaded, and if necessary, anything else can be loaded by you with no harm to the computer – for it refreshes upon start-up, neat invention. That’s the reason for an administrator account on Windows XP, as against a guest account. We are given full access privilege. All PC’s are optimized this way at DTC (or WHC) and probably all the campuses, making the computer damage free. Any problems, restart the computer. Not only that, but they restart twelve midnight each night. What DTC (or WHC) has that no other campus has, is a separate drive to store work even if the computer restarts – even a neater invention. All public computers should be this way.


Mr. Kingston hardly speaks and you can hardly find him, for he’s most often attending a computer or electronic device somewhere.


Scale rating of overall benefit to students:



Note: Scale ratings are not just based on teaching skills, but other things the teacher may contribute to the students. See part 1, section 1, clause 12.






The purpose of a group project is to work cohesively and pool individual talents as one; as often as that is facilitated. The purpose of this is defeated when grade is given individually. If you're going to give individual grade, let them work individually. If as a group, and the group project gets an 'A', all should get an 'A.' The impact one individual in the group can have will never be known or weighted correctly. For instance, the idea is what makes an advertising campaign work; yet the brainstormer did little of the graphic work. Which one is more valid? The one who did 90% of the graphic work or the one who mind mapped everything? They both work collaborately and both should reap the same reward. I was in a class where we were given a group project which entailed 10-15 pieces. We did a lot of brainstorming and I did give my “2 cents” more than all; though the theme was really not to my liking. For instance, each person was to come up with 1 slogan on paper, I gave 16: Whereby one of mine was chosen, less one word. I started several of the pieces but they were finished by someone else, who had a better expertisee I guess - benefit of working in group. The project turned out great, an 'A' project. Yet I was told I got a 'C' because none of the finished pieces were solely by me, despite my involvements in them. Isn't group work about “group work” and the group wins together - all for one, one for all; thus, everyone should receive the same grade. I just accepted it.


The next project was to do the same thing, but because it wasn't a group, it should be about 5-7 pieces. I ended up doing nearly 30 pieces alone, and finished before the rest of the class; who were struggling with 5 pieces. I had time also to help others with their projects. I could have gone ahead and done everything while in the group. But in a group, loads are shared, people specialize, division of labor occurs and individual talents/abilities are sacrificed and merged into the group. This give a quality group output and all share the benefits together, as in a real world environment. You hear after production, "hey I put that dot over that 'i', or I drew everything, I came up with the idea, I proofed everything, I stood in for the president informally. BUT, we did it and the 2 million dollars will be divided equally." This cannot be taught properly in schools, if after the group effort, different grades are given; instead of a properly one grade for all. It's like saying the Detroit Pistons won the championship, but the point guard lost or shouldn't get a ring, because he didn't make a triple double that final night. I hope this is looked into.





Teachers should not read all the essays "at one go." They should be read systematically - hours or days apart in small clusters. If a teacher reads 30 essays "at one go," it would be unfair to the persons who are numbers 23-30. At a point, diminishing Returns sets in, coupled with exhaustion, fatigue and boredom; especially if the topic is set - she'll be reading the same thing, as average minds think alike. The student's paper that gets read last will automatically get a lower grade. A systematic reading procedure can be a suggestion to teachers or even better, mandated.





It is recommended that a dress code be enforced; seeing that we can't mandate adults to wear uniforms. I can't help but see a fashion show being entertained in our colleges: A distracting fashion show for both the "super models" and inadvertent onlookers, like me. One big reason is that the fashion today (fad) is geared towards dressing sexy. Even the high school students on campus from the college academy are imitating this trend, and sometimes even more outrageously. It's distracting to learn when you have to constantly see thong prints, 90% of the breasts, the cheeks of the buttocks and even sometimes pubic hair, in a group-learning environment. I can remember a few times this lady wore a shorts so short, each time she bends over or stretches, her buttocks' cheeks keep showing almost to the anus. Then there was another time this lady wore a garment with no 'bra', that her breasts were visible seen through her clothes - the circuit of it, with the outer rings and the nipples.


Break down the very word sexy, it obviously has something to do with or originate with sex appeal. Sex appeal is basically sexual attractiveness. In other words, dressing sexy is not just a fad, but dressing sexy is to dress to entice the opposite sex for sex. Or, you could say, prepped for sex. Today, many would say that is wearing lingerie or a fetish outfit. But dressing sexy in a tight belly blouse and low cut jeans can have that effect; especially with nipples "printed out" and the underwear lining is visible. Showing half your chest with jeans so low the pubic hair is showing is enticing the opposite sex for sex. What we don't realize is that it has become our culture and we live in a sex driven society. This intent in dressing is not arbitrary, it is a psychological intended process; saying, if you look at me you must want me. The designers do this consciously, or they are engulfed in years of this sexy fad themselves. When this got out of control, dressing sexy became the normal attire. Then you have girls making stupid comments like, "I don't like it, men keep looking at me." What does she expect, if she has on tight shorts with a thong printing out and skimpy belly blouse? What you are is what you attract. For instance, dodo attracts flies. Similarly, dressing sexy attracts a person with sex on their mind. You don't want to be 'hit on', quit dressing sexy. Dressing that way has the opposite sex thinking only one thing - sex - which is the purpose for dressing sexy anyway. Unfortunately, our youths and populace take upon themselves the fads of the day, and thus become victims of fashion. Not knowing their attire is to psychologically stir the erogenous “bone” in the opposite sex. Dressing modestly lessens you being "hit on," humble your mind and even keep you from feeling sleazy or horny from your attire; to push you to the next level - sexual intercourse. Most people don't even realize that dressing sexy is more sexually appealing and enticing than being naked. A super model in lingerie will charge up a man to want her sexually, than that same super model naked. It's a psychological process designers have mastered over the years, and unfortunately, everyone is doing it. Dressing sexy should not be tolerated in our colleges; but unfortunately, there is hardly anything solid that can be done about it. Except for the Ivy League schools, that can put demands on students because students fight to be there. With an intuitive mind as "yours," some efforts can be made to curtail this college wide.


If a dress code is enforced, these should be excluded while going to classes:- no short mini-skirts; "suck on" tight jeans or pants; tank tops alone; anything excessively showing the navel area, breasts or buttocks; underwear shouldn't be visible, either directly seen or printed out; tops so tight the breasts are perfectly shaped; and anything on those lines.


In closing, just to lighten up a serious situation and demonstrate what an innocence matter can cause, take this joke:


A young female teacher was giving an assignment to her 6th grade class one day. It was a large assignment so she started writing high up on the chalkboard. Suddenly there was a giggle from one of the boys in the class. She quickly turned and asked, "What's so funny, Pat?" "I just saw one of your garters!" "Get out of my class," she yells, "I don't want to see you for three days!" The teacher turns back to the chalkboard. Realizing she had forgotten to title the assignment, she reaches to the very top of the chalkboard. Suddenly there is an even louder giggle from another male student. She quickly turns and asks, "What's so funny, Billy?" "I just saw both of your garters!" Again, she yells, "Get out of my classroom! This time the punishment is more severe, I don't want to see you for three weeks!" Embarrassed and frustrated, she drops the eraser when she turns around again. So she bends over to pick it up. This time there is a burst of laughter from another male student. She quickly turns to see Little Johnny leaving the classroom. "Where do you think you're going?" she asks. "From what I just saw, my school days are over!" (What’s hot, 2004, volume 3, number 2)





I think General Ed. classes for non-majors should be different from the existing class curriculum. For instance, a graphic student shouldn't go through the rudiments of a biology major for a single biology class. He's not going into the field and basically doing it because it is required. It's called a General Ed., so is should be general - layman type argument. It should be so general that it cannot be failed. Either cut the syllabus in half or tweak-it-as-you-go and make that class only for non-majors; especially in the A.S. programs. Such classes as Biology, Psychology, Math and others.





There should be more video in-class teaching. Not just showing a documentary, but interact with the video; not holographic or virtual reality. But demonstrate processes or what is being taught. There's a few classes that briefly has this, but a compact integration of constant "video and professor" teaching should help the students learn better; as they learn by seeing.


As I wrote in an introduction to my 2-D class, video learning is most effective and puts graphic designers in a position to be virtually unemployed in the future; holding all things constant. Reason being, in the future, all learning will be audio visual. Slide shows, videos, animations and others. Teaching in the standard way will become lame and everything graphically driven - in relation to motion. The reason this is more effective is that humans retain a higher percentage of what they see, than what they are verbally instructed, according to studies and logics. This can be backed by the famous quote, "tell me and I might see, teach me and I may understand, show me and I will learn" (paraphrased from a US President I saw in a Key Club literature in 1998). This phenomenon is also backed by the famous cliché, "A picture is worth a thousand words;" especially in motion. It simply means that audio visual education is the best method of retention and the best motivation to learn; if properly done. Therefore, you can see the impact television is having on our minds - silently educating us (conditioning) to its implied program; even if it is not ethically, socially and biblically sound. Then we wonder where all the violence, paganism and other societal problems are being fused. Education should take advantage of this phenomenon in our classrooms and instill good academics - having read part 2 of this manifesto. Not necessarily mandating a carry home video, but actual videos in class that also interacts with teacher. For instance, she explains a process, it is then shown or demonstrated on the screen; of course, given limitations, like an explanation of sexual intercourse. Much like how the whether is given, with the person and the Doppler radar screen.


Though I'm citing these advantages, I must also caution you that this is another setting of the stage for what is seen in the movie matrix. Upon realizing the influx of audio visual outputs, as demonstrated in the movie "Minority Report," coupled with the influx of knowledge, humans will be overwhelmed and the next step is to either download the knowledge in their brain or other such exploits; as seen in the movie "Dark City." This might seem far fetch, but visit MIT and look at some of the ideas they're experimenting. Or even the evolution of the cell phone - implanted under your skin, linked to your nerves and answered by the tap of the fingers. Just in case you might think I'm crazy, this was seen on a local news and the demonstration was successful. Suggestion and caution is therefore given in this section, for with progression comes a price. Remember, life is simple.


Note: Be careful of things I've written in a piece called "Modern Technology," found at http://groups.msn.com/accommunity/moderntechnology.msnw  or  http://www.tracks4u2.0catch.com  (numerical zero catch)  or  http://www.threeq.com.





Testing sometimes seems so unfair, because you can be a good student and one test can make you fail a course. However, how else can you know a student has learned; except for portfolio driven classes (E.g. graphics course)? Thus, testing is a must. The student friendly solution is flexible testing. It corrects the problem of a good student failing a course by failing a test. We want students to pass, but we also want them to learn. What flexible testing does is simply have a test every week and at the end of that course, the teacher chooses the best three scores of the student and allows him to pass. Not three overall best scores on the tests the class did, but individually. For instance, a student's best scores are on test C, test E and Test H. Another student’s best scores are on test A, test B and test D. It allows the student to pass the course, and learn at the same time. It might seem unorthodox, but it should work. Having a test a week is hectic and forces the student to work and study constantly. The workload alone ensures that they learn and the flexible testing makes sure they don't fail the course. We don't need a good student failing, but we have to ensure they learn and testing is still the best way. I don't know about the FCAT and other non-college tests for children, but I do see the fuss on the news. What would be good is to have two to three retakes before the next school term, so students who fail can avoid being repeated and placed in a school with their other peers. If taking the test three times before the next school term and failing, then the test is a good barrier to promote otherwise " illiterate" students to go further when they need to pass that level; holding all things constant. Constantly pushing the "illiterate" student ahead would produce at the end of his school life, an "educated derelict;" which unfortunately categories many. With all this, the crying protesting mother of a FCAT failing student should be grateful the child is held back, that at the end of his school life, she'll have something to be proud about. In this case, “leaving the child behind” might be a good thing. Also, the very dread of this happening will push the student, caregiver and teacher to ensure no one is “left behind.” Testing, therefore, helps the education system along greatly, but given other variables involved, should be flexible.





The flexible video learning class is excellent, designed for individuals who are highly motivated. Meeting 5 times for the semester and two are for exams - midterm and finals. There is a flaw though. The objective of a class should not only be that students learn but also pass the class. For instance, for numerous reasons, a good student who watched the videos and read the textbook can fail one of the two tests and fail the course. This shouldn't be, especially if it's a General Ed. Class. What should be done is, still have the two tests, but also a mandatory research essay that is design to show that the student had to research to even do the essay. All three are graded, but the essay grade is optional. That is, after doing the course and one of the tests is failed, use the grade of the essay to make the student pass. This is a fair system that fosters both learning in a flexible curriculum and passing the student at the same time; especially in a general Ed.


*There is an essay that is optional only, for those in a writing course and need writing credits.





Though this might seem to be going well, online learning is most risky. Not just for the school, but more so for the teachers and students. Having spent a great deal of time online, with all its "hang-ups," I've written a document called, "Internet Concealed Intensions" (ICI). From it you'll learn that any average hacker can manipulate an online program. That hacker could be a student who manipulate his scores, extend time on an online test and basically have his way in the system. Even further, earning several degrees online this way - in the span of year, he could have a couple of masters and doctorate degrees. You wouldn't believe what people have opened themselves to when they surf the internet. For the students, his computer could be hacked, and basically anything done - from not being able to log on, to buttons being unpressable, to half the screens not visible, to a mirror or fake page he's testing on or getting instructions from: Often with the culprit laughing in the background. These and many other things can be easily done, things I've experienced myself. Not only that, but simply viruses or worms can do even more damage by hacking the school server or the student's computer; Norton reports over 30,000 new viruses each month. If such delays happen on the student's part, his excuse won’t be accepted and he'll get a failing grade for the course. Any arbitrary person with computer knowledge can cause trouble. Not only that, innocent things can happen. For instance, many students accessing the server for a test can jam it, slow it down and persons while doing a test can be constantly "kicked off." The turmoil that can happen online is endless. It behooves you to read the ICI document and leave the school in the classroom.


Note: The ICI document can be found at http://www.tracks4u2.0catch.com com  (numerical zero catch)  or http://www.threeq.com/pages/internet.html





I've notice that BCC and other schools have gone all out online - registration, payments, materials, courses and almost everything. Again, though this works and possesses many benefits, it behooves you to have manual backups always ready at hand. As explained in the online classes (Part 1, section 9) and the ICI document, the Internet is just an accident waiting to happen. Much of the stuff that happens with online epidemic goes unnoticed. For instance, a simple virus caused a bank millions of dollars to fix and possible loss of data. Even the Y2K problem seemed like a hoax, but the world was relatively prepared and a few countries experienced costly problems. A good example would be what happened the other day. I tried to get my transcript from the BCC website and it wasn't there, some weird error came up. I called someone, he said I could log into facts.org and get it there. I did and it wasn't there either. There were even problems of logging in on both sites; both staff witnessed this. We were left at a standstill and he said he'll try to get it some other time or some other place.


With the emergence of technology, we are forced to depend and rely upon it, a most dangerous trap. People's lives could be affected by electronic problems at our schools, especially records. It should then be mandated that everything electronic must have manual backup.


I was going to mention other areas manual backups and the ICI effect influences, like new electronic voting to even lie detector tests – once it’s electronic today, it’s manipulative and deceptive. But I though not to do so because it didn’t fit into education that much. However, I saw this newspaper clipping and it verifies section 9 and 10 of Part 1. Even worse, through electronic voting, anyone can hire an adept computer specialist and rig the election to their favor, very easy to do. Imagine someone winning the election without not campaigning, just hack the system and reverse the votes. This will even be much worse, if and when voting is done through the Internet. But don’t take my word for it, read this article:


South Florida’s Sun-Sentinel, Aug-Sept 2004





I'm going to be brief in writing this, less I be carried away emotionally and thus be carried away verbally. Passing out Christian literature should be allowed and it is a constitutional right. The only blockage would be the school itself. However, a school funded by the government cannot block a citizen or *legal resident from exercising his constitutional right; as against a private school that can do whatever they wish. If condoms can be distributed, then literature that mirrors the constitution and the ideology of the "founding fathers" should more than be allowed. And if one wants to get "politically correct," you can list Christian literature Distribution under "preventative methods," to which condoms can be listed under. Not claiming to be very adroit of adept in constitutional laws, one exert did say:


"US Constitutional Amendment, Article I:  Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."


After reading part 2 of this manifesto, you'll see that passing out Christian literature is needed, feasible and a right.


*If an argument may arise that legal residents don't have constitutional rights, then don't let the U.S Government allow them to be drafted in its many wars, as it has being doing for years and must be signed to on immigration papers.





Some of the stuff I've said might be covered in the student handbook. But if the student handbook is not read by the students, what is the purpose of the handbook. Use creative ways to make sure it is read, like covering the classroom walls with all its content, as a decoration. Or even mandatory methods, like having each teacher read a section before any class. This is if you value what is written in it, I don't even know it myself and I'm a reading person. The method chosen should also prevent the feeling of forced encroachment; for they are other colleges - only a ‘must-go-to-this-school’ prestige could avoid that – Ivy Leagues. Nonetheless, if the info in the handbook addresses certain conduct to be upheld, students should be made to read it. Not knowing its content can be "careless" on both parts, but the student can plead ignorance if a student code is violated. Though it may happen in a real world setting, you can't charge someone for something they don't of, inherently or a law. A line cannot be crossed if there is no line seen.





a) World class looking website. Many might not even realize that they do it, but they make important "decisions of choices" base on how an institution website looks. Functionality of the website is another thing; that is, finding what you want. One reason might be that the search tool is powered by google. Therefore, the results that are shown are not from the entire website, but only those pages indexed by google; and google index a page based on the number of hits it receives. The techies should use a "search script" for the entire site. Easily found free on the Internet and Webmaster's websites.


b) Free computer give away, especially if the initiative is taken to give destitute students; even though it is called a lottery. They might use it for typing papers and doing other projects.


c) Many state of the art equipments - from digital projectors, to DVD/VHS players, to optimized laptop. I even got a chance to use some of these equipments in a class presentation.


d) I notice all or most of my teachers have a master’s degree. Is that the standard? I don't know. But this is assuring to know we have "qualified" teachers.


e) I notice some of the doors now have electronic coded locks, but it also has key entry. Excellent explanation of Part 1, section 10. That is, this electronic device has a manual backup. If someone forgets the code or the lock malfunctions, just get someone with a key. As against being locked out of the lab, waiting hours for a technician to arrive and hours if he resolves this electronic problem.


f) Student activity room on each campus, excellent to take a break between classes. Some have accommodations that are non-existence in some public family centers across the county.


g) At the downtown center, the cleaning staff keeps the place looking wonderful and it's never dirty. I can literally see my reflection off the elevator doors. However, they have keys to every office and facility in the building, just like the hotels – tempting for anyone who could just apply for a cleaning job and “wipe out” the facilities in one night or other such things.


h) They are other good points (written before ICI 3) but you get the point. Good work.





This section is advised not to be read if you're neither a fallen angel or aware of them. This is not a taboo section, but without the knowledge of their existence, then for certain this will be deemed as utter rubbish. This might not even seem to fit in an output on education, but it affects it more than we realize. DO NOT, and I repeat, DO NOT read it if you are not aware of fallen angels in flesh, which is 98% of all real humans. And DO NOT, I repeat, DO NOT seek to be aware of it; only revealed to select born again believers - though those who seek will find and those who ask it will be given. Moreover, away from the divine covering that Christ gives, you could go mad. If the wisdom of God seems like foolishness to men, it follows that the wisdom of one person who is wiser than another will seems like foolishness to the latter. No wonder the bible also said that the foolishness of God is wiser than men. In other words, it is a principle. If the animals could speak and they saw humans constructing a basic irrigation system, they would say, "these stupid humans are playing in the water." A wise man wisdom is foolishness to the less wise. That's why all the greats were considered mad in their time, and always will be, until the rest of the world catches up. Therefore, this knowledge will seem foolish to most, because it is unfamiliar and not easily attained to without madness.


That intro was also purposely made long to block further reading. Now, to the readers who are fallen angels, it is obvious that I nor any human don't know the "ordinances of the heavens" or angels, as they really are. But what I do know is that fallen angels in flesh exist, unaware to many humans; plus shown to me with their several abilities. They coexist beside us as mortal men and not only so, ruling amongst, as the bible endlessly reiterates.


I've already written literature concerning their dealings on earth and possible investigation of any possible redemption (Proverbs 18:1); taking in many variables I did not previously know, and why this section is even written. If I begin to mention their earthly involvement and abilities, many would think I'm regurgitating scenes from the movie and comic X-Men. What I want to mention and focus on is the involvement of fallen angels among schools; as teachers, board members and other staff. More so, certain queries any bold one willing to answer in a written form. Are our schools a heaven to "suck" the potential talents and abilities of unsuspecting individuals; as briefly discussed in the book "Demonology Revealed*?" Or, are there watchers or other angels or angelic order in place to prevent this and other exploitations from fallen angels in flesh? What I know is that there is a hierarchy of fallen angels, but don't all come to kill, steal and destroy? If the scripture is correct (Ex 22:28) and it is, then most leadership positions would be held by them, including this board and all educational boards. I found out they are not all as ruthless as previously thought, but like any rebellious person, acting out of their fallen state. That doesn't justify or give grounds for killing, stealing and destroying. But if, like all things in existence, they are constrained by the invisible presence and intuition of God and also being bound here under the vicissitudes of earthly dealings, then their presences in the education system can be good or bad. Bad in the sense that they can use it as a place to "suck" the lives of individuals. This is not what it sounds like, the Book *Demonology Revealed gives a brief outline - it has to be read. But fallen ones know what they do; in stealing the lives (ideas, abilities, thoughts, inventions and even character) of persons unaware to them. Often times leaving that person confused, doing something just to survive and even becoming "madmen." All by virtue of their abilities, being fallen angels in flesh. They could also be agents to persecute Christians and also promote humanism. As such, I not only pray God's intervention, but those in authority among them to take action, for you amongst all beings know the wrath of God.


On the other side, they could be of benefit, even more so than humans, if they function as human academic educators under the fear of God, being also bound here (Rev 12:13-17); especially if there is a possible redemption. Benefits that would go unnoticed, such as keen and deep understanding by virtue of their abilities, age (before creation) and stature. The ability to foresee, backsee and even give empathy more than what a human can; as weird as that sound. An example can be seen in the movie "Dream Catcher," where one of the four individual having the power to read mind and foresee, helped a student of his. He sent him away, knowing the real situation that would warrantee reprimandment by a human who could not foresee. I don't have the time to explain the countless occasions where such benefits could be had; with God given revelation and his favor, being one who knows these things among them. There existence has to be balanced, for even Michael the archangel didn't take a railing accusation against satan (Jude 1:9). The thing is, there is too much to know about them even to begin this section, but someone had to mention it and it had to be me. The books on demonology have to be read (published or to be published); link at the end of this section.


What I do know is that their involvement, both bad and potentially good, should be taken into consideration. And the fallen ones on our country's education boards, who are bigger ones, should be responsible. As a suggestion or warning, be reminded of the invisible hand of God that still watches over humans, to whom he allowed you to have some dominance over (the greater part has been taken away by Christ). One cry to God by a human can erode your existence (individually and otherwise), as was done to the first perpetrators (Jude 1:6) who became fallen angels in flesh. This might be the reason your existence as mortals remain an unknown mystery to man.


Note: To the bold fallen ones, you may respond, by earthly means only - mail, email, etc. If you feel responding to this section will jeopardize your position or "person", your comments can be withheld. But it would be interesting if a fallen one own up to their ‘person’ (acts); and also prove that I'm not mad in tackling a problem that has lie dormant since ancient biblical days - as far back as Genesis 6:4. Especially knowing you are bound in this atmosphere (Rev 12:13-17) until Christ returns.


* Demonology Revealed can be found at: http://groups.msn.com/iRecommend/halloween.msnw or http://www.truthseries.org or http://groups.msn.com/accommunity/special.msnw  or http://www.threeq.com. To find an article explaining suckery in a little more details, go to http://www.threeq.com/pages/suckery.html or http://groups.msn.com/accommunity/articles.msnw.




















“That God might manifest them” (Ecc 3:18)














Firstly, what is humanism? According to my Oxford dictionary, it is a “doctrine emphasizing human needs and seeking solely rational ways of solving human problems; concerned with human rather than religious values.” On the surface this might sound nice, innocent and even welcoming of a definition. However, it’s not what it seems, and all human agencies of the inherent evils of the world have to look and sound legitimate. The humanists are diabolically clever “mortals,” that have given their time, money and energy to completely overthrow the human race; by removing its infrastructures from a true godly sort, over into the hands of satan. It silently encourages rebellion, anarchism, selfism and immorality. The theme is that man or self is God, leading us to our own destruction. Like pulling away a baby from its mother with a candy, only to slay it when the mother is not looking. The scheme of this is fused by New Ageism - everything goes and nothing is wrong; “Do what thou will.” But the humanists are not secretive about their intensions and ploy. In fact, an exert from the 1973 humanist manifesto 2 reads, “The next century can be and should be the humanistic century. We stand at the dawn of a new age...a secular society on a planetary scale. As non-theists we begin with humans not God, nature not deity...we deplore the division of humankind on nationalistic grounds. Thus we look to the development of a system of world law and order based upon transnational fed. Govt.” What has become the sad fact and research of this essay, is that public education is the main tool to propagate their evil agenda: To the point that education has become mainstream humanism.


It’s surprising to know that schools were started and administered by the church, in the British Empire and colonies; yet it has deteriorated to humanism and no acknowledgement of God. Many missionaries in England and America would ‘go out’ and start schools, which years later flourished and erupted into universities. Humanism is a late invention of the rebellious elite and from ‘ever since,’ biblical foundations were the pillars of our educational system. It led to the rise of a great nation, beginning from its contribution to our independence. The same can be said of Great Britain and most European nations, who are adherents to the Judeo-Christian faith. That’s the reason humanists have invested our schools, to erode it of its foundation – the bible. And if a foundation is removed, there is always a tumbling: The intent of the inherent evils of the world, to give their ruler ship to a dictator called the Anti-Christ.


The above sentence might be too theistic for many to swallow, especially the non-theists. So more specifically, why has humanism taken over and what does it intend to do? It must be further solidified that that humanists have taken over education. This can be seen from another exert of their manifesto and give some reasons for its take over. It reads, "Education is thus a most powerful ally of humanism, and every American public school is a school of humanism. What can the theistic Sunday schools, meeting an hour once a week, teaching only a fraction of the children, do to stem the tide of a five-day program of humanistic teaching?" "The Humanist Manifesto calls for, and ultimately succeeds, in replacing God in America's public schools” (humanist manifesto 6/26/1933). This has clearly happened – prayer is out, bibles are out, public devotion is out and all godly exploits. On the reverse side – homosexuality as an alternate lifestyle is in, witchcraft is in, evolution is in, selfism is in and all ungodliness.


These quotes from legitimate sources also show what humanists intend to do in our schools and how they intend to do it:


“Fundamental, Bible believing people do not have the right to indoctrinate their children in their religious beliefs because we, the state, are preparing them for the year 2000, when America will be part of a one-world global society and their children will not fit in” - Peter Hoagland (State Senator and Humanist).


"I am convinced that the battle for humankind's future must be waged and won in the public school classroom by teachers that correctly perceive their role as proselytizers of a new faith which will replace the rotting corpse of Christianity" - John J. Dunphy (Author).

“A massive world-wide partnership is pioneering new strategies for social transformation. The media, the entertainment industry, computer companies, government agencies, educational institutions, the United Nations and its accredited non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have all joined together in a common quest for a global mind change. They seek solidarity -- a worldwide unity based on a new set of beliefs and values. "Obsolete" and "exclusive" loyalties to national sovereignty, Biblical values, and the unadulterated U.S. Constitution stand in their way. Conforming the masses to their way of thinking requires all the sophisticated tools and tactics developed at the various "behavioral science research" institutes and "education laboratories" established first in England, then in the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany, and finally in the United States. If these psycho-social engineers win their battle against an unsuspecting public, they would "wash" away individual thinking, free speech and all the other "rights" that have made America unique. The vacuum would be filled with lofty ideals, enticing images and deceptive promises designed to mold minds that match their global vision. Group thinking and other controls and "incentives" would enforce compliance"  - Berit Kjos (Author).

"It is necessary to gain the common people to our order. The best means to that end is influence in the schools" - Adam Weishaupt (The Founder of the Illuminati).

Basically, it all boils down to brainwashing; and they have been successful. Through various creative methods, backed by the wealth of the world, they have brainwashed our kids into becoming their pagan compliant slave. “Brainwashing is a system of befogging the brain so a person can be seduced into acceptance of what otherwise would be abhorrent to him. He loses touch with reality. Facts and fancy whirl round and change places.... However, in order to prevent people from recognizing the inherent evils in brainwashing, the Reds pretend that it is only another name for something already very familiar and of unquestioned respect, such as education or reform” (Edward Hunter, Brainwashing). “Brainwashing is not, as some educators and students contend, Christian child-raising. American freedom includes the promise that parents would have the right to train their children to follow God's ways. The word ‘brainwashing’ refers to a planned, step-by-step attempt to "wash" family-taught beliefs from the minds of those who oppose government ideology. In America, it would mean replacing the old Biblical values and worldview with a new way of thinking that would support a totalitarian agenda. In other words, every child must become a peace child, a willing and active servant of a new world order” (B. Kjos, Why few dare call it conspiracy). In other words, humanism in schools is basically brainwashing the masses to their set beliefs or ideology.

Education is fundamental in controlling people. For if you can control the way people think (the mind) you can control them altogether. One would ask how Hitler managed to convince the Germans of his onslaught of the Judeo-Christian people. Well, guess what he did? He organized nation wide plays depicting Jews as a threat or in some offensive or derogatory outlook as it relates to Germans. Now, after doing that, among other things, he had all the freedom to attempt genocide with the silent support of the masses. Currently, Muslims forces are showing free theater productions to Muslims children depicting Jews as an evil threat. For instance, one scene shows a Jewish soldier violently killing a Muslim man leaving his child alive crying for his dad. The child then asks someone what's the reason for his dad being murdered; an individual quickly defames the Jews as an evil regime whose purpose is to take Muslims land. Now, this is theater type education, but it also evident and underlined in mainstream everyday school teaching.

Turn a person's mind and you turn his whole being, thought process, views, actions, reactions and intelligent make up. In other words, you have fashioned the heart of an individual, and we all know that a mind is a difficult thing to change. That is the reason the bible said train a child in the way he should go and when he is old he will not depart from it.

No doubt, education is fundamental, but it should be operated with a Christian basis. Why? The humanist uses it to indoctrinate the people to their way of thinking and lifestyle; which is erroneous spiritually, morally and other wise. These are most often embedded in the General Eds. One doesn't earn a computer science degree by doing computer classes only. It is compiled of literature, cultural, musical, speech and other mandatory classes that are irrelevant to one's line of occupation. Nevertheless, it is argued that, it is meant to create a "well rounded" individual. They are right about that, they are creating an individual (new ager).

Education is now meant to indwell a humanistic viewpoint on everything. It is so mainstreamed that education prides its thinking over the church. In addition, if you speak with educated Christians, if they were honest, you will find that their Christian overview is particularly geared toward a worldly thinking and implementations as it relates to worship, structure, governance, etc. If some were honest, they will tell you that they feel superior to their uneducated brother or sister. It is not that one wants to think this way, it is simply inevitable, being embedded. You cannot just finish watching people having senseless sex for an hour, then look at a "sexy" individual and not think about sex. Similarly, you can’t be educated today and not express humanism some how; especially if you don’t know this was done to you. Mainstream education has this underlining agenda and many aren't aware of it. The main fact this is so can be seen in the quote from the AFA journal. It reads, “It’s bad enough to instruct teacher on how they can force-feed little children a pro-homosexual message. Now these activists want direct access to the hearts and minds of kids who are essentially a captive audience in their classrooms” (AFA Journal, February 2000). Thus, education is a most powerful tool seen by the humanists and exploited thereby, because they have a “captive audience in their classrooms.”

What have been the results of this humanist take over? Expectedly, because of the humanist take over, many adverse effects have plagued our societies. Some are:

  1. Increase school violence: In the same time frame prayer was being slaughtered in schools, columbine and other school violence eroded the nation.
  2. Increase suicide: We have seen a great increase in suicides over the pass decades.
  3. Increase Depression: Without biblical values being emphasized and selfism encouraged, many students have given into severe depression. Being disoriented, many have become addicted to psychoactive drugs.
  4. Lower Grades:  With freedom to do anything, “regardless of”, especially promiscuity, many students have become distracted and even loose interest in education. This has helped lower their grades. Also, there are now many ‘illiterate’ students, yet possessing an education. President Bush said in January 23, 2004, “The illiteracy level of our children is appalling.” Many of these children are being schooled and are schooled.
  5. Innocence and humility gone: With selfism and encouragement of sexual experimentations, many youths have lost their innocence. This stress of intangible responsibilities weights them down. Their humility is also tarnished, as they now rush to be egotistic brats.
  6. Resistance of school uniforms: Resistance to school uniforms promotes an ungodly “individualism” or selfism. So even this agenda is executed by the humanists. As one person puts it, “school uniform will do nothing but cut down on a student individuality.” Or, “students learn from uniforms that their individuality, political opinions…are unimportant.” To which I responded – If it was that important, they would be allowed to vote and wouldn’t have parents and the “inherent powers” to guide them. Guidance to the point of obedience – submission to school uniform. This is teaching them to make their voices be heard at the right time. A calm before the storm, discipline before power and control before expression. All these things are good, but when the individual has no control over his own self, how can he be effective? The bible rightly said, “A good man is satisfied from himself.”
  7. Sexual immorality is at an all time high. Especially when all things are permissible in humanism – homosexuality, incest, transsexualism and anything imaginable. This can only hamper the human race and ‘global community’ even further; in more ways than one – from psychological problems to STD’s.
  8. Witchcraft, sorcery and paganism is accepted and openly practiced. Things our biblical foundational Education system denounced and rightfully deemed unfit.
  9. Worse of all, God is mocked, and God cannot be mocked; so it brings the wrath of God. This is expressed in the allowance of such events as September 11, 2001.

No empirical studies may opt to verify the above, for empiricism is a flawed source of “judgment.” These are societal evidences, clearly seen coming from a morally deplored Education system and country: A known fact that has contributed to the downfall of the Roman Empire.

To think that all this happened with what many overlook – humanism. Many even thought it insignificant, for good reasons. Many of the changes the humanists implemented looks similar to some biblical values, but are deadly. One reason is that it takes the focus off the creator and put it on the created. For instance, take this exert from B. Kjos,

Remember North Carolina School Superintendent Causby's words: "We have learned to put the best spin on things." Character Education, as touted by the educational establishment and the White House, has put the best of spins on a most alarming plan.

Let's see what happens when Christian words are plunged into the New Age context. But first, remember that teaching character began as God's idea. Long after He first told parents to train their children to follow His ways, He gave us this list of godly qualities: diligence, faith, virtue, knowledge, self-control, perseverance, godliness, kindness, and love. (2 Peter 1:2-8)

You know what those words mean. The context of the whole Bible makes it clear to us. Only by His life in us, can His character qualities be demonstrated through us. Only by faith in Him and all He has promised us, can we be "partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust?"

When globalist leaders use similar words, the focus changes. The Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD-the curriculum arm of the mighty NEA) has given schools a nice-sounding set of character qualities, but its leaders had no intention of promoting the Christian values they have fought so hard to ban. Their list--justice, altruism, diligence, and respect--may sound Biblical, but its intent fits the NEA vision of social control.

Don't forget, most of the character qualities were good when seen from the traditional context of Biblical definitions. But when moved into the global paradigm, they became tools for “transformation.” Notice how the focus changes with the paradigm shift:





for what God calls good

for earth-centered values


 to God first

to the collective community


 from God's perspective

from global perspective


according to God's plan

according to changing rules


obey God's guidelines

serve and conform to group


God's love through us to others

mandatory "voluntary" service


compassion for the needy

oneness with all


fair trial, compensation for wrong

socialist equality, redistribution


It’s remarkable to note that it takes a little change or subtlety to devastate a country. As one cliché said, “a little leaven raises the whole lump.”

What can we now do to rectify or undo what the humanists have done? What are the resolutions? Home schooling is good, but given the thread mill work cycle most parents are trapped in, it’s not possible for many Americans. Private schools are also good, but given the monetary constraints, most children will be left out. The only thing left is for all Americans to be resolved in putting God in America again. For instance, we must bring back prayer, bible, bible teaching, Christian devotion and all previously slaughtered godly exploits in our schools. Let us strive to put God back in our schools, and also teach academics minus the humanist agendas – socialization, immorality, paganism and sustainability. In closing, I must quote Edward Hunter’s words. He put this dilemma in frank non-spiritual terms:

“This was war! Some called it psychological warfare. A better name would be brain warfare. The only difference was that formerly weapons were aimed principally at bodies, to incapacitate and destroy them, whereas now they were aimed mainly at minds, so subvert and control them.”

Who will stand with this manifesto and victoriously win the war for our children and future?





Text books have become the corner-stone of learning in public schools. They are a set of prescribe books embedded with info, practices and tutorial for learning. While majority of time is spent in schools, an equal amount of time is spent reading the texts. Teachers themselves are mandated to teach from the text. Therefore, one of the most influential tenets of Education is the textbook. What the textbook teaches is what the children will learn and what they’ll become. If the text teaches and endorses murder, then this generation will become murderers. It therefore becomes necessary to carefully watch over the content of the current textbooks: Especially seeing that it is targeted by humanists to infiltrate our youths with planned socialization, sustainability, pseudo-academics, paganism and immoral conduct.


The first successful step that humanists took was to remove the vital foundational tenets of our texts. That is, biblical and godly learning. All original texts were not only academic, but also Christian based; thus morally sound. Textbooks in America cannot be textbooks without this influence. In fact one writer noted:


“As a matter of fact, most Americans at the outset of this nations’ formation were devout Christians. There is no better proof of that truth than the New England Primer. The New England Primer was the first textbook used in America. It was taught both in public schools and in Sunday school. Try getting that to happen in today’s “separation of church and state” climate. We must remember, that because most people subscribed to the Judeo-Christian worldview at this time, there was no diametric opposition between what could and could not be taught in public schools.

What were the contents of the New England Primer? Well, this may surprise you, but the first school textbook in America was based on the Bible. That’s right … the Bible! Wide sentiment at the time was that, in the words of first chief justice of the United States Supreme Court, John Jay: “The Bible is the best of all books, for it is the word of God and teaches us the way to be happy in this world and in the next. Continue therefore to read it and to regulate your life by its precepts.”

It was that sentiment that led Benjamin Harris, who had published a similar volume in London, to first print the volume in Boston in 1690. The Primer’s primary intent was to teach children to read, though the underlying motivation for doing so is noteworthy. Early Puritans believed that an inability to read was Satan’s way of keeping people from the Holy Scriptures. So, in essence, the primary motivation for learning to read was to know God.

The popular children’s prayer beginning with the phrase, “Now I lay me down to sleep,” was introduced to us via the Primer. In addition, the Primer combined alphabet rhymes with moral lessons to foster spiritual growth while teaching phonics. An example of the method follows:

A In Adam's fall, we sinned all.
B Thy Life to Mend, This Book Attend.
C The Cat doth play, and after slay.
D A Dog will bite, A Thief at night.
E An Eagle's flight, Is Out of sight.
F The Idle Fool, Is Whipt at School.
G As runs the glass, man’s life doth pass
H My book and heart shall never part

It is noteworthy that the University of Notre Dame claims that the New England Primer sold more than five million copies between 1690 and 1799. To put this into proper perspective, the population of the United States did not even reach five million until around 1800. This would be comparable to a modern textbook selling 280 million copies in its lifetime.

The Primer was a textbook that is more necessary now than ever. Living in a Biblically illiterate culture, the Primer’s ability to foster deep scriptural thought, is unparalleled, scripture not withstanding.”


Educators need to return to the founding principles that made America great – biblically sound text – and erode the existing humanistic teaching.


In addition to making that successful step of removing the biblical backbone, our textbooks have become purely humanistic, drenched in all types of errors. It would be one thing to take out the strong Christian references and make it “purely” academic, so to speak, but it’s now being used for sustainability (control or mind control), socialization, paganism and many more woeful humanistic agendas, subtly. On the reverse, you really can’t have a purely academic American/European education without Christian values. Morales are embedded in Education and morals are purely biblical in most the world. My Psychology teacher, Dr. P. Nash, said morals are basically choosing right from wrong. How can you choose if you can’t determine right from wrong? And how do we determine right from wrong since the institution of the alphabet or even formal education? The bible of course. Now it would seem that we have out grown it. It’s a humanistic agenda used to destroy true morals and let anything go. The boundaries would fade and all things become relative. It is a deadly deception that can crumble a nation in no time; as it did the Roman Empire.


Not only was the bible used for morals, but many other key areas and was a good source of scientific evidence. The minor fraction of the then science world has created this wedge between science and the bible. For example, a good scientific read would be the book of Job, noting ancient dinosaurs-like beasts and even scientific processes. Or, even the fact that it was long recorded in the bible that the earth was round – far before the scientists/explorers figured it out. This was our base, yet the “unbiblical minority” has removed them to our own hurt: Not only that, but the history of our biblical base. Dr. Kennedy himself said, “America’s Christian Heritage is clearly evident from its History…However, the evidence is routinely censored from our children’s public school history textbooks, expunging nearly all references to the founding father’s deeply held Christian belief.”

Enough has been said about the humanistic agenda, here is one example of their many influences in our texts, "At Silver Lake High School, the ninth-grade health text teaches: 'Testing your ability to function sexually and to give pleasure to another person may be less threatening in the early teens with people of your own sex.' Also, 'You may come to the conclusion that growing up means rejecting the values of your parents.' Students were told to keep the book in their lockers and not take it home" (B. Kjos, Sex Ed and Global Values). Several things were wrong with the teaching of this text: 1) Student at ninth-grade should not be experimenting with sexuality. 2) As if their minds aren’t already mixed up, they are encouraged to attempt this with the same sex. 3) And to show that the humanists knew what they are doing is wrong, they were encouraged not to take home the book; just in case their rational thinking parent “flips.” Can we not then see the deliberation of a regime intended to wipe out the benefiting godliness of the bible and replace it with immorality and pseudo-academics? Can something then not be done about it? When will the true educators act and when will the Christians pray?

There is even an organization called Global Vision Corporation found at www.global-vision.org. It uses educational materials to brainwash students into becoming New World Order Slaves; obviously the humanist agenda. All we know is that it’s new and should help our students, without any investigation: Powered by the invisible, yet financially and politically powerful adherents of the humanist agenda. This agenda, through textbooks and other materials, seek to establish socialization. “Socialization - learning global beliefs and values and politically correct behaviors – have replaced academics as the main outcome of education.” At a time when schools are outputting derelicts. I watched a “60 Minutes” Show airing one Sunday and what was being featured was startling. There was a brilliant man that did several test and research on text books in schools, and found an enormous amount of errors; academic errors. Equations were wrong, answers that were wrong, formulas that were clearly incorrect and other errors. Yet some humanistic educators have the time and money to fiddle with the minds of the young in humanism, when the very textbooks are filled with arithmetic errors, mathematical errors and other errors. Spend some time fixing those problems and leave the moral, spiritual, ethical, characteristical undertaking to the proven and establish principles of the bible.

Just look at what tax-dollars are been used to do for the humanist agenda, beneath our very noses:

·         uses schools to transform our culture

·         molds children's minds for a global workforce

·         trades academics for socialization

·         bases learning on feelings, not facts

·         immerses students in global spirituality

·         builds permanent electronic file on each child

·         attempt this in private and home-schools

·         yields parental rights to community "partners"

·         establishes the new global paradigm

·         be open to new ideas (humanistic)

·         set aside home-taught values (Christian) that might offend the group

·         Compromise in order to seek common ground and please the group

·         Respect all opinions, no matter how contrary to God’s guidance

·         Never argue or violate someone’s comfort zone

This takes considerable time, money and a lack of “fear of God,” to purposely erode what has been established for centuries and proven effective. Not to mention the affront to God, to you and to me. We the people standby and watch this happen. We the people who know that 90% of America are Christian minded, even the most heinous of sinners. The parents themselves go out and buy these textbooks and materials, embedded with these implicit and explicit socialization pagan philosophies.

In 1970’s, there was a public outcry of what was being taught in our textbooks, depicted in the picture below:


The banner in the background reads, “Text books undermine our religion,
home and nation.
” The paragraph at the bottom had this to say,
 The issue was not obscene language, but unpopular ideas

Seeing that our parents are now “purposely” distracted in the present work treadmill cycle, it’s up to our educators to now make a stand to what is being taught in our schools. The educators have to take the initiative to give heed to this manifesto concerning the backbone of our educational system, and choose to put God back in our text books: And remove the socialization, sustainability and pagan agendas. If it means writing our own local textbooks, as I’ve had the pleasure of experiencing with my psychology class and teacher, then it means individual godly school districts have to take that step. If no one else will, then who? May God help us!


Additionally, it would be a good thing in Colleges that Textbooks can be placed in Libraries for student who can’t afford it or can’t get it. That is, numerous copies of textbooks on the campus that can be checked out there but cannot leave the campus; only used there. That’s option one. Option two, checking it out off campus. However, if it is checked out it might conflict with the bookstore – no more book sale, hence the ruin of the bookstore. Their argument is that they contracted to be there for such a time and has made no profit, etc. While the school could say you have a monopoly on books in the school and can charge gigantic prices, which you do. For example, a book for $80.00 used I found several copies online for less than $15 with shipping included. Not advocating online buying, but…and other off campus used bookstores probably have similar prices. There would be endless conflict with option 2, between school and store, so option 1 is best and should be attempted. With option 1, those who can’t bother to use the lab to read the text at school, just purchase a copy from the bookstore, and have the luxury of it at home. It should be very easy to get business or government to donate money/books for a community college – except the lottery and other gambling agencies.


The reason this is suggested was that I encountered a small used textbook in summer 2005 for nearly $100 and couldn’t pull myself to buy it for a single class; especially being insolvent. However, I thought on this then carried it out by asking the Dept. Head if he has a copy he could loan me, he had several and lent me one, which I returned at the end of the semester.







Notice the presidents of the United States. The Majority were affiliated with a church. Their denomination may differ, but they all believed in Christ (Yahoshua) and the God of Abraham (Yah). Regardless of any underlining agenda, all the founding fathers and Presidents demonstrated to the public a Judeo-Christian faith; which was used to govern the people. This was and still is the religion of America: Even though Leaders maybe “satanic,” the people and governance would always be biblical; example, Joseph (second to Pharaoh) in Egypt, Daniel (President and second to the King) in Babylon, Mordecai (second to the king) in Medes/Persia and Jews & Christian in Greece & Rome, which had Christianity as its official religion. You can’t have a great nation except the foundation is biblical; known by the good and “evil.” Remove the foundation and you remove the ground beneath you; plunging to death is the only occurrence. “If we do not remember who we are, how can we know who we are supposed to be” (Woodrow Wilson, US President, 1913-1921)? Put God in America again!





To the non-theist reader, my pardon for the biblical exegesis, but such exploits cannot be avoided whether we accept the fact of a true divine God that is involved or not. One famous scripture noted, “If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do” (Psalms 11:3)? Meaning, if godly foundations are gone, then comes God wrath. That’s why they have to be a great falling away before Christ returns (2 Thess. 2:3). The great falling away will be the removal of the foundations. The righteous can keep back the wrath of God if the foundations remain; even in a hedonistic nation. If that freedom and exercise thereof is taken away, not only can they not please their God, but the ungodly or ungodliness increases. Both undoubtedly make God step in. Hence verse 4-6 of psalms 11, which reads, “The LORD is in his Holy Temple, the LORD’s throne is in heaven: his eyes behold, his eyelids try, the children of men…upon the wicked he shall rain snares, fire and brimstone.” This can take the form of many things now; for instance, columbine, ‘mad cow disease,’ or even Sept 11, 2001. To prevent these and more terrible things from happening, the foundation must stand and flourish; as implemented by our forefathers. Hence, the verse, “righteousness exalts a nation” (Prov 14:34). Godly foundational principles exalt a nation and it must stand.






Today, many revisionist historians have taught America's children that our Founders were publicly atheists and secular-minded. As a result, many Americans blindly believe that our forefathers intended to erect the so-called "separation of church and state." By simply reading through the words of our Founders, you will come to realize that nothing could be further from the truth.

George Washington, Signer of the Constitution, First American President

In 1789, two years after signing the U.S. Constitution, Washington was inaugurated to serve as the first President of the United States of America. In his Inaugural Address, he stated, “It would be improper to omit, in this first official act, my fervent supplications to that Almighty Being who rules over the universe, who presides in the councils of nations and whose providential aid can supply every human defect… No people can be bound to acknowledge and adore the Invisible Hand which conducts the affairs of men more than the people of the United States.”

Later in the address, Washington declares, “We ought to be no less persuaded that the propitious smiles of Heaven can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right which Heaven itself has ordained.”

In 1796, less than a decade after Congress approved the Constitution, Washington delivered his Farewell Address. In that speech, Washington states, “Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness.”

He continues, “Let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail, in exclusion of religious principle.”

George Read, Constitutional Signer from Delaware

George Read is considered to be “The Father of Delaware.” He wrote the state’s first laws and the 1776 Delaware Constitution. The Delaware Constitution initially read, “Every person who shall be chosen a member of either house, or appointed to any office or place of trust, shall make and subscribe the following declaration, to wit: ‘I, ______, do profess faith in God the Father, and in Jesus Christ His only Son, and in the Holy Ghost, one God blessed for evermore; and I do acknowledge the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be given.”

Richard Bassett, Constitutional Signer from Delaware

Richard Bassett also helped to author the aforementioned Delaware Constitution. In addition, he served as the Delaware Supreme Court Chief Justice, the Delaware Governor, a U.S. Senator, and later a U.S. Circuit Court Judge. Unfortunately for us, he remained fairly quiet during the Conventions.

Major William Pierce of Georgia, who recorded character sketches of the delegates, described Bassett as being “a religious enthusiast, lately turned Methodist, who serves his country because it is the will of the people that he should do so. He is a man of plain sense, and has modesty enough to hold his tongue. He is a gentlemanly man, and is in high estimation among Methodists.”

Gunning Bedford, a Constitutional Signer from Delaware

As a delegate from Delaware, At George Washington’s funeral, Bedford stated, “To the character of hero and patriot, this good man added that of Christian… Although the greatest man upon Earth, he disdained not to humble himself before God and to trust in the mercies of Christ.”

John Dickinson, a Constitutional Signer from Delaware

He once wrote, “Kings or parliaments could not give the rights essential to happiness… We claim them from a higher source—from the King of Kings, and Lord of all the Earth. They are not annexed to us by parchments and seals. They are created in us by the decrees of Providence, which establish the laws of our nature. They are born with us; exist with us; and cannot be taken from us by any human power without taking our lives. In short, they are founded on the immutable maxims of reason and justice. It would be an insult on the Divine Majesty to say that he has given or allowed any man or body of men a right to make me miserable.”

Jacob Broom, a Constitutional Signer from Delaware

Jacob Broom, a signer of the Constitution, wrote the following letter to his son, “Don’t forget to be Christian. I have said much to you on this head and I hope an indelible impression is made.”

The Official Papers of Delaware make record the following statement regarding Jacob Broom: “He lived in one of the potential crises of history, in which and for which the sublime visions and words of prophets and apostles had developed and inspired a stalwart manhood. As it is an accepted fact that ‘the foundation of all permanent prosperity is a right regard for the Divine Being, it is proper to say that Jacob Broom was a God-fearing man.”

James McHenry, a Constitutional Signer from Maryland, Secretary of War

James McHenry served as the first president of the Baltimore Bible Society. As a constitutional signer, he wrote the following letter soliciting funds for the distribution of Bibles to the public:

“Neither, in considering this subject, let it be overlooked, that public utility pleads most forcibly for the general distribution of the Holy Scriptures. The doctrine they preach, the obligations they impose, the punishment they threaten, the rewards they promise, the stamp and image of divinity they bear, which produces a conviction of their Truths, can alone secure [to] society: order and peace. And to our courts of justice and constitutions of government: purity, stability, and usefulness.”

“In vain, without the Bible, we increase penal laws and draw intrenchments around our institutions. Bibles are strong intrenchments. Where they abound, men cannot pursue wicked courses, and at the same time enjoy quiet conscience.”

During the War of 1812, Francis Scott Key wrote the “Star Spangled Banner” as the British bombarded Fort McHenry. Fort McHenry was named after this great patriot of his day.

Daniel Carroll, a Constitutional Signer from Maryland

He was a devout Catholic. In fact, his older brother, Charles Carroll, was the first Roman Catholic Bishop in America—likely the reason for Carroll’s inclusion.

James Madison, Primary Architect of the Constitution and a Signer

“No people ought to feel greater obligations to celebrate the goodness of the Great Disposer of Events and of the Destiny of Nations than the people of the United States. And to the same Divine Author of every good and perfect gift we are indebted for all those privileges and advantages, religious as well as civil, which are so richly enjoyed in this favored land.”

Madison also wrote, “Before any man can be considered as a member of civil society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governor of the Universe.”

James Madison was one of three men who compiled the Federalist Papers. John Jay (the nation’s first Supreme Court Chief Justice) and Alexander Hamilton (a signer of the Constitution) wrote the Federalist Papers in an attempt to further explain the intentions of our founding Fathers at the Constitutional Convention. In speaking of the Federalist Papers, Madison declares, “The ‘Federalists’ may fairly enough be regarded as the most authentic exposition of the heart of the federal Constitution as understood by the body which prepared it and the authority which accepted it.”

Federalist #47 reads, “The judges can exercise no executive prerogative, though they are shoots from the executive stock; nor any legislative function, though they may be advised with by the legislative councils.”

William Blount, a Constitutional Signer from North Carolina

This Signer was appointed by Washington to serve as the first governor over the territory that would become Tennessee. Blount was largely responsible for drafting the Tennessee state Constitution, which reads, “No person who denies the being of God, or a future state of rewards and punishments, shall hold any office in the civil department of this State.”

Richard Dobbs Spaight, a Constitutional Signer from North Carolina

“Every man has the right to worship the Supreme Being in the manner he thinks proper… I do not suppose an infidel [non-Christian], or any such person, will ever be chosen to any public office unless the people themselves be of the same opinion.”

John Rutledge, a Constitutional Signer from South Carolina

John Rutledge’s father was a minister, and he actually entered politics at the request of his church, Christ Church Parish in South Carolina. Washington later nominated Rutledge to serve on the Supreme Court.

Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, a Constitutional Signer from South Carolina

Pinckney was considered to be a “master-builder of the Constitution.” He was president of the Charleston Bible Society, and he would later also serve as the American Bible Society’s Vice-President. His last will and testament begins, “To the eternal and only one true God by all honor and glory now and forever, Amen.”

William Few, a Constitutional Signer from Georgia

He was a member of one of the earliest slavery-abolitionist movements in the country. One of the group’s letters reads, “I can safely promise that neither my tongue, nor my pen, nor purse shall be wanting to promote what appears so inconsistent with humanity and Christianity.”

Abraham Baldwin, a Constitutional Signer from Georgia

Baldwin was actually a chaplain during the Revolutionary War. He once wrote, “When the minds of people in general are viciously disposed and unprincipled, and their conduct disorderly, a free government will be attended with greater confusions and evils more horrid that the wild, uncultivated state of nature. It can only be happy when the public principle and opinions are properly directed and their manners regulated. This is an influence beyond the reach of laws and punishments and can be claimed only by religion and education.”

He also stated, “It should therefore be among the first objects to those who wish well to the national prosperity to encourage and support the principles of religion and morality.”

John Langdon, a Constitutional Signer from New Hampshire

He was a Vice President of the American Bible Society.

Nathaniel Gorham, a Constitutional Signer from Massachusetts

Nathaniel Gorham helped with the original Massachusetts Constitution, which is the oldest Constitution still in effect today. He penned, “Any person chosen Governor, lieutenant-governor, counselor, senator, or representative… shall make and subscribe the following declaration, ‘I, _____, do declare, that I believe the Christian religion, and have a firm persuasion of its truth.’”

Also, Chapter I, Article III of the Massachusetts Constitution reads, “As the happiness of a people, and the good order and preservation of civil government, essentially depend upon piety, religion and morality; and as these cannot be generally diffused through a community, but by the institution of the public worship of God, and of public instructions in piety, religion and morality: Therefore, to promote their happiness and to secure the good order and preservation of their government, the people of this commonwealth have a right to invest their legislature with power to authorize and require, and the legislature shall, from time to time, authorize and require, the several towns, parishes, precincts, and other bodies politic, or religious societies, to make suitable provision, at their own expense, for the institution of the public worship of God, and for the support and maintenance of public Protestant teachers of piety, religion and morality, in all cases where such provision shall not be made voluntarily.”

Rufus King, a Constitutional Signer from Massachusetts

King once stated, “The law established by the Creator extends over the whole globe, is everywhere and at all times binding upon mankind… [This] is the law of God by which he makes his way known to man and is paramount to all human control.”

While at the Constitutional Convention, King stressed, “The judges must interpret the laws; they ought not to be legislators.”

William Samuel Johnson, a Constitutional Signer from Connecticut

William Samuel Johnson was the president of Columbia University. As he served, admissions requirements were quite high. They included the following: “No candidate shall be admitted into the College… unless he shall be able to render into English… the Gospels from the Greek. It is also expected that all students attend public worship on Sundays.”

He seemed to have no problem with religion in the classroom. In one of his commencement speeches, he stated, “You have… received a public education, the purpose whereof hath been to qualify you the better to serve your Creator and your country… Your first great duties, you are sensible, are those you owe to Heaven, to your Creator and Redeemer. Let these be ever present to your minds, and exemplified in your lives and conduct.”

Roger Sherman, a Constitutional Signer from Connecticut

Mr. Sherman’s name appears in the Annals of Congress quite frequently. It is listed in the records for the annals of Congress on September 25, 1789—the same day that Congress approved the wording of the First Amendment. The Annals of Congress read: “Mr. Roger Sherman justified the practice of thanksgiving, on any signal event, not only as a laudable one in itself but as warranted by a number of precedents of Holy Writ.”

Alexander Hamilton, a Constitutional Signer from New York

Alexander Hamilton was an instrumental character in this nation’s foundation. He not only signed the Constitution, but also wrote many of the Federalist Papers.

Alexander Hamilton authored Federalist #78. It reads, “It proves incontestably, that the judiciary is beyond comparison the weakest of the three departments of power; that it can never attack with success either of the other two; and that all possible care is requisite to enable it to defend itself against their attacks.”

“Whoever attentively considers the different departments of power must perceive that in a government in which they are separated from each other, the judiciary, from the nature of its functions, will always be the least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution; because it will be least in a capacity to annoy or injure them.”

In Federalist # 81, Hamilton writes, “There is not a syllable in the plan under consideration which DIRECTLY empowers the national courts to construe the laws according to the spirit of the Constitution, or which gives them any greater latitude in this respect than may be claimed by the courts of every State.”

Hamilton wrote, “The law… dictated by God, Himself, is, of course, superior in obligation to any other. It is binding over all the globe, in all countries, and at all times. No human laws are of any validity if contrary to this.”

After witnessing much of the French Revolution, Hamilton recorded, “The attempt by the rulers of a nation to destroy all religious opinion and to pervert a whole people to atheism is a phenomenon of profligacy [moral depravity]. To establish atheism on the ruins of Christianity is to deprive mankind of its best consolations and most animating hopes and to make a gloomy desert of the universe.”

William Livingston, a Constitutional Signer from New Jersey

Livingston was responsible for one of the first National Days of Prayer and Thanksgiving. On the floor of Congress, he declared, “The Congress desirous to have all people of all ranks and degrees duly impressed with a solemn sense of God’s superintending Providence, and of their duty devoutly to rely on His aid and direction, do earnestly recommend a day of humiliation, fasting, and prayer.”

David Brearly, a Constitutional Signer from New Jersey

Not much was recorded on Brearly’s life, but he was undoubtedly a strong Christian. Brearly served to develop the Episcopalian Prayer Book, which is still in existence today. Also, his Last Will and Testament read, “First and principally, I commit my soul unto Almighty God.”

William Paterson, a Constitutional Signer from New Jersey

Paterson once said, “Religion and morality are necessary to good government, good order, and good laws.”

What was his punishment for violating the principles of the so-called “separation of church and state”? President Washington nominated him to serve on the Supreme Court.

One of the only anti-faith founders was Thomas Paine. He wrote the Age of Reason, which belittled the Christian faith. In response to Paine’s work, Paterson replied, “Infatuated Americans, why renounce your country, your religion, and your God? Oh shame, where is thy blush? Is this the way to continue independent and to render the 4th of July immortal in memory and song?”

Note: It was commonplace for early American administrations to trade political prisoners. However, when Thomas Paine was arrested in Paris during the French Revolution, President Washington was still so angry with him for his anti-Christian bigotry that he left him there to rot and refused to negotiate for his release.

Jonathan Dayton, a Constitutional Signer from New Jersey

Dayton became involved in politics only after attending the Princeton Seminary.

Benjamin Franklin, a Constitutional Signer from Pennsylvania

Historians believe that Franklin was one of the most important founding Fathers at the time of the Constitutional Convention. He was respected and admired by all. At a time when the New York delegation had left the Convention, and others were on the verge of also calling it quits, Franklin delivered a stirring and convicting speech on the Convention floor.

“In the beginning of the contest with Britain, when we were sensible of danger, we had daily prayers in this room for the Divine Protection. Our prayers, sir, were heard—and they were graciously answered. All of us, who were engaged in the struggle, must have observed frequent instances of a superintending Providence in our favor. And have we now forgotten that powerful friend? Or do we imagine we no longer need its assistance? I have lived, sir, a long time; and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this Truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid?”
“I therefore beg leave to move, that henceforth prayers, imploring the assistance of Heaven and its blessing on our deliberations, be held in this assembly every morning before we proceed to business; and that one or more of the clergy of this city be requested to officiate in that service.”

Franklin was not opposed to having religion in the public realm. Franklin actually explained the benefits of being a Christian nation to the French. He told them: “Bad examples to youth are more rare in America, which must be comfortable consideration to parents. To this may be truly added, that serious religion, under its various denominations, is not only tolerated, but respected and practiced. Atheism is unknown there; infidelity rare and secret; so that persons may live to a great age in that country, without having their piety shocked by meeting with either an atheist or an infidel.”

Thomas Fitzsimons, a Constitutional Signer from Pennsylvania

Fitzsimons was a devout Roman Catholic.

Jared Ingersoll, a Constitutional Signer from Pennsylvania

He attended Harvard with the understanding that “All the scholars are required to live a religious and blameless life according to the rules of God’s Word.”

James Wilson, Constitutional Signer from Pennsylvania

One Constitutional signer and initial Supreme Court Justice, James Wilson, once wrote, “Human law must rest its authority ultimately upon the authority of that law which is Divine. Far from being rivals or enemies, religion and law are twin sisters, friends, and mutual assistants. Indeed, these two sciences run into each other.” Though James Wilson calls them “religion and law,” this is equivalent to “church and state.” If church and state are to be separated by a “high and unimpregnable wall,” how do you suppose "these two sciences" are to “run into each other?”

Gouvenour Morris, Constitutional Signer from Pennsylvania

Gouvenour Morris was the most active member at the Constitutional Convention. He was recorded as saying, “Religion is the only solid basis of good morals; therefore education should teach the precepts of religion and the duties of man towards God.”

He also wrote, “For avoiding the extremes of despotism or anarchy… the only ground of hope must be on the morals of the people. I believe that religion is the only solid base of morals and that morals are the only possible support of free governments. Therefore, education should teach the precepts of religion and the duties of man towards God.”

Morris proclaimed, “There must be religion. When that ligament is torn, society is disjointed and its members perish. The nation is exposed to foreign violence and domestic convulsion. Vicious rulers, chosen by vicious people, turn back the current of corruption to its source. They take bribes. They sell statutes and decrees. They sell honor and office. They sell their conscience. They sell their country. By this vile traffic they become odious and contemptible… But the most important of all lessons is the denunciation of ruin to every state that rejects the precepts of religion.”


[source: Sam Kastensmidt, June 25, 2004, What did America’s Founders Truly Believe?]







Yes, Washington and Lincoln were Christians. Ah, but alas, when we come to Thomas Jefferson, it is quite a different story, as we all know. A deist, a skeptic? He has been called an atheist, an infidel, hostile to religion, rarely ever attended church, expunged the miracles from the Bible and made the Jefferson's Bible which had no miracles in it. He originated the "separation of church and state" doctrine to keep religion out of government, out of the schools, out of the public life of America. He is the guru of separation, the darling of the liberal left, the leader of the effort to expunge Christianity from American life. Yes, we all know Thomas Jefferson, don't we? Or do we?


Jefferson was a Bible scholar. He read the Bible daily. As Washington read it an hour every morning and an hour every night, with prayer, so Jefferson read the Bible in English and in Greek and in Latin and in French. He faithfully studied it, but apparently there was no one there to guide him, and he came to a rejection of the deity of Christ.

By the way, the Jefferson Bible is another myth. There never was a Jefferson Bible. No, years before this, he cut the miraculous out of the New Testament (out of the Gospels), and from the Gospels he produced a book on the ethics and morals of Jesus Christ for the purpose of evangelizing and educating the American Indians. They were a great concern of his. He approved money for building a church for the Indians while he was President. He approved money for the support of a missionary to the Indians out of the Federal Treasury. He also gave of his own money to help try to reach the Indians. He believed that this simplified statement of the ethics of Jesus Christ would help to civilize and educate these people.

He never ever called it a Bible. He called it a system of ethics. It was, he felt, the most marvelous system of ethics the world has ever known. He said later in one of his statements that the religion of Jesus Christ is the best religion the world has ever been given, and that the ethics and teachings of Christ are incomparable, and therefore, as Chief Magistrate of the United States, he would lend all of the power of his example to supporting that system. That is what he did with that system of ethics of Christ-he simply took out the teachings of Christ about ethics and morals to present it to the Indians.

By the way, let me also mention that the phrase of the so-called "separation of church and state" has been again totally twisted, turned upside down, and made to be the very opposite of what Jefferson intended it to be. When he was President, he received in late 1801 a letter from the Association of Baptists in Danbury, Connecticut. They were concerned about the newly formed federal government. This leviathan that had been created could, they feared, become a great danger to their Christian faith and to their churches.

Jefferson was out of the country when the Constitution was written and when the Bill of Rights was proposed and passed, and he had nothing to do with it. He said that he was greatly impressed that the American people, through their representatives and through the First Amendment, had, in effect, erected a "wall of separation" between the church and the state, so they need have no fear that the federal government was going to intrude upon their religion or in any way disturb their faith.


[My Comments: This was wise, because Emperor Constantine use his power to intrude on the church and polluted it. King Henry of England did the same thing, married Anne Bolyn and created heresy, to the overthrow of many. Jefferson in no way meant that the state shouldn’t tolerate Christianity in the ways mentioned today, but rather do the opposite, without dictating to the clergy. That is, they can’t come and do what King Henry did – compromise the scriptures and make it law to suit their own purpose. That is separation of church and state. You the state respect and uphold biblical “law” regardless if it is not to your liking and your “powers” must not be used to change or interfere in it, as Constantine or King Henry did. That’s what Thomas Jefferson meant, and he didn’t find this intimidating as a politician and president. Thus, what is being done by the courts today, in dictating and even ruling out Christian principles, is unconstitutional and erroneous; far from what Jefferson meant.]


When Jefferson came to the presidency…one of many of the documents he signed while President…says, "In the year of our Lord Christ 1804." He was the first one, and to my knowledge the only one that did that. Here is Jefferson, the "anti-Christian, irreligious infidel," saying that it is Christ who is our Lord and no one else, lest anyone have any false ideas about that.


Capitol Rotunda, the most visible public building in America, bar none. There, every week for seven years, during the rest of his presidency, Thomas Jefferson was there. He sat in the front row. He wasn't pleased with the music, and so he ordered that the Marine Band, under his control, come to church on Sunday and play to support the singing of hymns and psalms in the church. (By the way, they were paid out of the Federal Treasury.)


“There is simply no historical foundation for the proposition that the framers intended to build a wall of separation [between church and State] . . . the "wall of separation between church and State" is a metaphor based on bad history, a metaphor which has proved useless as a guide to judging. It should be frankly and explicitly abandoned.” -William Rehnquist [Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States].


For example, what he [Jefferson] did as President included, among other things, supporting government involvement in

* Legislative Chaplains.

* Establishing a national seal using a religious symbol.

* Including the word "God" in our national motto.

* Official Days of Fasting and Prayer-at least on the state level.

* Punishing Sabbath breakers (is that real enough for you?).

* Punishing marriages contrary to biblical law.

* Punishing irreverent soldiers.

* Protecting the property of churches.

* Requiring oaths saying "So Help Me God," taken on the Bible.

* Granting land to Christian churches to reach the Indians.

* Granting land to Christian schools.

* Allowing Government property and facilities to be used for worship.

* Using the Bible and non-denominational religious instruction in the public schools. (He was involved in three different school districts and the plan in each one of these REQUIRED that the Bible be taught in our public schools).

* Allowing clergymen to hold public office, and encouraging them to do so.

* Purchasing and stocking religious books for public libraries.

* Funding of salaries of clergymen in Indian mission schools.

* Funding for construction of church buildings for Indians.

* Exempting churches from taxation.

* Establishing professional schools of theology. [He wanted to bring over from Geneva, Switzerland, the entire faculty of Calvin's theological seminary and establish it at the University of Virginia.]

* Treaties requiring other nations to guarantee religious freedom.

* Including religious speeches and prayers in official ceremonies.

The real Thomas Jefferson is the ACLU's worst nightmare.


Also, in the first 150 years of our nation, “separation of church and state” was mentioned less than a dozen times by the federal Courts; and that’s being generous.

During the last 50 years, it’s been mentioned over 6,000 times. Who best knows what the First Amendment means: the Founders of our country, or a bunch of federal judges today?



[source: D. James K., August 15, 2002, The Real Thomas Jefferson]





On July 9, 1776, only five days after our Declaration of Independence, General George Washington wrote, “The blessing and protection of Heaven are at all times necessary, but especially so in times of public distress and danger.” On the same day, Washington ordered, “The colonels or commanding officers of each regiment are directed to procure Chaplains. The General hopes and trusts that every officer and man will endeavor to live and act as becomes a Christian soldier defending the dearest rights and liberties of his country.”

Our founding Fathers strongly relied upon God’s assistance.

Patrick Henry, largely responsible for Virginia’s involvement in the Revolutionary War, in the course of his famous speech, said, “Three millions of People, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Beside, Sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of Nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us.”


[source: Sam Kastensmidt, Thursday, May 22, 2003, Lest We Forget]





In fact, as far back as 1606, one can see America’s Christian heritage in full bloom. That year, the first British colony was established on the North American continent in Jamestown. The original charter for the colony gave glory to “the providence of Almighty God,” and its stated purpose was “propagating the Christian religion.”

Just fourteen years later, the Pilgrims landed at Plymouth Bay. Before setting foot on land, their leaders drafted the Mayflower Compact, which has been called “America’s Birth Certificate.” The very first sentence made clear their purpose: “In the name of God, Amen.”


Over a century later, America’s founding Fathers signed the Declaration of Independence. It mentioned God four times. It says that people have “inalienable Rights of Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.” These rights are “endowed by their Creator.”


[source: Greg Hoadley, Friday, February 21, 2003, One Nation Under God?]





Christianity in America's history can be seen as far back as Christopher Columbus' historic voyage in 1492. Though seeking to reach India by sailing west—a notion scoffed at by his contemporaries—Columbus came across two islands off of the coast of North America.

What inspired him to make this voyage?

In his journals, Columbus remarked, "It was the Lord who put it into my mind" to find a different route to India. He glorified God in all he did, including the naming of the two islands: San Salvador, meaning "Holy Savior," and Trinidad, meaning "trinity."


[source: Greg Hoadley, Friday, November 15, 2002, Remembering Our Foundations]






The historic Christian foundation left is not only the constitution, but many other godly legacies that are being butchered today. The mere fact we have them showed that we were not only Christian based but intended to stay that way. The following display what the founding fathers left or what is left of them.


The monument Chief Justice Roy Moore placed in the rotunda of the Alabama Supreme Court has four quotations from official acts of the federal government, each of which acknowledges God, and 10 supporting quotations from founding Fathers and others. Here is a sampling of what is inscribed below the Ten Commandments on the monument.

Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.
(Declaration of Independence)

The laws of nature are the laws of God; Whose authority can be superseded by no power on earth. (George Mason 1772)

One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.
(Pledge of Allegiance, 1954)

Human law must rest its authority ultimately upon the authority of that law which is divine. (James Wilson)

So help me God.
(Judiciary Act of 1789)

Let it simply be asked, where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice? (George Washington)

In God we trust.
(National Motto, 1956)

O thus be it ever when freemen shall stand
Between their lov’d home and the war’s desolation!
Blest with vict’ry and peace may the heav’n rescued land
Praise the power that hath made and preser’d us a nation!
Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,
And this be our motto—"In God is our Trust."
And the star-spangled banner in tri- umph shall wave
O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave.
(National Anthem)


[source: John Aman, September 01, 2001, What does the monument say?]





US Constitutional Amendment, Article 1: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”


It simply means the government cannot stop persons from having church service, distribution of Christian Literature, bible reading and doing any thing “religious;” even in public and governmental places. Thus, neither can anyone else prevent them. Religion there only meant Judeo-Christian faith, that was the religion of America and every other religion was paganism; “even to the punishment of pagans.” Also, notice the presidential faith lists in Part 2, section 3, clause 1. Under religion it would seems that they were many religions but these were only denominations under the Christian faith. When you asked a man his religion then, he wouldn’t say Christian, but Baptist, Episcopalian and so on. That was the diverse religion congress should make no law on, or interfere in. Christianity was so involved then that certain governmental building in Washington had church service being held in them, with even attendance of Presidents.


Therefore, what the law states, unaware to many and ignored by the “unbiblical elite,” is that Christians have the freedom to do anything in the name of their religion, in the confines of their religion. That is, pray in school, have devotions in school, read the bible in schools, freely distribute Christian literature in schools, have true religious education and bible classes in school, erect Christian monuments and anything within the confines of Christianity. Therefore, what has taken place in the pass decades by the humanists, mainly ACLU, is unconstitutional. Most Americans and lawyers aren’t even aware of this. Most think Christianity and government (as in public) shouldn’t mix, but what the constitution did was to encourage this and even release itself from imposing on it by Amendment one of the US constitution. For instance, removal of the Ten Commandments by any judge from a public place is unconstitutional. For if you’re not to make any legislation against Christian exploits and then by law remove a Christian monument you’ve clearly made a law pertaining to Christian religion and violated Amendment 1. The same goes for bible reading, devotional service and anything that is outlawed today in public schools, under the misguided notion of “separation of Church and state.” As seen in Part 2, Section 3, Clause 3, Phase 1, “separation of church and state” isn’t what most think it is. What is called “separation of church and state” today is utterly unconstitutional. One of the chief essences of Amendment 1 is to prevent a repeat of King Henry or Emperor Constantine, whereby the state can assume authority in the church and change it as they feel and enact what they change. So when Jefferson alludes to a “wall of separation” this is what he meant and not what the ACLU suppose. For he couldn’t have meant what the ACLU suppose it means if he overtly did the opposite of what the ACLU suppose it to mean; detailed in Part 2, Section 3, Clause 3, Phase 1 at the end. That alone is clear common sense to debunk this wrong non-theist notion of “separation of church and state.” But at last, who are these non-theists eroding our nation? “Mainly” fallen ones who far-see that this true meaning would surface and prevent their aims and thus for the pass 50+ years have cede this wrong notion fully well knowing that it is wrong; another ability of theirs we are subject to live with. That’s the reason for this conclusion, “in the first 150 years of our nation, ‘separation of church and state’ was mentioned [far] less than a dozen times by the federal Courts…during the last 50 years, it’s been mentioned over 6,000 times.


Even further, let me show you that the entire Amendment 1 is misunderstood. Many people and journalists use Amendment 1, the part that says, “abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press;” they use it to bash political leaders, promote sexual immorality, humanism and everything imaginable – when it was not given to them. In other words, there is no such thing as freedom of speech for the public, or freedom of the press under Amendment 1. That entire phrase was being addressed to religious adherent or more specifically, Christians. It states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion….” Then after that, it listed the other things congress shouldn’t do in respect of religious adherents (Judeo-Christians). Commas (,), Semi-colon (;) and the word “or” were used to separate the things listed that were attributed to Christians only; it was one sentence with one subject – the church. The first time I realized this in July-2004, I was shocked that I thought to hide it; seeing that I write a lot of stuff with the pretext of freedom of speech. But later realized that all I write is religiously oriented. Then another sad thing dawned on me, if the “house”, judiciary and courts realizes this and let it be heard, then the “unbiblical minority” will try to evade it by forming pseudo-Christianity; like Christian science, Mormonism, today’s Unitarians and even homosexual churches. And if my knowledge of fallenangelogy and their involvement is correct, then they would have known I would write this and begin this pseudo-church process as well. That’s the reason I wrote that the law said “they have the freedom to do anything in the name of their religion WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THEIR RELIGION.” In other words, the constitutional Amendment 1 didn’t give the Christian rights just to do anything. That would mean a Christian can walk in the white house undetained, shoot the president in the name of their religion, walk out and even the vice-president shaking his hand and saying, “thank God you obeyed your religion.” No. The only reason congress gave Christians that power was because they themselves were Christians and knew the bible inside out. In fact, Jefferson studied it in four languages daily. So they all knew what it teaches - the inherent laws of all nations. Not only would it bring a prosperous mighty nation, but an obedient people. So enticing are its principles that even a “satanic” leader in a democracy would opt to use it.


Therefore, not anybody or group under the banner of Christianity can exercise this freedom either – only those who are true bible adherents. This is not determined by denominational differences, which some call different biblical “interpretation.” This is determined by the sameness that all denomination has – the inherent dogmas that make one cling to the Judeo-Christian faith: Example, a belief in the 10 commandments, Leviticus 18 and all the doctrines of the apostles. In other words, one cannot claim to be a Christian church if it promotes homosexuality as biblical or even adultery (polygamy). Or, a Muslim saying he’s a Christian when he “deifies” another God or exemplifies the life of Muhammad. Sporting the “label” Christian would only be a ploy to enjoy the benefit Christians have: In this case, that would be freedom of speech and press. The above are easy inherent biblical characteristics of Christendom, some are not that easy to decipher. It therefore means that the federal Judges, Congress, “house,” President and all governmental officials have to get back to the foundation of studying God’s word – just like how Washington and Jefferson did daily. Or even the recent promising news I saw of 2004 Presidential Candidate John Kerry, they say he carries his bible with him everywhere. For this to occur, “Religious Christian Education” has to be mandated in our schools and even colleges. It simply means we have to put God in America again!


There is no various interpretations to the constitution, there is only what is meant. You don't have a strict constructionist view and a liberal view of the constitution, there is no various views, it's black or white. It has one meaning. Loosely speaking, if it didn't you wouldn't have the ability to make amendments to what is already set*. Various interpretations is like saying to the judge after having force intercourse with a young boy, "he said no, but I interpreted it as yes, for sometimes no means yes and vice versa." Judge, "but the boy said he kicked you and was running away, when you apprehended him while he was halfway through the window crying." "Yes, your honor, but he kept saying no, which I interpreted as yes, because sometimes...." (Not to mention that this is sodomy, rape, statutory rape and a disgraceful sinful act worthy of death). This is how these who see this true explanation of the constitution sound by saying it can be interpreted this way or that way. The framers had one literal meaning when they made it and it must be upheld for the life of the Union (nation). The constitution was guided by Christian men and the values they instill were Judeo-Christianity, best of all values, used by most nations. Hence, to totally be intolerable to God, Christian values and Christian Chief Justices would be considered paradoxical and any with this mind set can only spawn unconstitutional legislatures and claims - Plan Parenthood, People "for" the American Way, ACLU, "irreligious" judges and chief justices, Pro-Abortion groups, so called "Separation of Church and State" groups and many others. Even further, they know this and are purposely doing so as stated in the preamble of the Student Manifesto, please re-read it.


Notice, "The English constitution was not a written document or a fixed set of unchangeable rules...and most people were willing to accept changes in it. Americans, by contrast, drew from their experience with colonial charters, in which the shape and powers of government were permanently inscribed on paper" (Unfinished Nation, Alan Brinkley). Overtly making my point plain that the constitution is set and there is no interpretation or change to it. Amendments didn't change the constitution, but added more “unchangeables” as time went by. Example, no Internet laws until the Internet came. Hence, what was unconstitutional then is unconstitutional now and the "same" ideological form of government should exist today.


"The problem is whether the American People have loyalty enough, honor enough, Patriotism enough, to live up to their own constitution" (Fredrick Douglas).



* A type of various “interpretation” might be seen only in clauses like Article 1, section 8; whereby legislature can be deemed based on what is currently necessary and lawful to that Article or clause, now enlightened to it. And that type of “interpretation” is stated and plainly spelt out.























“That God might manifest them” (Ecc 3:18)











After reading this section, any rational thinking person will come to the conclusion that uniforms are necessary. All the good points will be brought out, but also, all the allege disadvantage will be dissipated. Though our economy had flourished without its relative enforcement, we need it more than ever – as our children are getting out of control and rebellious violations are running rampant. This and the resistance to uniforms are simply a result of the humanist manifesto – to remove godly attributes and discipline and replace it with individualism and humanism. It is my desire to see a great nation mandate this needed policy nation-wide.



“School for most children is the major experience with the world outside the home. About a third of the day is spent at school and about half of a child's waking hours.” So attire is not a subject easily overlooked and should be properly put in place by uniforms. “Uniforms were first instituted in 16th Century England at the charity schools for poor children. It was not until the 19th Century that the great English public schools began instituting uniforms and even later for them to be widely accepted at state schools--especially state elementary schools.” History also teaches us that uniforms are the wise choice and anything less, especially recanting, is disastrous. One source noted about uniforms in England, “It was the widespread youth revolt of the late -1960s that had the greatest impact…A few public schools abolished uniform altogether. Most later regretted it.”



In assessing the matter of school uniforms, we must take in consideration actual words or pro’s and con’s of the public. From them we can solidify the opening thesis. These are the main ones:


Pro 1: School uniforms would save parents money. - Anonymous, yourdebate.com


My comments:  No argument about “Hidden Costs” of uniforms can change that. No matter how much uniforms cost, it will never cost as much as casual clothes. Moreover, any report of high uniform cost is either distorted or made up. One source said, “Today in many countries without uniforms, buying school clothes has become a late summer ritual, considered a symbol of privilege. This has, however begun to change. Simplified school uniforms began to be seen as a way of limiting school clothing expenses.”


Pro 2: School uniforms would save parents time. Kids in the morning would not have to make up their minds on what to wear. - Anonymous, yourdebate.com


My comments:  That is true, but a weak point; for a “tardy person” will always we a “tardy person.”


Pro 3: Kids, whose parents would not or could not buy them the newest fad, would not be embarrassed or harassed because of their cloths. - Anonymous, yourdebate.com


My comments:  Plus there’s no distinction between the rich and poor; “class” is dropped and togetherness encouraged. This is even a good way of teaching our kids not to be prejudice.


Pro 4: Kids social standing would be based more on individual character and less on their economic status. - Anonymous, yourdebate.com


My comments:  Good point.


Pro 5: Lots of gangs use cloths to identify themselves and other gangs. - Anonymous, yourdebate.com


My comments:  Hence reduces this sort of gang related affair and adversely affects gangs in general.


Pro 6: Some kids use baggy cloths to hid weapons and drugs. - Anonymous, yourdebate.com


My comments:  A good example is the columbine school shooting and others. Trench coats were often used; as in the famous herald, “The Trench Coat Massacre.” Though a ‘weakish’ point, for weapons can still be carried in bags, it nevertheless helps. It lessens it and the imitation influence from television gunslingers and villains.


Pro 7: It is my opinion that school is in the 'business' of learning. School is the place where the next lawyers, bankers, CPA's and Doctors are given the fundamentals of working in this economy. One of the basics of our culture in the working world is conservative dressing, dress code, or even uniforms. What is wrong with sending our kids the message that they are in 'the business of learning' by enforcing dress codes, or even ascribing a uniform? - Anonymous, yourdebate.com


My comments:  Moreover, clothing gives off a mood, that’s why certain jobs have them. Wearing baggy jeans and a tank top is not conducive to working in a corporate environment and lessens productivity in the individual. It’s also psychological, you perform the way you dress, if you’re particular about dressing – everybody. Similarly, most clothes don’t foster the mindset of learning in a child and even detract from it. Leave the casual clothing for the casual time; it will be more appreciate there.


Pro 8: Uniforms make it easy to identify kids who belong in the school and those that don't. - Anonymous, yourdebate.com


My comments:  Also, teenage intruders on school property can easily be identified.


Pro 9: Boys in school uniform are in fact walking advertisements for a school, giving an impression of the school for good or for bad throughout an entire town or city. Many believed the uniform to be an accurate reflection of a school's discipline standards and discipline. - HBC


My comments:  Good point for school to want it. Plus, it holds the schools responsible to the students. That is, seeing that the students are advertising the schools, it is in their best interest to make sure the students are not indiscipline off-campus, to bring the school in shame. Hence, schools are forced to instill discipline in the students so they behave properly away from school. While at my high school, boys were reprimanded for incidents they committed at the bus stop, miles away from school: Because they were in their school uniforms. I remember an incident while at high school. We were visiting an underground game arcade downtown, Kingston, in our uniforms. The vice-principal got a whole of that information and on one occasion, suddenly made a surprise visit, to our reprimandment. He did it to protect the school name and probably cared for the students. Nevertheless, many boys simply take off their tie, which was our identification, for future mischief. To mirror that now, that would be carrying a change of clothes. This can hardly go unnoticed by the parent/guardian, and if they become involved, the student knows the punishment is worse.


Pro 10: Most people are not educational experts, but a smartly uniformed schoolboy can be noted by all but the blind. – HBC


My comments:  Good point. It demands respect; a thing many student lack in most areas, especially if you’re of the minority. You could equate it to an official. What if the President made an appointment with several other nations and showed up bare footed, shorts and sleeveless shirt. He would get no respect and everything he says or does would be treated with disdain.


Pro 11: Some scoff at the importance of discipline, but as any school teacher can tell you, discipline is critical to the functioning of any school. No school can function effectively without a disciplined student body. A disciplinarian is not necessarily a good teacher, but unless a teacher can control his class room, it will be impossible to teach no matter how learned he is. -HBC


My comments:  Can I say more.


Pro 12: Uniforms in the early 19th century were adopted by some of England’s exclusive private schools to prevent boys competing with each over with outlandish styles and colors. –HBC


My comments:  This competition causes a great number of problems and basically causes them to be distracted from the purpose to which they came to school – to learn. If so, it defeats the purpose of school and needs to be done away with.


Pro 13: To reduce the appearance of class differences. - HBC


My comments:  Much needed, in an already diversely classed nation.


Con 1: Clothes don’t make the man, but education does. – Anonymous


My comments:  Uniform clothing is not the issue, but the intent behind the cloths – discipline, order, money-savings, etc. If you give a man an academic education without correct character training, like discipline, you’re defeating the purpose of education. It’s like giving a gun to a man off to war, without showing the man how to use the gun. Though possessing the weapon, he’ll be at lost and jeopardy to himself and others.


Con 2: It’s tyrannical (one person said “sartorial tyranny”), communistic, fascist and therefore not conducive to a democratic state. The very notion of “mandatory” and “enforcement” resonate this. - Devil’s advocate


My comments:  On the counts of tyranny, fascism, overt use of federal power, communistic or other such things used against uniforms, be it known that Nazi Germany didn’t have uniforms for schools; the most tyrannical of all communists sect. Thus, if it were tyranny or some means of evil control or evil use of power, they would have definitely implanted it. But they didn’t for it has no such ties. The rebellious for lack of words and to glorify their defense say these things.


Con 3: Teachers should then wear uniforms too, to lead by example. – B. Wilson


My comments:  Teachers are the workers, and like any job, attire themselves professionally. Their attire distinguishes them loudly, even from intruders off the street. Teacher uniform is not necessary. They have surpassed the child-learning stage and have progressed into responsible adults, who are hired to do a job. If mandatory, it would be like diapers on a 20 year old man. What might be good is a school nametag. Teachers are already an example by their professional dress; saying to the students that when they are released from this mandatory code this is how you must attire yourself with the choices now given.


Con 4: Followers wear uniform. Leaders Don’t. – Mount Carmel Area School District Protestors


My comments:  This is the reason uniforms are needed. For the sentiment behind this statement shows the state we are in – disobedience, self-aggrandizement, rebellion and devilishly out-of-order. How can you lead, if you can’t first follow? How can you first give commands, if you cannot take commands? This is what ‘things’ like uniform prepares our children for – real leadership. Instilling in them discipline by first following, to lead to true leadership. Each leader had to first submit before leading. If they cannot, you might be raising a tyrant. Everybody is under some authority; therefore, everybody has to follow at some time. If not, you’re not fit for this life and worthy to be cast out. Moreover, everybody can’t be a “leader.” There’s one Queen in England out of millions of people. There is only one President out of some 250 million Americans.


Con 5: Why not simply remove the gang members from the schools and place them in an alternative learning environment like a boot camp? - Anonymous, yourdebate.com


My comments:  This cost money, your tax dollars. Plus it’s only relocating the problem, rather than dealing with it. One would rather disenfranchise others at your own expense (tax dollars), rather than wear a ‘measly’ uniform. You see that loose dressing is seeded in selfish individualism; the corner-stone of the humanist agenda. Any personal discomfort felt by mandating uniforms in all public schools should be tolerated for the greater good; until it has settled in our society.


Con 6: School Uniforms are expensive and have no use outside of school. - Anonymous, yourdebate.com


My comments:  See Pro number 1. Also, for the last part, a bike helmet has no purpose outside of riding a bike. Does that reduce its purpose or importance?


Con 7: School uniforms will do nothing but cut down on a student’s individuality. A uniform is not the way to cut down on school violence. The only thing that will cut down on school violence is if parents would pay attention to their children and keep their children out of trouble and give them consequences when they disobey and not to let them run wild. - Danyelle C. Swain, yourdebate.com


My comments:  Individuality!? Up until my post-secondary studies, I had to wear uniforms with tie, yet no one is more individually oriented as I am. A uniform cannot stifle your individuality; only teach you how to control it, by discipline. Whereby the bible said, “He that is slow to anger is better than the mighty, and he that ruleth his spirit than he that taketh a city” (Prov 16:32). “He that hath not rule over his own spirit is like a city that is broken down, and without walls” (Prov 25:28). This person also said, “if parents would pay attention to their children and keep their children out of trouble.” This is most encouraged, especially if biblical; but in a sensitive work treadmill society, majority of the parents won’t achieve this always.


Con 8: School is also the place where the next actors, writers, artists, politicians, inventors, designers and musicians are trained. School uniforms send a clear early-life message to students that [3] conformity is important and creativity is not, that authority is allowed to abuse its power and constrain our [1] constitutional right to free speech and expression. Students learn from uniforms that their [2] individuality, political opinions and religious rights are unimportant, as is their education: students are regularly suspended for non compliance to the uniform code even if their school work is excellent. If uniform-requiring schools were actually in 'the business of learning' this would not occur. – T. Maginnis, Ph.D.


My comments:  For [1], this is ridiculous, plus we really don’t have this right; it’s a mistake we have enjoyed and abused it. See Part 1, Section 3, Clause 5. For [2], If it was that important, they would be allowed to vote and wouldn’t have parents and the “inherent powers” to guide them. Guidance to the point of obedience – uniforms; which is teaching them to make their own voice be heard at the right time. A calm before the storm, discipline before power and control before expression. All these things are good, but when the individual has no control over his own self, how can he be effective? He would be a raw actor, raw writer, raw artist, raw politician, raw inventor, raw designer and raw musician who will never exploit his true potential. For [2] and [3]: Uniforms, therefore, helps the individual better exercise these rights and expressiveness by instilling needed discipline – as against the violent rebellious characters that now plague us.


Con 9: Not everyone should be punished for other people’s crimes!  - gurl552004@hotmail.com


My comments:  To response to this might be stupid. See also CON # 5


Con 10: I am totally AGAINST school uniforms! One reason, of many, is Safety of the Students. For example: During a natural disaster (God Forbid) Earthquake, Tornado, etc... How would a Parent I.D. their child? By the clothes that they were wearing, when they left home. What if a senior decided to attack a 9th -or- 10th grade student? How would the victim describe the attacker? Let's see, Khaki Pants - Navy Blue Shirt - Brown Shoes. You get the picture. This was, is, and will ALWAYS BE a VERY BAD idea. - Randy


My comments:  Responding to this might also be stupid. How does the parent do the same thing on graduation when everybody is not only in gowns, but a hat? As I’ve said, I’ve been in a school system under uniform until post secondary studies, these and other “CON’s” are non-existent. While in it, like most, we hated uniforms and wanted to show off our name-brand clothes – to the point we tried this in bag packs, shoes, belt and even tie-pin. Even that caused many problems – theft, fights, etc. It’s after finishing post-secondary studies and now an adult, I realize how brilliant and blessed uniform was!




Having dealt with the pro’s and cons', arguments for and against can be formalized with the following summation from HBC. They either add to the arguments already mentioned or arouse new solidification to the opening thesis. However, most often, “The debate over school uniform can take on an importance far beyond the issues involved.”


The Case for School Uniforms


Those that believe school uniforms are beneficial generally make the following arguments:


Promotes good discipline: Many feel that school uniforms help a school in maintaining discipline. Many school systems report uniforms help to reduce discipline problems. Some schools report dramatic declines, although opponents question some of these reports. Children today are lacking in self discipline. Many parents simply refuse to discipline their children. This makes it much more difficult on the teacher who has to deal with a class of 20-30 children throughout the day.


Reduces fighting and violence: School uniforms reduce violence by eliminating fights and disruptions over fashionable clothes. Children invariably tease those who do not have trendy clothes. Poor children are often very sensitive about their clothes. American inner-city schools facing serious gang violence believe that uniforms help to ease the problem.


Business like: Some say that a child in a uniform is more likely to take school seriously. Putting on the uniform signals that he is going to school just as dad dresses up for work. When students were dressed in "learning clothes" rather than "play clothes" some schools report that students took a more serious, scholarly attitude towards their studies.


Appearance: Many parents and even some children generally believe that student wearing uniforms looked nicer and that a uniform policy ensured that children would come to school in appropriate clothing, avoiding distractions such as fads considered outlandish or overly revealing. A HBC reader in the U.S. writes, "I read a book showing how children dress for school in the U.K. and showed it to my mom. She said those boys look neat clean and disciplined. I also think the saying goes, ‘If you look nice you are going to act nice’ like a gentleman. Kids today cannot accept those kinds of disciplinary clothes they want to wear those ugly baggy things and they are ugly looking clothes! My mother said it’s a fad and they will grow out of it, but I myself don't think it’s going to happen. I know our school district puts millions of dollars for soccer fields and other sports. I spoke with a school board member about getting school uniforms for the kids the answer was, 'We don’t have the money.' I showed him a photo of the way the kids dress in Papatoe High School in new Zealand he said its probably a fake photo. Can you believe that!" My comment: I wrote something in Part 1, section 4 about dressing “sexy” and fashion victimization students have been manipulated into. Read that section. Uniforms will greatly reduce this.


Focus on academics: No morning confusion. Many parents in schools with uniform policies indicated that they no longer had the morning debate over "what to wear." Some students have turned school into an unending fashion show. This is embarrassing to the children who can’t "keep up" and it detracts from the focus on academics. There is no doubt that some children spend more time selecting their wardrobe than doing their home work.


Values: School uniforms stress that individuality and self-expression are not determined by designer clothing or the latest fashion fad.


Safety: The school uniform readily identified students as a member of that school and increased student safety on and off campus. Uniforms readily identify who belong on campus and who does not. Unfortunately this is a matter of increasing concern in our modern age.


Reduces distractions: Proponents say that uniforms allow students to concentrate on their studies instead of the latest fashion trends. The idea is to promote a better atmosphere for learning and help children concentrate on the academic program. Peer pressure appeared to take a back seat to learning.


Equity: School uniforms help to eliminate social distinctions. Children from low-income families need not be embarrassed by not being able to afford the latest fashions or designer clothes. Many schools report that school uniforms do help to reduce socio-economic differences.


Low cost: Uniforms are a good bargain. They are cheap and getting cheaper. They are getting less expensive than any other clothes. Proponents say that uniforms are economical. Compared to buying designer clothes this is undoubtedly true. Some children pressure their parents to buy very expensive clothes--even in elementary school. Some parents report that uniforms appeared to be more durable since they are made for repeated wash and wear. Often schools have used uniform shops, further reducing costs.


School spirit: Some feel wearing a uniform help builds school spirit. They believe it instills a feeling of belonging. Parents and students in schools with successful uniform policies often indicate that there was an improved sense of school pride and spirit.


Individuality: Regimentation and suppressing individuality is the most frequently cited objection to school uniforms. Some educators argue that an academic program encouraging children to pursue individual thought is much more important than what they wear. The fact that students object more to fashion concerns than to school academic programs discouraging free thought is a good indicator of why the use of uniforms to reduce concern with fashion may be beneficial.


The Case Against School Uniforms


Those that believe school uniforms are not beneficial generally make the following arguments:


Inhibits creativity and self-expression: Self-explanatory and false.


Individuality: The opponents of school uniform maintain that students should be allowed to choose their own clothes and they shouldn't be forced to conform. The opponents feel that the inability to choose ones clothes causes children to lose their individuality. Interestingly, many who feel strongly about this are not nearly as concerned over the insistence of many schools to avoid controversial issues. Different societies have place varying emphasis on conformity. In Japan it has been a strongly held goal. In America society has placed a much greater emphasis on individuality.


Causes discipline problems: Some students object to any rules. Rules about their clothes are particularly objectionable to some. They alter their uniform by lengthening, shortening, widening or tightening them. Tension between students and teachers sometimes occurs, as teachers try to enforce the school rules, and students resist them. My comment: This is a foolish argument compared to having no uniforms; children on a whole will attempt to resist any rule. HBC records, “School uniform remains an issue between pupils and school authorities. It would be odd indeed if this were not the case. But it is wrong to imagine that the adolescent rebel really wants uniform to be abolished or that abolition would put a stop to the arguments. Most American schools have dress codes. Often parents and students participate in setting the code. But that is not to say there are fewer disagreements over clothes at American schools than at British schools. In fact, far from reducing disputes about what could or could not be worn, the dress code was open to more conflicting interpretations than the uniform regulations had ever been. Enforcing a uniform is a relatively simple matter compared to the constant small issues arising from a never ending decisions that have to be made on the never ending appearance of new clothing styles and looks.”


Little or no relationship to academics: Opponents insist that there is no creditable evidence that uniforms improve school discipline or result in superior academic achievement. The principal evidence offered here is that some good students are scruffy dressers. There is no doubt that children can learn even if they dress as they want. The question not addressed is to what extent fashion, and the tendency of modern children to focus on fashion, distracts from the academic program. This issue is generally avoided by those who argue that dress is unrelated to academics.


High cost: Some say that uniforms are excessively costly. As they are generally available from one supplier, some of the market action limiting prices may not work well. My comment: Untrue, uniforms are inexpensive and proven to be so. See Pro #1.


Emphasizes social distinctions: The uniforms worn by affluent children going to private schools help to emphasize class distinctions. My comment: What private school does is out of the hand of the public. They can wear what they feel or mandate what they feel, that’s why it’s private - you pay greatly to send your child there, thus parents and staff have an anarchy on what they do. Nevertheless, their uniforms are still affordable in America; even over the fad-fashions. And even with no uniform, kids in private school would dress “better off” than those in public anyway; uniforms lessens the social distinctions of this in the individual schools and among themselves.


Dowdy styles: Children generally feel that their uniforms are dowdy and not attractive or stylish. My comment: If this emphasis were placed on children, what on earth would we be instilling in the future America or world? They would be shallow. Moreover, giving the child the ultimate freedom to dictate on matters like these is spoiling the child, a far more adverse societal effect.


Absenteeism and truancy: Often Absent from school. My comment: This is too ridiculous to even ponder a rebuttal. If casual dressing ostracizes certain student, hence truancy, then the opposite must happen under a uniform policy. Only on the shaky foundation of Empiricism can such a fallacious claim be made.




I download and read an essay or article by Darlene Williams; I must say she really was crafty with words and reasoning. She gave the best devil’s advocacy and used many cases and Empirical data. I’ll cite her arguments briefly. It can be read at http://www.gate.net/~rwms/UniformDWilliams.html


She cited a good result of mandatory school uniforms and how effective it can be:


In Long Beach…the first district to have a widespread mandatory uniform policy in the public schools, the initial reports concerning drops in crime and discipline were astonishing. Assault dropped by sixty-seven percent, vandalism by eighty-two percent, and robbery by thirty-five percent. Overall crime was reduced by seventy-three percent the first year the policy was in place ("K-8" 1).


I lauded her for that. But then she made a fallacious statement:


So, while uniforms were the most visible change, the improvements were more likely attributable to the other programs which included, among other initiatives, a $1 million grant from the Edna McConnell Clark Foundation for the improvement of teaching methods (Brunsma and Rockquemore).


This is utter foolishness to try and discredit uniforms. For instance, a better way to improve how a teacher teach math can’t reduce crime that dramatically. It’s like saying three puny children were trying to push down Arnold Schwaganegger (terminator) and a fouth man came, HULK; then Arnold fell. We know 2 ton Hulk pushed over Arnold, but the anti-HULK fan would say it’s a contribution of all the men. Please.


She then cited another school that followed long beach and said they didn’t have the same results: Like two person weight lifting will have the same results:


The results were, at best, disappointing and, at worst, alarming. The elementary schools with mandatory uniforms saw a slight decrease in discipline problems.


Any decrease in “crime” is welcomed, especially by an initiative that has numerous other benefits. She went further to say on the matter:


Unfortunately, the high hopes held by the district for immediate, significant improvement in discipline were not realized.


Mandatory uniforms is not an over night magic wand for a country that has avoided it. It takes a process; long beach is one of the many exceptions. She then lamented against one of the benefits of uniforms with her data:


The summary further states that while some safety violations declined at mandatory uniform schools, the same problems were reduced at no uniform schools as well. Empirical data does not support the anecdotal accounts of discipline and safety improvements cited by uniform proponents.


In studying economics, I learnt a great deal about all data in all fields of study. They are all assumptions and making comparisons is not more accurate with the use of Empirical data over her claim of “anecdotal accounts.” Reason being, the comparison are made with all things held constant or a few variables; what my teacher refer to as a “real world” case cannot be gained easily or at all. For instance, if planter ‘A’ uses fertilizers this year and planter 'B' doesn’t, it means planter 'A' crops will be better. But it didn’t happen because of a deadly drought. Empirical data would show fertilizers don’t work better than no fertilizers: When in fact, other more impacting variables are involved. It would only be true if all things are held constant. This example is clear, but others are not that simple. Mandatory uniform policy can be said to have inherent intangible benefits that empiricism cannot weigh properly or at all.


She then gave some facts from the Manual on School Uniforms and other data to say:


"A mandatory school uniform policy without an opt out provision could be vulnerable to legal challenge."


Opt-out clause gives the right for some to wear casual clothes. Having an opt-out clause is defeating the purposes of uniform altogether; and even shows partiality, bias and elements of a weak governing body. You don’t need an opt-out clause for a Muslim to wear her shawl or someone with a sickness to wear special clothing. That is an inherent use of discretion. Opt-out fosters abuse of the policy by the rebellious and the ultimate overthrow of the uniform policy itself. This should be dismissed by any court, for if you take away the power of the school to administer what it deems disciplinary and necessary, what are they left with. The parents and students would be the boss and we wouldn’t need a school; let them teach themselves! It’s better said by this Supreme Court ruling, “We are not anarchists, and recognize that society can only function by having rules of conduct and behavior. However, when the government restricts the activities of its citizens, it must show just cause for such restrictions. Should not the standards be even higher for the government to dictate what actions its citizens must perform?” Dictate doesn’t mean Nazism, but exercising inherent powers in the best interest of the people.


She then gave incidents that occurred while implementing the uniform policy, mainly Polk County Florida. This was done to disapprove the policy. She ended those incidents with this statement:


We cannot afford to allow our schools to be used as laboratories and our children to be used as guinea pigs for new questionable fads founded in vanity and based on supposition.


Uniforms are not new; it ranges from the 16th century and based on centuries of establishment, as against this allegation of vanity and supposition. America and few other countries have long rejected it, but later came to realize its importance. If it hadn’t been successful for many years, it wouldn’t even have been considered. What has happened in Polk County, and will happen across America, is that a new seed is breaking the ground and with that seed, or change, comes difficulty. That’s the reason psychologist say that all changes, positive or negative, induces stress (T. Holmes and R. Rahe). Nothing good is done in comfort. No real change is left without pain and eruptions – a mother delivering a baby, a bulldozer plowing at asphalt or even the surgery of a patient. Jefferson himself was frank and related this notion. He stated that the tree of liberty is manured by the death of the faithfuls - He spoke of the war of independence, as learnt in my history class (97-99). In other words, implementing this relatively New Mandatory Uniform Policy will have confrontations, but like all good things, prove to be the best choice in the long run. One concerned citizen seems to agree, as against Mrs. Darlene preferred notion of pitching arbitrary funds, see the article below:


South Florida’s Sun-Sentinel, Sept 2004




Based on this section thus far, school uniforms can then be implemented. England began instituting school uniforms at the elementary stage, that’s where it should begin in America, nation-wide. Start in Kindergarten even. It’s kind of difficult to put it in at the high school stage, when that generation has been going casual. Though waiting for the right time will avail no time. Nothing should stop it, but tact should be used. For instance, mandate all elementary schools to institute it, when that class moves to the next stage, then mandate if for all schools in that stage; and so on. Over a period of time, with much difficulty, it should be in full effect for all schools at all stages. Students will always resist uniforms, just like how children will always resist vegetables; especially with this proposed massive sweep of having it done year by year and some students will wear uniforms beside those in casual wear. Should we listen to children and let them eat only ice-cream and donuts, especially when you, the parent, are paying for it and their consequential medical bill? Therefore, their voice in this is of little importance, as well as the rebellious “children” who claim to be their parents. Hence, it must be mandated. That shouldn’t sound harsh, for such power would be exercise in the best interest of the people; as parents have over a child.


In my research, I’ve not seen one teacher protest uniforms, mostly parents and their rebellious siblings. It seems the teacher welcome it because they can relatively teach their class with ease; having focused students. The mere fact that teachers welcome it is enough to implement it. Yet these parents want to drop off their untrained child to these pitiable teachers, who finally (or would have finally) got some help with these “generation of vipers.”


It would be good if the schools sell the uniforms to the parents. This would be even more feasible if they could buy it in bulk at a school discount from wholesalers; and even further, subsidized by the government. Then set price ceilings and price floors to regulate the same selling price across all schools that sell it. This will prevent stores and mega malls from fluctuating prices to benefit themselves, knowing parents have to buy it. Even so, stores wouldn’t hike it above affordability, knowing it’s for the kids. All in all, uniforms will never be beyond affordability either sold by the market or schools. School uniforms may even vary and cost differently, but subsidization and wholesale favors should be able to still be obtained. Nonetheless, all schools should strive to wear the same uniform and use either a tie, coat of arms, crest or logo for differentiation; all with the school name. To make it also cheaper, special materials, special colors and patterns should be avoided. It should be so basic that parents could make it; yet worth the wear.


Discretion and wisdom should be used, for in all things there is little “ironing out” to do. For instance, someone might ask, “should school uniform code extend to underwear color?” It might sound ridiculous, because base on the purposes of uniforms, THE UNDERWEAR SHOULDN’T EVEN BE VISIBLE, that’s the code. Despite all things, implementation is possible, necessary and should be done.




No other publication has put together such strong and blunt inherent reasons for uniforms in America. And no other time than now should it be implemented. It takes a bold nation to make a long term decision with such controversy as this. But it takes an even greater and bolder one to have it mandated for the benefit of all. America has long since posses such qualities; it should then live up to that reputation and use its inherent powers, through legislature, to enact a nation-wide mandatory school uniform policy. Along with “godly” exploits, it’s the only way to push forward and dig our education system from the ditch it has fallen into.







The first thing that can be said is that I’m a witness, a witness to the fact that corporal punishment is more than feasible in schools. Reason being, I grew up in a school system that had corporal punishment in place. I didn’t die, I wasn’t emotionally traumatized, I didn’t take revenge on the school by burning it down and best of all, I turned out okay. Moreover, as experimental as I was, I received more corporal punishment (beating) than most. “Corporal punishment is the intentional inflicting of pain upon a child because he or she has exhibited unacceptable behavior. When an adult in authority hits a child with a hand, cane, paddle or belt to inflict pain, that adult is using corporal punishment." "Since colonial times corporal punishment has been used as a method for disciplining children. Its roots in the United States can be traced back to England."


"Over the years the courts in our country have heard many cases about the legality of corporal punishment. In Ingraham v. Wright (1977) the U.S. Supreme Court considered whether the paddling of two male students in Florida violated their right to be free from "cruel and unusual punishment," as stated in the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. In siding with Dade County school officials, the Court decided that the Eighth Amendment was designed to protect persons charged and/or convicted of a crime, not children in school." Thank God for this, but there are other hindrances. And fortunately, "According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, about 90 percent of U.S. parents spank, and about 59 percent of pediatricians in a 1992 survey said they support the practice."


It is after becoming an ardent student of the bible I learnt that this is not only a good thing, but the best way of punishing a child. Actually, this is the instruction and wisdom given from God himself; as against today’s methods, from allege wise psychologists and experts. As the Bible tells us: "He who spareth the rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him correcteth him betimes" (Proverbs 13:24) and "Withhold not correction from a child: for if thou strike him with the rod, he shall not die. Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and deliver his soul from hell" (Proverbs 23:13-14). Meaning, we are not to spoil children by not beating them, or implementing corporal punishment. The very bible tells us why, “Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him” (Proverbs 22:15). In other words, the child’s tendencies are always folly, mischief and troublesome inclinations, but proper physically felt punishment can correct them. This has lasting adulthood effects of good character and discipline. This is the wisdom given from the being who saw this age and ages to come, when he made us. This might be hard for a non-theist to swallow. However, fortunately, many psychologists have seen the fruits of this and can deem it the best form of “conditioning” – a most effective tool of learning, especially character development.


Modern methods, the alternative, might seem to be more favorable but can be really damaging. Reason being, the modern methods are mental processes, while corporal punishment (beating) is directly physical. For instance, some of the modern methods utilize neglect. This can lead to low self-esteem, lack of self worth, social ineptness and even suicide in the long run. Why? In these processes, the mind was directly affected. They are far more dangerous and should even be avoided. Mental processes are such things as ‘Time-Outs,’ ‘don’t-get-that-don’t-get-this-get-that-get-this’ rambling and other mental gymnastics. Some are so complicated that less educated parents can’t enforce them on their child and being restrained from beating them, they are led to rash behaviors. The mental reprimandment is dangerous because it deals with an area that if tampered with can hardly fix or leads to damages we can’t see or even diagnose. A normal child turns into an adult psychopath for no apparent reason. Most often, they were mentally affected through one of these means.


God took care of that area and made it physical; especially knowing we will never have full expertise in the area of the mind. Bruises will heal, but a scared mind or “mixed up” mind can cause untold lingering problems. The mind is the central part of the body, as an engine is to a car. If the engine of the car is damaged, the whole car is inept. But if there is a bumper-to-bumper hit, the car can go on. The damage engine is modern methods and the bumper hits is corporal punishment. A child will remember the pain from the beating of a loving mother and avoid the offense, as against a mental process that he neither understands nor realize will adversely affect him in the long run. Therefore, corporal punishment for children is the better and more effective method. Most often, when a child “acts up,” he or she seeks attention. Fiddling with the mind and sending them away won’t solve the problem, but make it worse. Flogging them corrects the problem and shows that you do care, by giving needed attention through corporal punishment (presently felt pain).


The only objection to corporal punishment is abuse. But corporal punishment is not abuse, though there is a thin line, as in everything. And most of what is recorded as abuse is not. "According to the National Institute for Healthcare Research, more than 80 percent of the professional publications attacking spanking were reviews and commentaries, rather than quantitative research. When analyzing the small portion of quantitative studies that included spanking, more than 90 percent of these studies lumped together mild forms of spanking with severe forms of physical abuse without discussing why they did so. Thus, the professional organizations which advocated outlawing spanking evidently made their decisions without the benefit of the facts. Mild spanking and severe child abuse are not the same thing." If and when abuse is suspected, anticipated or seen, then the authorities should step in. With chances of this happening doesn’t mean corporal punishment shouldn’t be implemented. For instance, eating food can cause obesity or even food poisoning, but does that mean we shouldn’t eat food? No! In the case of obesity, it just means eating food should be monitored by the individual – moderation. For instance, the American public is well informed on obesity. Many agencies, sub-agencies and programs have been developed to curtail this problem; not the “vital” cause of it – eating, so to speak. The same can be done in the rare cases of abuse. For example, an infomercial stating that beating your child with an iron on the head is not corporal punishment, 10, 20, life. Get rid of these cases of abuse, not the “vital” cause of it – corporal punishment, so to speak.


Another often used objection, inline with the above, is that the child may have ailments and cannot be subjected to corporal punishment. Usually, such students don’t give that much trouble or trouble warranting corporal punishment. Moreover, students with that sever of an ailment would be in a special school, or on record with the school of having that sever ailment. This is an extremely rare case with trouble free students.


Having said all that, there is nothing wrong with spanking the child in school, even creating a position called detention coordinator or corporal punishment assistant. They would carry out flogging on students who are “acting up.” I held such a position at a High School and the students, on and off campus, treated me with the utmost respect; even when I didn’t hold that position anymore. They themselves were “bettered” and felt gratitude, knowing someone cared enough to punish them. Order, discipline and character were also restored to high school students who often create a troublesome frenzy environment in a troublesome time. “According to the Journal of Adolescent Health, supporters of corporal punishment state that children learn the appropriate appreciation for authority, are better controlled, learn to discipline themselves, develop better social skills, and improve moral character. Without the threat of corporal punishment, advocates speculate that discipline problems in school would increase, jeopardizing teacher safety. Supporters of corporal punishment in schools include various churches, the National Association of Secondary School Principals and the American Federation of Teachers.” This order, discipline and godly character are needed in our schools today. One of the best solutions is to bring back corporal punishment for students.


Corporal punishment from a parent and a school staff has the same rewarding benefits. However, punishment from a parent has the better effect, because the child has greater tendencies to feel cared for; the parent has that inherent capacity. To also achieve this in schools and help set a non-abusive standard, the following method is advised (redone from spare-rod.com):


Calibrating your paddle:


    Before applying paddle to a child you should determine the force of your swing.

    There is only one way to measure effectively - sit yourself on the rump and adjust
     your swing appropriately.


For maximum effect:


    • Have the child tell you the reason they are being punished.

    • Teachers should wait 10 seconds between each swat.

    • Apply no more than 15 swats per day.

    • Spank only on the rump and palm of the hands.

    • Child must be wearing clothes.

    • Use force sufficient only to get the child's attention.

    • Support child's torso so no stress can be placed on their spine.


After punishment is served:


    Before the day is done, call that child again, in a friendlier manner. Tell them you punish and
    will always opt to punish because you care: And that the punishment was for their behavior


In closing, to reiterate the dreaded cause of why our school standards have change from corporal punishment and that you must stand up, take this quote, "Humanism in your world has been created by satan. You will bring back the adages of old of: Spare the rod, and you will spoil the child. Discipline must be returned" - St. Joachim, July 25, 1973.


[Help sources: http://www.njsbf.com/whatsnew.cfm, http://www.tldm.org, and http://www.spare-rods.com]






"At Silver Lake High School, the ninth grade health text teaches: 'testing your ability to function sexually and to give pleasure to another person maybe less threatening in the early teens with people of your own sex'. Also, 'you may come to the conclusion that growing up means rejecting the values of your parents.' Students were told to keep the book in their lockers and not take it home" (B. Kjos, www.crosswind.to).


Three things were incredible wrong with this picture and the third shows that biblical and true sex education can and needs to be taught in our schools. One, in a high school in America, sexual experiment was encouraged among teens. Second, sexual experiment was encouraged with the same sex. And thirdly, to show that "they" know this is wrong, students were told not to carry the text book home. In other words, they were silently teaching the students hedonistic values with a hope their parents don't find out. This happened in America, where the "unbiblical minority" is prohibiting any religious freedom in schools. If this can be taught, biblical and 'true' sex education should be taught in schools again. Teens should not be experimenting with sexuality at such a time, much more to experiment with homosexuality. Biblical and 'true' sex education will show why this should not be. This is the intent of this descriptive section, without trying to be persuasive.


I call the teenage years and single years the rebirth of one's self (personal renaissance). Meaning, it is at this point that one really realizes that they exist. It is really at this point that the last stage of shaping one's mind really develops. So much so that the great King of Babylon, Nebuchadnezzar, captured and tried to use some of the wisest men of Israel. Among the most intellectual were Daniel, and the three Hebrew boys who were thrown in the fire unburnt. When they were captured, they were all under fifteen years of age. After Nebuchadnezzar's three years "brain-washing" conversion strategy, some were barely over fifteen years of age. This youth brain washing strategy is key to controlling the masses and most effective. In fact, Adolph Hitler knew it and said that if he got a generation of youths, he could take over the world. In other words, manipulation of the masses can only be successful, if their minds were already fashioned while being a youth.


Why? It is at this point that one is most vulnerable to learn anything lasting and once shaped, it can hardly break. It's at the teenage years that the clay is almost hard, so the last reshaping must take place. Your mind could be marred forever, so this part of one's life must be dealt with caution and not carelessly, as it is treated today – with long lines of sensual partners from the preteens.


Why at this most vulnerable time should one be seeking to know someone else, when one hardly knows him or her self? Why should teens seek to get their minds emotionally entangled when they don't know: 1) where they're coming from 2) why they're here and 3) where they're going? Why not spend some time seeking the will of God for your life, which might take years, especially depending on the enormity of God's purpose in your life?


Not doing this may be the reason we have so many dysfunctional adults ("teenults"), because in their teenage years, whether directly or indirectly, they were yanked away from themselves, in relation to God. Pulled from godly self-discovery and being established in adulthood lifestyle. These years are called adolescence, by interpretation that should read "adult-lessons" and not adulthood.


One of the reasons they were yanked away from themselves is peer pressure and societal influences. Yes, teens might object, but if they lived in an environment where there is no nudity and sex on television, no porn on the web and in magazines, no public display of nasty affection, no improperly covered persons walking the streets, less stress on self vainly and much reverence for God, one wouldn't even feel like having a boy or girl friend; much more pre-marital sex.


On the other hand, some persons coming from a background where their parents are ministers usually fall prey to unwed children and many shocking occurrences, contrary to their parents' belief. Why? All their lives, they may have been sheltered: church, school, home, church outings. Such a person sees no evil, speaks no evil and hears no evil; consequently they do no evil. And stupidly, the parents didn't tell them of the many evils – “birds and bees”. So when the opportunity arose to be exposed, BAM! They had no mechanism to deal with what the real world is about (mostly in remote countries with Christian teens going off to school in the West). Notice also that without the influence of evil (TV, cable, web, print, fad) they did no evil. But when the exposure came, without knowing about it, many problems arose.


To solve these and other teen problems, take the example of the first man created, Adam. God graced him to walk and talk with him. By this relationship, God declared his purpose, 'dominion over the earth'. God also graced Adam to work with him in ministry, 'naming every animal'. Adam was so into God that he was not thinking about a mate, but it was God who decided it was not good for him to be alone. From this, four biblical and true sex educatory guidelines can be used for teens today. They are:


1. You should first develop an excellent relationship with God, whereby everyday you are in harmony with God as close to the "pre-Adamic" state as possible; which can be found in Christ.


2. You should then search out your purpose, which only God can verify. Do you know that it pleases God when a young person sets their heart and time to find their purpose on earth? This will not go unrewarded.


3. While this is ongoing, strive to be active, mostly in ministry. It might not be your ultimate purpose, but it usually should be something leading up to it. Again, let God verify your purpose and not an arbitrary person. So it means you have to seek to have a relationship with God. Don't you dare let any arbitrary person dictate your purpose and it hasn't been rectified with the creator. Who does one go to for a blue print, the architect or the construction worker? Moreover, you have direct access to the throne of God through Christ, no matter how young you are. Remember the fifteen-year-old boy in the bible, Daniel, he was more in tuned with God than everyone in Babylon.


4. Now, while all this is ongoing, God is on the other side preparing the woman or man that you will just adore (only the opposite sex). Believe you me, you will, if you believe it. Then when you ask your daddy, God, being in his presence every second, he will just tell you and the peace of God will go with it. Then it won't take forever to get married, for God would have set that compatibility already, not lust; Him knowing all things. At least give him that much credit. Notice that God didn't make Eve and tell Adam to go and date her for a while and said, "If you don't like her, I'll make another one for you, dearest." No, when God made Eve, Adam exclaimed, "WO!" "MAN!" And so females were called from that point (don't quote me on that, though this is becoming a cliché). In other words, one would not take apart a merchandise to try and know it really well before buying it; instead, just go to the maker and he will tell you where, how, what type and when to obtain it. Then you can trust the maker, for he is the one who made the "specs". Would you go to a device and ask, "What is your purpose in relation to me?" Could it tell you? The same principle applies to you in relation to finding a mate. Go to God! Also, I found out something great while listening to the bible on my MP3 CD player recently. It said, "Whoso findeth a wife obtaineth favour of the LORD" (Pro 18:22). Then it dawned on me, nothing on earth - principles, steps, intuition, outward appearances or anything will guarantee you a real spouse. But what actually happens is that anyone who marries the right person did so because God grants him or her favor; they had nothing to do with it. In other words, he likes you so he makes sure nothing ties themselves to you that is not good, only the real thing. And believe you me, I've learnt that finding the right person for you is impossible. That's the reason the verse does use the word "findeth," indicating you doing something, but put it back into true perspective by saying you really had nothing to do with it but simply "obtaineth favour." Another verse back this up and says, “a prudent wife is of the Lord” (Pro 19:14). Therefore, if you really want a good spouse, strive to please God.


So, from these four guidelines, it all boils down to this bible verse, "But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you" (Matt 6:33). With the Kingdom comes true sex education and true guidance. And having an adept background and "track record" in biblical exploits, the guidelines given are biblically sound.


Having written all that I must draw your attention again to Daniel and the three Hebrew boys, whom I admire. Although Babylon tried to infiltrate their minds with Babylonian doctrines and lifestyles they did not "bow". They were just teens, but with God anything is possible. With God you can stand on his word. Don't give into peer pressure and societal influences, give into God and stand on his word. For his word is sure and stands forever (Matt 24:35). The boyfriend and girlfriend mentality should be left until teens have completed their Adam experience – knowing what God has called them to do, unequivocally. When that is completed, God will give you the desires of your heart (Ps 37:4). In fact, Christ was recorded as saying that if anyone has a son and he asked for bread, would that parent give him stones, or scorpions for eggs (Lk 11:11-13). In other words, will God give you something to hurt you or that is not years on end satisfying? No. God will only give you the best.


If these biblical and sex educatory guidelines were applied to our present generation, the divorce rate would be zero. Frankly suggesting that marriages that result in divorce have failed to apply this principle of seeking God totally, and developing a clear relationship; which can only be sanctioned by being truly saved (acts 2:38).


This descriptive outline of why teens should not be experimenting sexually in no way violates the present agenda of sex education in schools; but rather fulfills it, the correct way. Dr. Lester Kirkendall of SIECUS (The Sex Information and Education Council of the United States) wrote in 'Sexuality and Man':


"The purpose of sex education is not...to control and suppress sex expression, as in the past, but to indicate the immense possibilities for human fulfillment that human sexuality offers. The individual must be given sufficient understanding to incorporate sex most fruitfully and responsibly into his present and future life."


Giving biblical and true sex educatory guidelines is the best way to give "sufficient understanding to incorporate sex most fruitfully and responsibly." Thus, dating should be left for adulthood and maturity in Christ: And sexual experimentation should only be entertained between a man and a woman in marriage.


1-5 of the Sexuality Series can be distributed in schools (high school mainly) for sex education. Here’s a link to the Sexuality Series online http://www.sexuality.andmuchmore.com  or http://www.sexseries.0catch.com  or  http://www.threeq.com or www.lulu.com/godshop or www.cafepress.com/witness.





I’m a regular user of the public library and see it as a great educational influence in our society. If so, it should be treated with some of the principles already outlined in this manifesto. I don’t know, but in the county that I live in, the libraries are superb. One such one is the Coral Springs Branch off Sample Rd, Broward County, Fl. This is the library of libraries for luxury. It has numerous computers for computing and Internet stuff. There is a huge collection of music CD’s, even current ones. There is also a huge collection of DVD’s and VHS, even current releases. There is a huge section for nursery and mother to play with her kids. There is also a section of rooms for study and conferencing. And finally, the traditional section for books, magazine, tabloids and other printed materials. This is compact on a bright two-storey building. Libraries have really ‘evolved’, providing an inviting radiant atmosphere to all. This one, I guess, was more luminous than the others by its design – it was bright and contemporary. In other words, the libraries are being professionally designed with aesthetics in mind. The only one that could match it for exterior design is the main library in downtown Ft. Lauderdale, Fl – one section is made of luminous glass reflecting glasses with a waterfall facing it.


The library is a good place to keep the internet out of your home (ICI), and put it at a central place for research and other internet activities, much like how it’s traditional use with books have been. It also provides a place to study and embark on ideas in “pen and ink.” The schools use it, the students use it, everybody use it; and all these benefits are known and inherent. It’s good to know that our libraries are accommodating and filling the need of libraries. In fact, I thought of a little tabulation of the savings and saw that it is tremendous, HOLDING ALL THINGS CONSTANT. The library now has a scanner (2005), Internet access, free DVD’s / Cassettes, Music CD’s / Cassettes and finally free books. You have ten sessions (1 hr) a day at the library on the Internet, at Kinkos, etc, that is $150.00 or $15.00 an hour. For scanning, around $3-$10 per scan, unlimited at the library. Rent or buy two DVD’s, $5.00 each and you can check out 4 at a time at the library. The same for CD’s. Books are a given. So each person would spend $210 each day if the library didn’t provide that service, that’s $76,650 per year per person. So the library is giving you $210 a day, without mentioning the free classes. And they current have all these resources already. For instance, Broward county library is the tenth largest in the United States and it has: 1) 2.7 million items. 2) 200,000 videos and DVD’s. 3) 8.5 million items are checked out each year. 4) 16,000 programs provided last year. 5) 550,000 residents attended library programs. 6) 440,000 residents received technology instruction. But wait, where did they get the funds to do this? Libraries are government run, so it’s your tax dollars, kind of at work, so I kind of ease the complaining on my pizza bill that has a few cents tax. So your tax dollars are at work, a lot of it and don’t think about cutting it, if it can, politician – an educated populace is a stable populace, so to speak. However…


What I’d like to mention are suggestions to make it better and help influence the society at large.


  1. A big problem is that children have no restraint on what they surf on the web. I watched a group of kids looking at porn right beside me with no remorse. They were in the age range of 6-10. Their innocence is gone forever and the nasty backlashes of porn-addiction will begin to deplore them from this tender age. I’m still stunned. It’s like a father watching his daughter get raped. Why I felt this way I don’t know. But it could be that I see a sore erosion in our society, eroding our youths while nothing is being done. Well actually, one time they put in place this system where you had to use library card to surf the internet. I was surprised to see these group of youngsters (7-12) walk up to their computer, pressed a few buttons and bypassed the system without a card. I though “my God,” what are they feeding them, “brain juice.” In other words, no matter what blockage they put on the computer, they’re going to bypass it; not only accessing porn, but also other materials children ought not to see. How to solve this, I might not know, but it would be wise to attempt blockage of porn sites from the Internet provider or main server if provided by the library. The techies should know how to do this without affecting other sites. Or better yet, put porn filtered computers in an area for kids alone to use. Reasons being, they are other websites for research that might get filtered, that an adult needs to surf, even though it might not be porn. I’ve seen sites that have porn related words, but are not porn, but good information that would get filtered on a porn sensitive system.

  2. The same thing goes for video rentals with adult themes, not necessarily full nudity; other themes as well, such as witchcraft, Satanism, etc. Some of which I’ve borrowed for religious writing and warning. Actually, I borrowed an old paranormal film for research and to my surprise, there was full nudity, sex and sexual language; never though such films would be in a library. If heeded to, this might be easier to catch because they have to check out the video at the counter. Not with the VHS though, there is an electronic self-checkout, where a person swipes his library card, then swipes the tape and their out. The only thing that might prevent this is if the videos correlate with the card, so that persons of a certain age can’t self-checkout certain video – it would be barred. Also, though the self-checkout is good, it is another step towards an implantable device in the hand or what is called “The mark of the beast.” Another thing, libraries shouldn’t carry or store videos with nudity, sex and sexual and obscene language.

  3. There should be a mini-show room where persons or groups can watch videos without carrying home the videos, after checking it out. This should be for educational purposes and not encourage a theater scene or a “home away from home.” A good step might be to have the computers DVD compatible and thus watch the DVD’s on the computer, while taking notes.

  4. Keeping in mind Part 2 of this manifesto, posters with biblical references could be erected. For instance, I see posters of Yoda and Britney Spears encouraging children to read in 2004. Though the intent is good, a figure such as Britney Spears – sex symbol – is not conducive for children. A better figure could be erected that says, “Don’t be Idle, Read the Bible.” Or even a poster of a Moses type figure with the Ten Commandments in his hands. I don’t know if the library has it, but there should be stacks of bibles, so if someone wants to check it out and read it there, they can. The bible is the most read book in the world and the number one best seller of all times of all books. Thus, the library should have it more than ready to checkout or arbitrarily picked up for reading. I’ve seen copies of the Koran in cases being displayed, so the bible and Christian literature can also be displayed and distributed, more so than any other, seeing we are a Christian nation. I often see rackets with bus schedules, alerts and many other literatures. Allowing Christian tracts to be erected in these places will help the youths and public greatly. Also, allowing Christian groups to host events.

  5. As discussed in Part 1, Section 1, librarians should also go through special psychological training, especially seeing that some teach free classes. It might not be as intense as professional teachers, but at least periodical training. They deal with all types of people, ranging in different ages. Moreover, this can be even more feasible, because I hardly see a great turn over rate in librarian employment. Librarians are not just the traditional woman/man that is a master researcher, indexer and detail oriented “find-what-you-want-person.” They are simple jobs created that “lesser” librarians do – like computer sign up for Internet. Even they get entangled with the public and because the service is provided free, the sentiment is that they think they are doing us a favor. Though this is not said verbally, having this in mind will spin-off in slight behaviors of disdain. The service might be provided free, but the individual who use it pay tax (e.g. working, buying, shipping, etc), and if I’m not mistaken, the libraries are funded by government tax collected dollars. Therefore, the salaries of the librarians are paid by the taxpayer. If we don’t use the library they don’t get paid – a simple person may say. The point is, hands on people management should be better dealt with.

  6. Abiding by the rules and logics. I was at a computer over 60 minutes and a librarian told me to get off, exactly the minute after the hour. I quickly looked around and some computers were opened; the reason I was at that branch, for it was seldom crowded. I asked why, she said I exceeded the 60 minute limit. I pointed to the rule written on the computer that says that we are to observer a 60 minute limit “IF” others are waiting. There was no line and several computers free. She got irate. I thought this lady was a “retard.” Forgive me for thinking that, really don’t like to, but this was really bizarre. Here I am, fresh and clean, sitting at the computer and this lady opt to call the security guard on me for nothing. This is why # 5 was suggested, for incidents like these can cause the ‘county’ to be sued for nothing. Being quiet, as I always am, just left. Nevertheless, this ought not to be so. Having the best of facilities is good, but we should also strive to attain excellence in service. I guess to correct that problem they had put in place a “time management software” mentioned in number 1, probably after I’d written the manifesto or foreseeing it. However, this poses several problems also, though good. One, It uses your library card and hence can collect data on where you surf, even if someone else is using your card. By this your privacy is lost and tarnished with possible false arraignments. Two, it is also computer and can be plagued with malfunctions, as I’ve been subject to. Plus many more I could mention.

  7. I had also dropped in a suggestion at the library that there should be separate sections for children Internet users and adult Internet users. They become loud and boisterous playing games, when you’re trying to do research or type a paper. I’m still pondering why they are allowed to be playing games online, when persons are in line waiting to do serious business; even the more reason there should be a separate section for them, for this can be perturbing to the eye.


These are some suggestions for libraries and the train of thought to which other ideas can be fostered. Libraries are a beautiful place where education takes place and should be preserved as such.







The following is a synopsis on home schooling today, in America. The figures and charts were left out for brevity, but remain accurate – so you’ll see a reference to a figure number.

20,760 student achievement test scores and their family demographics make this the largest study of home education to date! Results demonstrate that home schooled students are doing exceptionally well and provide an informative portrait of America's modern home education movement. Conducted by Dr. Lawrence M. Rudner, Director of the ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation.

How Many Home Schoolers Are There?

Just how prevalent is home education today? The data indicate there are approximately 1.23 million American children being taught at home. This finding (which has an estimated margin of error of ± 10%) exceeds the total public school enrollment for the state of New Jersey, which has the 10th largest student population in the nation. Put another way, there are more home school students nationwide than there are public school students in Wyoming, Vermont, Delaware, North Dakota, Alaska, South Dakota, Rhode Island, Montana, and Hawaii — combined. In fact, America’s home schoolers collectively outnumber the individual statewide public school enrollments in each of 41 states



Academic and demographic information from the largest national study of home schooled students How do home schoolers measure up?


Home school students do exceptionally well when compared with the nationwide average. In every subject and at every grade level of the ITBS and TAP batteries, home school students scored significantly higher than their public and private school counterparts (Figure 1).


Because home education allows each student to progress at his or her own rate, almost one in four home school students (24.5%) are enrolled one or more grades above age level (Figure 2). It should be noted that home school scores were analyzed according to the student’s enrolled grade rather than according to the student’s age level. In other words, a 10-year-old home school student enrolled in 5th grade would have been compared to other students in the 5th grade, rather than to his age-level peers in the 4th grade. Thus, the demonstrated achievement of home schoolers is somewhat conservative.

On average, home school students in grades 1–4 perform one grade level higher than their public and private school counterparts. The achievement gap begins to widen in grade 5; by 8th grade the average home school student performs four grade levels above the national average (Figure 3).

Another significant finding is that students who have been home schooled their entire academic lives have the highest scholastic achievement. The difference becomes especially pronounced during the higher grades, suggesting that students who remain in home school throughout their high school years continue to flourish in that environment (Figure 4).


Differences were also found among home school students when they were classified by amount of money spent on education, family income, parent education, and television viewing. However, it should be noted that home school students in every category scored significantly higher than the national average.

No meaningful difference was found among home school students when classified by gender (Figure 5). Significantly, there was also no difference found according to whether or not a parent was certified to teach (Figure 6). For those who would argue that only certified teachers should be allowed to teach their children at home, these findings suggest that such a requirement would not meaningfully affect student achievement. (source: www.hslda.org, by L. Rudner)

In the influx of the humanist agenda, many Christians have found refuge in home schooling; a step which I encourage. What else can you do if the school teaches your child to be a homosexual or how to live a transsexual life? In the failure of our educators to prevent this, and even most encourage it, mothers have taken education in their own hands. Though the outcome of home schooling is good, what if that sentiment was carried across on other societal infrastructures? For instance, what if people began to take the law in their own hands? We would not only have chaos, but it would be evident that the law has failed. The increase rise in home schooling is evident that education has failed: Failed to prevent socialization, sustainability brainwashing, paganism and the “unbiblical minority” from taking the foundation (“God”) out of schools. If it means equipping Christian churches and parents with funds and non-literary tools for home schooling to prevent these things, then go right ahead. For though after reading this, a change might occur, it can only go so far and no more, affecting the private schools more than anywhere else. The public schools will still belong to the government and thus still subject to the invisible, yet financially and politically powerful adherents of the humanist agenda. And if you’re a follower of bible prophecy, they shall give their rule, or have given their allegiance to what is know as the Anti-Christ – dictator in waiting. “Satan” is the main architect to erode God in our schools and replace it with humanism, socialization, pseudo-academics and paganism. Presently, we can still make a difference in striving. The home schoolers have stood up, educators, will you?


Note: A warning to home schoolers and potential home schoolers, because of the success of home schooling, there will be or has been an infection of pseudo-home schooling and pseudo-home schooling literature or literary materials. Prevent this flexible learning from becoming standardized, infiltrated with humanism and pseudo-academic. It might be all we have left.






Having biblical teaching is good, but given the different variables involved, some students would not choose it; as many kids would not choose to eat vegetables. Mandatory biblical teaching is therefore implementing a bible studies curriculum in our school system – from kindergarten to college. If you’ve read part 2, especially section 3 clause 5, you’d see how important biblical studies is to the prosperous thriving society. Building a society begins with building the people. The infrastructures are only corollaries of this. It’s one thing if the infrastructure’s foundation is weak, but it’s a more devastating thing if the people foundation is weak. And that would be an absence of biblical teaching. Studies can be done and it will show that Christian people make the best citizens. A proven fact installed by the founding fathers of America. They encouraged, practiced and help mobilized Christian teaching. For instance, Jefferson took the moral teaching of the bible, compiled it in a book and mandated that it be taught to the Indians. He didn’t have to do that for the American public, for all public schools had it woven into their curriculum. Why? He and all people then, knew that the nation cannot stand if the people of the nation are biblically ignorant; not to mention biblical violators. Except this is restored, any nation will crumble, for “righteousness exalteth a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people.” That’s one of the reasons the Roman Empire couldn’t stand. History had it that the Empire fell from within, that is, the declining morals caved in a great empire. Therefore, if what is happening in America today continues, the same faith that crumbled the Romans will ‘indirectly’ befall us: And God will “directly” intervene, for “if the foundations be removed, what can the righteous do.” Let us prevent this and help build a great nation, by mandating biblical teaching in schools again.


In addition to the general reasons outlined above, they are some key reasons that make this implementation urgent. That is, there is a deliberate attempt to wipe God from our schools, under the guise of “new values” in a new society. Such educators are hastening the Roman cave in and the wrath of God. For instance, notice this illustration from Berit Kjos article:

The consensus process. Matt Piecora, a fifth grader from the Seattle area, was told to complete the sentence, "If I could wish for three things, I would wish for..." Matt wrote "infinitely more wishes, to meet God, and for all my friends to be Christians."

Since each student's wishes would be posted on a wall for "open house", they had to be just right. Matt's didn't pass. The teacher told him that his last wish could hurt people who didn't share his beliefs. Matt didn't want to hurt anyone, so he agreed to add "if they want to be."

Another sentence to be completed began, "If I could meet anyone, I would like to meet..." Matt wrote: "God because he is the one who made us!" The teacher told him to add "in my opinion."

When Matt's parents came to the school, they noticed the phrases that had been added to Matt's sentences. "Why did you add this?" his mother asked.

"The teacher didn't want me to hurt other people's feelings," he answered.

"But these are just your wishes..."

"I thought so, Mom." Matt looked confused. Later, the teacher explained to Matt's parents that she wanted "diversity" in her class and was looking out for her other students. But the excuse didn't make sense. If the papers were supposed to "express the students' diverse views," why couldn't Matt share his views? Didn't his wishes fit? Or was Christianity the real problem?

"I try to instill God's truths in my son," said Matt's father, "but it seems like the school wants to remove them."

He is right. The old Judeo-Christian beliefs don't fit the new beliefs and values designed for global unity. The planned oneness demands "new thinking, new strategies, new behavior, and new beliefs" that turn God's Word and values upside-down. Directed group discussion is key to the transformation. Professor Benjamin Bloom, called "Father of Outcome-based Education," summarized it well:

The purpose of education and the schools is to change the thoughts, feelings and actions of students.

Unaware to most educators and probably even the secretary of Education, many American schools have rejected the God that made America great and choose to follow their own ways. What has been the result: violence, immorality, confusion, intellectual derelicts and the list goes on. When will we realize that we don’t have it together as “mortals,” and never will; hence, God did us a favor by giving us his word. Not only that, but we are eroding the foundation the founding fathers laid down; most often doing the opposite. For instance, notice this quote from the same article:

Today, American children from coast to coast learn reading, health, and science through group work and dialogue. Most subjects are "integrated" or blended together and discussed in a multicultural context. Thus, fourth graders in Iowa "learn" ecology, economy, and science by "real-life" immersion into Native American cultures. They role-play tribal life and idealize the religion modeled by imaginary shamans. Seeking common ground with the guidance of a trained facilitator-teacher, they share their beliefs, feelings, and "experiences" with each other.

They might agree that "there are many gods" or "many names for the same god" and compare the exaggerated spiritual thrills of shamanism with their own church experiences. Which religion would sound most exciting to the group? [even if that religion states we must kill one person a day.]

This was never the case, there was only one religion and in it America thrived/prospered to its present position. When the constitution spoke of religion, it unequivocally meant the Judeo-Christian faith; see Part 2, section 3, clause 5. This was so evident that Jefferson instituted that “pagans” be taught the word, not “role-play tribal life and idealize the religion modeled by imaginary shamans.” This is direct devilry introduced in schools, purposely, to bring destruction upon America by violating biblical foundations. Not to mention the adverse effect it has on a great society. The humanist manifesto clearly stated that they want replace “God in America’s public school.” Now, if under their tenure they encourage and “allow” kids to experiment with other faiths and deities, then it should be clear to you that such faiths and deities are no God. They know it; and in wanting to replace God, what better way than to set-up “dummies” or pseudo-gods and their faith – which are really devils

When will countries like America realize that they are not great by what they posses, their achievements, capabilities or anything tangible. The only reason America is great is because the foundation was sure and flourished. That is, the only reason America is great is because of God. Nothing else, nothing more. Different countries of the world are larger, more capable, have more geniuses and far better than America in numerous way imaginable. China alone is a good example, by virtue of their skill and technology; they should be the leading super-power. Not to mention the middle Easterns and their oil. But they all follow not the Judeo-Christian faith. And no other country of the world has given so much liberty to adherents of the Judeo-Christian faith than America. So much so that it was mandated in the constitution that they have freedom to do anything – see Part 2, section 3, clause 5. Plus, its principles reigned in the public, schools, governments, municipals and all areas of daily life: Making it an oasis for the spirit of God. It is such a good principle that a leader can be “satanic” and thrive a democratic nation bountifully. Why? Because God doesn’t look to “persons,” he looks to his word and honors it. It simply states, “righteousness exalts a nation…” When this is taken away by the humanists, replaced with their introduction of New values in schools, then God’s blessings will go and his wrath return. Not to mention the deplorable condition the society will be in. That’s the reason we need mandatory biblical studies in school as quickly as possible.

This is not hard to do, though given the humanist embedding thus far, it might bring a great stir, until it is settled in. Jamaica is a good example. This little island has flourished bountifully beyond its borders, because it is a strong Christian nation. In fact, the national anthem is a prayer, song every morning in every school – “Eternal father bless our land…” As a result, this little island has produced some of the greats in America and the world. A good example is that Colin Powell is said to be of Jamaican Parentage. The black civil rights movement was actually spawned in America by a Jamaican name Marcus Garvey. Patrick Ewing is a Jamaican and one of the top 50 NBA players of all times. Their athletes are also a force to reckon with at the Olympics. Noel Jones, one of the top preachers in America second to T.D Jakes, is a Jamaican. Busta Rhymes, rapper, is also a descendant to the Island. The little Island has won the Miss world Pageant and even the American Spelling Bee competition. Being tropically oriented, they have even sent a team to the Winter Olympics. The food is renowned as well, with local Jamaican beef patties being on the main menu of the school lunch program. The music speaks for itself and epitomize by Ziggy Marley having a theme song for the popular “Arthur” Children program sung on Sesame Street. If I continue, the examples would fail ink and paper. They are far disadvantaged compare to other nations, but like America, prospered because of Godly principles; holding all other things constant.

What they have done is to implement a mandatory class from the early childhood to mid secondary school (high school), called “Religious Education” or “Bible Knowledge.” By it they would learn the bible, its stories and principles. You couldn’t avoid religious studies. You had to buy the textbooks, attend the classes, do exams and pass the class to go on. This happened year after year until mid high school; where the curriculum was replaced by the CXC and students could choose what subjects they want to take. It was also welcomed by God-fearing students. Many others loved it because it was easy to pass and this builds the average grade. Also, it was not an affront to those who weren’t inherently Christian; for it was taught properly, as a subject. And Jamaica is a very diverse country – Indians, Chinese, Arabs, Americans, etc. – hence the national motto reads, “Out of many, one people.” Nevertheless, another characteristic it possesses, as did the same classes taught around the time of the founding fathers, is that it showed the faith of others and why Christianity is chosen. At present, it seems that this is slightly fading and so the humanists are creeping in Jamaica. Many projects were also given on the bible as well – for us to know and memorize the Ten Commandments, the story of Moses, Jesus and other essentials. Even further, some elite post-secondary schools wanted their students to become model citizens, so their enrollment required a mandatory religious class (Christian). With this outline, there should be enough grounds that America can easily draft a curriculum to foster needed biblical studies in our schools. Here is an example transcript of a High School, yes, High School:

Notice that it isn’t even called “Religious Education” on the transcript, but “Bible Knowledge,” clearly identifying Judeo-Christianity as the beacon of model citizenship and true religion.

This was similar to what the founding fathers did and was blessed in like manner. That’s why it’s ridiculous how today our courts are making our schools secular and the educators intolerant to Judeo-Christianity. Just to show you how ludicrous these humanist are and are getting away with murder, look at the example schools of today, historically: “Harvard, the first American college, was established in 1636 by Puritan theologians who wanted to create a training center for ministers. The college was named for a Charlestown minister, John Harvard…In 1693 William and Mary College (named for the English King and Queen) was established in Williamsburg, Virginia; by Anglicans. And in 1701, conservative Congregationalists…founded Yale (named for one of its first benefactors, Elihu Yale) in New Haven, Connecticut. Out of the ‘Great Awakening’ [Christian Revival] emerged the college of New Jersey, founded in 1746 and known later as Princeton. Despite the religious basis of these colleges, most of them offered curricula that included not only theology but logic, ethics, physics, geometry, astronomy; rhetoric, Latin, Hebrew, and Greek” (Unfinished Nation, Alan Brinkley). Can you believe that, schools in America were started by Judeo-Christianity and today we ungrateful people are intolerant to it, what ridiculous absurdity? Not only that, they were started as Christian colleges for Christian men, but included “secular” studies to further enrich the lives of the students. Then today we turn it around and throw away the root and mandate only a secular curriculum (general Ed); yet Judeo-Christian studies was not only a general Ed but the main course. Why, Why, Why, Why, Why! Why are we blind to this injustice to education and evil agenda of the humanists? America, please wake up!


Notice even the name of the person Yale was named after, Elihu Yale, Elihu being a prominent Judeo-Christian name meaning, “God of him,” with the Godly appellation in it, EL; written also as Eliel. Even further, "A more staid revival occurred in New England, led by various preachers including Timothy Dwight [1752-1817], who was PRESIDENT OF YALE" (Ninan Smart, The Religious Experience, page 388. On early American great awakenings and this more than likely refers to Yale University).

Therefore, with a simply example of Kingston College of current times and America’s history, I must press on all educators to overthrow the agenda of the humanists and implement mandatory biblical studies in our schools again; plus Christian services to demonstrate what is being taught. It is not only needed and feasible, but with the great minds of our American school system and true Christians - ApostolicCongress.com - a workable curriculum can be achieved effortlessly. The only caution I would give is that it should truly reflect the bible, and not just sport a label with a “form of godliness.” For instance, I’ve slightly seen groups that place bible teaching in schools again, under a different term: To say we fought and brought it back. This might not be true, if what will be instilled is “regularized” bible teaching. That is, a pseudo-bible teaching; or what is not necessarily taught in the bible, but a set of moral beliefs they conjure and use the bible to justify. For instance, some homosexuals use the bible to justify homosexuality, though the bible does no such thing; directly or indirectly. To the true bible adherents, beware of being joyous because bible is allowed in schools again, for what is allowed might not be bible. To the educators, doing this would have defeated the purpose mentioned earlier for implementing it. It’s either all the bible and its truth or nothing; the sentiment intended is mirrored in the great American historic herald, “5440 or fight!” – as learnt in my American history class at Kingston College. Don’t allow this great heritage, prosperity and the lives of the people go wasted, because we choose not to teach the bible in our schools, as taught when this nation began. Don’t let the *underline founding alternate age-old agendas come to pass in America. You have the power to stop it! You have the power to make a change for the better! Use it for me! Use it for our children! Use it for you! Bring God back in America again!


*There was another evil agenda intended from the foundation of the thirteen states. This is another whole topic and book, seek the “Truth Series.” But you can make it not come to past, by stamping out humanism in our schools.

** I check out Yale in the Hebrew from Strong’s and it sounds like three Hebrew words, which means, in no particular order, “Howling” (3214) “God has Carried Away” (3273) and “Climbing Goat” (3277). Which if it were to be put in a sentence would read, that is Elihu Yale, “God of him, the howling Goats he has Carried Away” – The God of “Him,” of why the Eagle created the place (Isa 30:33, “tophet” from Strong’s 8612 and 8608), has carried away the set of Goats (Reds) that are weeping and rueful from the other Goats (Yellow) to this land: Which would correspond with the prophecy in the last section of the manifesto and Rev 18 that shows the woman (reds) moving from off the beast (yellows) to her own land, that is, Babylon the Great Whore, America. Not wanting to go into this in this book, but if Demonology Appealed is written, if God be willing, I might show the case of the Two Mary's, one with inherent sins (Mary mother of Jesus) and the other blatantly a sinner (Mary the whore); both got saved after repenting. Remember, where sin increase grace much more increase (Rom 5:20).







After first writing this manifesto and giving it to several individuals, this section came to me as I curled up with the bible; from the book of revelation. It's funny that before writing this section I didn't realize that it was my first publication that was numerically off. Or, so I thought.


They are three parts to the manifesto, which represents God's manifestation as Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Part 1 has 14 sections, which is double sevens or double perfection, for seven is the number of perfection. It also coincidentally has 14 clauses. Today I realize that Part 2, with all the sections, phrases and clauses adds up to 12. Twelve is the number of government or foundation, fitting for that section. However, Part 3 only had 6 sections. But with this section it now has seven, which is the number for perfection. Making every aspect of this publication thoroughly inspired. Also, all the Parts, sections, clauses and phases add up to fifty. Fifty might not be an overt biblical number, however, there is always a reference to the fifty states in the America: Which not only shows that this publication is inspired by its numerology, but also inspired specifically for America.


This section is even more inspired and thoroughly startling. It relates to prophecy and a fervent call to heed to that prophecy. As I said, I was reading from the book of Revelation and this verse spoke of what is to come, when, might depend on you:


"Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every fowl spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird" (Rev 18:2).


Chapter 17 and 18 of the book of Revelation has to be revealed for you to realize that this spoke of America. In other words, Babylon the great is not the Catholic Church or some missing fragment of prophecy - it speaks of America. No other nation on earth has the sumptuousness described, so much so that when John saw the metaphorical representation, he "wondered with great admiration." Verses 11, 12, 13, 15 and 23 of chapter 18 and verse 18 or chapter 17 clarified that this spoke of America.


Now notice verse 2 of chapter 18 again, it wasn't fallen because it was burnt with fire or some other disaster. No. It was fallen because it will "become the habitation of devils, and hold of every foul spirit" (Rev 18:2). It has fallen because the foundation of godliness that buttressed it was destroyed and everything now mobilized for extensive "devilry" and all imaginable evil - you might even hear of homosexual Presidents. It would have become so stink with sin that God now warns the saints to get out of her, "Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues" (Rev 18:4). Then after this moral collapse, the physical destruction will come in one hour (Rev 18:17). The one hour is also very Key. For it seems this will happen at the same time the ten Kings or world leaders of the east gave their power to the beast for one hour (Rev 17:12-13). So then, the ten kings, through the beast, will be responsible for America's destruction. In the one hour they gave power to beast, is the same one hour America will be destroyed.


They had always hated America and wanted to destroy her, because she "reigneth over the Kings of earth" (Rev 17:18). In other words, they hate her because America reigns supreme over all the mighty nations of the east, yet not having the prestige of their "kingly" governance. Or in loose terms, she is hated because she is the “Last” Super Power, affectionately called. When the foundations are fallen the "ten horns [kings/world leaders] which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire" (Rev 17:16).


The nations of the East - EU, Middle East, Asia and most all the East - had always wanted to do this, why in this hour they got the chance? Because the thing that made America great, and was protecting them from the wrath of God, was removed. What is that? Godly biblical foundation. "If the foundation be destroyed, what can the righteous do" (Psalms 11)? When the ten kings see that the foundation has fallen or the humanist and ACLU has ultimately won, they'll say, "aha, nothing is holding us back now, God is removed and their protection is gone, let us combine our powers as one and align ourself with the beast (anti-Christ) and strike America at once." America might be filthy now, but it hasn't reached that point, especially with many turning to Christ tremendously; when it does, the very angels in heaven will declare with the angel that said it, "Babylon the great is fallen" (Rev 18:2). The beast and the ten kings of the east shall know it and America will be wasted. In other words, end time prophetic events are held back by America; because the inhabitants still hold onto the little godliness that is left. In fact, America is the only nation to spread the gospel throughout the world this greatly. Presently, the evangelism of the rest of the world is done through America, a great reason for the beast to hate her. That's the reason when the destruction comes, the bible said, "the light of a candle shall no more shine in thee; and the voice of the bridegroom [Christians] and of the bride [God's spirit] shall be heard no more at all in thee" (Rev 18:23). So you see why the Humanist manifesto wants to replace God in the schools.


This will be a sad time, when devils will be destroyed by devils. Spiritually, the fallen angels of the East, ten Kings and beast, will destroy the fallen angels of the West. Then the ten kings or fallen angels will be put down by “satan.” The plot is clear, satan destroys the fallen ones of the East, who took coverage behind the relative freedom of the saints. But he first tricked the ten fallen ones with him, to give him their power. Then when the one hour is up and America is destroyed, he put away the ten and he alone stand supreme in the earth as the leading fallen angel and one world mortal dictator, through the anti-Christ. A very smart being he is. But you see that he and the east had no power over the west, because the foundation was sure; and even God had to put it in their hearts (the ten) to agree (Rev 17:17, Zep 3:8). That is, though evil is hidden in the country and its rulership, America is still a Christian nation. Both good and evil know that God honors his principles. That's one of the reasons verse 15 of Revelations Chapter 17 says, "the water which thou sawest, where the whore sitteth, are peoples, multitudes, and nations, and tongues." In order to escape the stronger fallen ones in the east, they hide behind peoples of the world, through the saints and the liberty they relative allow them to have; even aid to them and others. They made sure the foundation stood firm when they first came here in the founding centuries and even constituted it. Not only were they protected, but thrive a blessed and untouchable nation. Today they feel they can survive without a Christian America and push to eradicate all references of God, through humanism; spawned by the Devil himself, through globalization - he couldn't just sit back and not try to crumble the foundations. When America finally gets caught in the web of humanism, totally, that will be the end of America as we know it.


The difference with the fallen ones from the East and from the West is that the ones from the East are extensively ruthless and seek only to war and destroy God literally, also his saints (Rev 17:14). All they want is to kill God and rule as God, epitomize in Isaiah 14:14. The fallen ones in the West just want to get away from God's rulership and live how they want to live, sinfully (Rev 17:4); they'll do this even if saints stand in their way. They seem to care less about "Killing" God and taking over, as the ones in the east. Nonetheless, both fell from heaven and are utterly evil, being devils. However, those who are west minded might not be fully categories as "*satan and his angels" – probably another reason for Part 1, Section 14, Paragraph 3, Sentence 1.


This prophetic section might not only be hard for the non-theist to swallow, but also them that are of the household of faith. Probably, it has never been told in this fashion before, speaking things as they are and somewhat a follow-up of Part 1, section 14. Nevertheless, at the center of this are innocent lives. That might be the reason I was recently frustrated, took a bus as far I could and ended up on a beach, where I was praying and crying. The crying was mostly to release stress, but the spiritual song that was sung, and the thought pattern that fostered while crying, showed that this was an intercession as well. I was on the Atlantic coast facing the East, where the ten kings and beast may come from. Could the crying prayer be for the inhabitants of America? Well, the prophecy is explained, who will let it, let it.


*Having now reveal this, they also knowing that this will be written, satan and his angels might try to rise and run the world from America, which seemingly not only has that capability and fashion, but initially has such a built.


Mr. President


The headlines read, “Why His God Talk Worries Friends And Foes.”

I saw this cover of time magazine amongst some other magazines on a brochure. How in heavens the governmental powers of this nation can quarrel with President Bush during his presidency, for wanting to do what the founding fathers did? Yet when 911 happened, the whole nation cried for prayer and went to church. Mr. President, use this manifesto to combat these scoffers: Especially the majority, who think they have freedom of speech/press, when they are actually “unconstitutional.” Use Part 2, section 3, Clause 5 of this manifesto to stamp out the humanistic liberalists and immoral publication and media: And if a fallacious argument arise that this meaning is only historical, then why don't all the constitution be treated that way. Murder, as a violation of law, should also be seen as historical and then say, "murder is not murder anymore, that was its historical meaning, now it’s only if you cut the heart out and mince it, then the person is killed by you." Those who would treat Part 2, Section 3, and Clause 5 with only a historic meaning would sound this way. If the constitution or any part of it was meant to be only for a specific time, that would be the worse constitution ever and the constitution itself would be unconstitutional. A law is constituted to be viable the entire duration of the said nation. Time changes, but the law doesn’t, crime would seem different but they inherently fall under the same laws – just different ways of doing the same thing. The bible is like that, which the constitution copied.


Mr. President, regardless of your 'person', seen or not seen, promote God: And when applicable, my vote and even greater, our prayers will be with you, and any President that exert the strong Christian foundation that buttressed all great nation. Bring back God in America again and stamp out immorality. For instance, homosexuals are not quiet and reserve as one time, now they are marching in the streets, and to be seen, openly engage in gay sexual acts. Not only that, but under the notion of constitutional freedom. Under this same sentiment, freedom of the press, things like these circulate as newspaper comics – distributed free in public places:




The same thing is creeping in our schools, whereby I saw a T.V program on T.B.N where a parent found a story book their child borrowed from the school library – “King and King”. It narrated a story of a prince who married another man instead of his many choice women. The couple even shared a kiss.


There are many other areas that can also be tackled. For instance, I'm one for a good 'healthy' heterosexual relationship while picnicking, even with intimacy; abiding within the guidelines, after getting saved. However, the following should not be done under alleged "freedom rights:"


New times” or “City Link” of South Florida


This was done by PETA. I laud PETA and want their efforts to continue, especially in the area of stopping persons from using animals in bestially and bestially porn. But come on, this is only causing another problem, affecting these young children. Some times we can go too far.


Mr. President, these and many other things need to be cleanse in our society, in addition to other things mentioned through education, from Part 1 section 1 to Part 3 section 7. Seek to fully cleanse the nation of all appearances of evil.


Last Word


We are all not perfect, that's why we need salvation and God's continued guidance. But God vehemently hates the forwardness with sin and evil. The first forwardness began when humans openly sinned without remorse, regret or guilt and say it is not sin (humanism) - "we can do what we want," and "all is right in our eyes, we don't need God." We become even more forward and abominable by teaching this to our children; even worse, making it mainstream education. The implications of this are lamented throughout this manifesto. The next step lies with the reader, will you take heed and change be effected. Or, will this go by as nothing, until destruction comes? This manifesto serves as an expository on education and a warning. You don't have to know my full name or much about me. All you need to know is that this manifesto is irrefutable true: And like John the Baptist, this has been "A voice crying in the wilderness."








This section was not in the manifesto when widely distributed, put here now because it is available in book form.


Oneil McQuick has responded in a most positive way to the challenge of youthful strength by choosing to channel his energy into the very rewarding exercise of the study of the word of God. This undying love for the Word of God has allowed him to be the author of several books (Truth Series, Truth Series Expanded, Truth Series Evolution) including: “The Voice,” “Demonology Revealed,” “Fasting and Prayers,” “You Believe, Now Receive,” “What is his name,” “Student Manifesto” and others.


He will also confess that his studies, however intense, have not afforded him the privilege to expound on the word of God, but like Jesus, it was simply given! In other words, it is the spirit of the Lord upon him that has graced him to write these books, booklets, newsletters, tracks, pamphlets, magazines, web pages and articles; as he confesses, "Nothing more, nothing less! Grace!"


His Christian walk began in Kingston when he received the Lord Jesus Christ as his personal savior under the ministry of Bishop S.U. Thomas. His subsequent migration to Florida facilitated his tremendous spiritual development and has laid the foundation for him to equip himself for the tremendous task which he has set himself to maximize whatever means necessary to touch and change peoples’ lives. He has served in several areas of ministry including men, youth and outreach; with certifications in lay counseling. He is the founder of Liberation International Ministries and a licensed minister.


More Details on Oneil at: www.McQuickEnterprise.com

Elder G. Johnson, M.B.A

(Bank Manager, Bible Teacher, Head Admin Personnel for the Emmanuel Apostolic Churches)





Additionally: The Student manifesto (1) was written by Oneil McQuick in June-July of 2004, at the age of 23, while attending a local community college: Mainly doing research for an essay on Education and Humanism. Further edition and Part 3, section 7 was added in August 2004 and a tidbit was done in September. Some information were obtained from other places, the sources were given. After writing that some more work was done and added in late September 2005.








All pictures were obtained from the W3. Most of the original artists were contacted, while others could not be contacted after several tries; some are even deceased. The pictures were not copyrighted as far as seen on the websites it was obtained from, neither were there any disclaimers. Others are from royalty free stock photography. Others are from newspaper or magazine clippings, and one or two from an old book. However, if any artist have noticed their work and would like it removed, we will definitely attempt to do so. But bear in mind that this is a non-profit expository venture. The author or ministry seeks no profit from any proceeds, if any is even obtained. In fact, the books are offered free online so as to get it distributed rather than seek gain. Having said that, your generous contribution of any artwork or material is appreciated.



For Additional Copies
Shipping is separate. ICI caution, evil on the prowl; even by phone.




Go here to print it - www.threeq.com/pdf/manifesto.pdf  or

 Free: The book is also on web pages for immediate viewing -
             http://apostolics.web1000.com (has pdf also)
(has pdf also)
http://www.manifesto.0catch.com (zero catch and not ‘o’ catch)
             http://books2u.beplaced.com (has pdf also)
(has pdf also)


Get a Paper Back Copy, Visit amazon.com with the ISBN, Title or Author.
           Or, visit booksurge.com (1-866-308-6235) with the ISBN, Title or Author.


            Size: 7.5 x 9.25   


            Advantage: Best. Spaced, quality layout and design, last longer, more durable,
            higher readability, opens flats on desk, raised letter cover and polished; more
            bangs for your bucks though cost the most; basically has all the juice.

 Paid: Get a Paper Back Copy sent to you here - www.lulu.com/content/168870

            Size: 8.5  x 11


            Advantage: Cost the less and a larger perfect binding. For shipping in US,
            choose “US Postal Media” when option given, it’s even cheaper. For a little
            more you can buy the hardcover at http://www.lulu.com/content/188588.
            Use the straight links otherwise they are at lulu.com/godshop, #  should be same.

Get a Paper Back Copy sent to you here -
Or call toll Free at 1-877-809-1659 & ask for Product # 28728644 (shop ID is manifestobook)

           Size: 7.5 x 9.25

           Advantage: Cafepress also has phone ordering and a 30-day return policy
           for dissatisfied customers. Easy to use website and options for quick shipping.
           Use the straight link above otherwise www.cafepress.com/manifestobook.