Real World News: History of Palestine vs. Israel

The lies in world news notwithstanding, here is the real history about the Islam-caused ethnic cleansing —

With anti-Semitism rising around the world, Jews need a homeland more than ever

keyCan we all agree on one simple premise? Ethnic and religious cleansing is morally wrong. That recognition should be enough to put to rest the heckling for Israel to stop building houses for Jews—anywhere, anytime. ~Joseph Farah


Never Again: Why Israel must not ever cede Judea and Samaria

Joseph Farah,

A former Middle East correspondent, is founder, editor and CEO of Word Net Daily.

Widely recognized for his Middle East reporting, he is a recipient of the Ben Hecht Award for Outstanding Journalism in the Middle East, presented annually by the Zionist Organization of America.


“So how can you expect me—a Jewish prime minister of the Jewish state, who heads a cabinet of 15 Jews—to forbid fellow Jews from acquiring a piece of land and building a home in the original Shiloh, in the original Beth El, in the original Bethlehem, and in the original Hebron from where our Jewish forefathers originally came? Would that not be scandalous?”~Menachem Begin


israelmapIsrael’s military response to thousands of rocket attacks from Gaza and infiltrations by terrorists through a maze of Hamas-built tunnels, has, somewhat predictably, prompted its enemies and many others around the world to demand the Jewish state stop building what they call “settlements” in areas on the West Bank of the Jordan River, or, more accurately, Judea and Samaria.

As a former Middle East correspondent and an Arab-American, let me explain why Israel must never allow pressure from its enemies or foreigners to deter the building of “settlements” or consider ceding any more land to Palestinian Arab control.

Israel dismantled similar “settlements” in Gaza in exchange for promises of peace. But “settlements” is a loaded word. What the world calls “settlements” are Jewish communities built on historically Jewish land—territory desperately needed by Israel to protect itself from the kind of attacks being perpetrated by Palestinian Arabs in Gaza. In fact, some 9,000 Jews were forcibly removed from Gaza by the Israeli military in 2005.

How did that work out for Israel?

Not so good.

Now the focus of the world’s attention is on so-called “settlements” in and around Jerusalem and throughout Judea and Samaria. Even the U.S. has, at various times, called for Israel to stop construction of houses—and sometimes even repairs on existing structures—in East Jerusalem and in Judea and Samaria.

Why do I put quotes around the word “settlements”? Because it’s an ugly word. If Jews don’t have the right to live and build communities in historically Jewish lands, where do they have a right to live?

israel_flagIt may be too late for Gaza, but with anti-Semitism rising around the world, Jews need a homeland more than ever. Israel’s population is growing, both from immigration, rising birth rates and increased longevity.

In addition, Israel has experimented with land giveaways, and they have resulted only in more attacks on its population centers. In other words, the land-for-peace gambit has failed miserably.

What’s the solution? Israel needs to do what is right for the Jewish people.

But these communities are a thorn in the side of Arab Palestinians. Why? Simply because they don’t accept the idea that Jews have a right to live there. In fact, polls show most Arab Palestinians don’t believe Jews have a right to live anywhere in Israel—not even Jerusalem or Tel Aviv.

That’s not just the overwhelming opinion of the Arab people in Gaza and the Palestinian Authority, it’s the opinion of the leadership. The official position of the Palestinian Authority, including those supposedly negotiating “peace” terms with Israel, is that no Jews should be permitted to live there.

In other words, the Palestinian Arabs believe I religious and ethnic cleansing of their land.

Back in 1977, when Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin was negotiating a peace deal with Egypt’s Anwar Sadat, then-resident Jimmy Carter was already pressuring Israel to halt Jewish “settlements” in Judea and Samaria.

In a meeting with Carter, National Security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski and Secretary of State Cyrus Vance, Carter raised the issue with Begin.

According to a new book called “Rebbe: The Life and Teachings of Menachem M. Shneerson, the Most Influential Rabbi in Modern History” by Joseph Telushkin, [the following exchange took place].

Menachem Begin: “Mr. President, here in the United states of America, there are 11 places named Hebron, five places named Shiloh, four places named Bethel and six places named Bethlehem.”

Carter: “Indeed there are. Within 20 miles of my home there is a Bethel and a Shiloh.”

Begin: “May I be permitted to visit them one day?”

Carter: “Of course, with pleasure! There are three good Baptist churches there.”

Begin: “In that case, I shall bring along our chief rabbi to protect me. Allow me to put to you a hypothetical question. Imagine one day that the governors of the states in which these Hebrons and Shilohs and Bethels and Bethlehems were located were to issue a decree declaring that any citizen of the Untied States was free to settle in any one of these places except for one category—the Jews. Jews are forbidden to build homes in the Shilohs and the Hebrons and the Bethels and the Bethlehems of America—so it should be decreed. Oh dear! Everybody is welcome to settle in any of these cities whose names derive from the Book of Books except for the people of the Book. Good women and men everywhere would cry from the rooftops—‘Scandalous! Discrimination! Bigotry! Am I not right?”

Carter: “Hypothetically.”

Begin: “So how can you expect me—a Jewish prime minister of the Jewish state, who heads a cabinet of 15 Jews—to forbid fellow Jews from acquiring a piece of land and building a home in the original Shiloh, in the original Beth El, in the original Bethlehem, and in the original Hebron from where our Jewish forefathers originally came? Would that not be scandalous?”

Indeed it would be scandalous. In fact, it is scandalous for anyone to suggest that Jews don’t have a God-given right to live wherever they choose to live—but especially in those communities.

Today, as a result of this continuing, unrelenting, unwarranted and immoral international pressure on Israel to cede more territory to its sworn enemies—people who still call for the destruction of the Jewish state—Bethlehem is already devoid of a Jewish community. And this town once dominated by Christians—the little town where Jesus was born—is nearly devoid of Christians.

Tired of religious persecution, the payment of jizya taxes imposed by the new Muslim majority and getting caught in the crossfire of Palestinian Muslim attacks on Israel and the predictable responses, the small Christian community represents less than 10 percent of the population.

This proves Begin’s instincts were right—not only for Jews, but for the Christian Palestinian minority as well.

Can we all agree on one simple premise? Ethnic and religious cleansing is morally wrong. That recognition should be enough to put to rest the heckling for Israel to stop building houses for Jews—anywhere, anytime.

Related Posts:

10 differences between Israel and Palestine

John Voigt Defends Truth about Israel

YouTube Video, Classic Violin, and Music Appreciation

Dinner Topics for Friday

Music Appreciation YouTube Video: Itzhak Perlman plays Paganini Classic Violin

Niccolò (or Nicolò) Paganini (27 October 1782 – 27 May 1840) was an Italian violinist, violist, guitarist, and composer. He was the most celebrated violin virtuoso of his time, and left his mark as one of the pillars of modern violin technique. His Caprice No. 24 in A minor, Op. 1, is among the best known of his compositions, and has served as an inspiration for many prominent composers.

Early career

170px-Nicolo_Paganini_by_Richard_James_LaneThe French invaded northern Italy in March 1796, and Genoa was not spared. The Paganinis sought refuge in their country property in Romairone, near Bolzaneto. By 1800, Paganini and his father traveled to Livorno, where Paganini played in concerts and his father resumed his maritime work. In 1801, the 18-year-old Paganini was appointed first violin of the Republic of Lucca, but a substantial portion of his income came from freelancing. His fame as a violinist was matched only by his reputation as a gambler and womanizer.

In 1805, Lucca was annexed by Napoleonic France, and the region was ceded to Napoleon’s sister, Elisa Baciocchi. Paganini became a violinist for the Baciocchi court, while giving private lessons to her husband, Felice. In 1807, Baciocchi became the Grand Duchess of Tuscany and her court was transferred to Florence. Paganini was part of the entourage, but, towards the end of 1809, he left Baciocchi to resume his freelance career.

Travelling virtuoso

For the next few years, Paganini returned to touring in the areas surrounding Parma and Genoa. Though he was very popular with the local audience, he was still not very well known in the rest of Europe. His first break came from an 1813 concert at La Scala in Milan. The concert was a great success. As a result, Paganini began to attract the attention of other prominent, albeit more conservative, musicians across Europe. His early encounters with Charles Philippe Lafont and Louis Spohr created intense rivalry. His concert activities, however, were still limited to Italy for the next few years.

His fame spread across Europe with a concert tour that started in Vienna in August 1828, stopping in every major European city in Germany, Poland, and Bohemia until February 1831 in Strasbourg. This was followed by tours in Paris and Britain. His technical ability and his willingness to display it received much critical acclaim. In addition to his own compositions, theme and variations being the most popular, Paganini also performed modified versions of works (primarily concertos) written by his early contemporaries, such as Rodolphe Kreutzer and Giovanni Battista Viotti.

Christian Story: Plan of Jesus is Liberty

Dinner Topics for Thursday

The Cause of Our Redeemer

keyThe tyrants and antichrists of the world will not prevail against God’s plan. But liberty and our salvation are not maintained by default. The War in Heaven is the prototype for our sojourn on earth. The struggle is ongoing, and we must choose sides in the battle.   Will we choose the cause of our Redeemer, led by Jesus Christ— our Great Deliverer, the Giver of Liberty?


From Mormon’s great war saga, two prominent, opposing figures emerge. On the one hand is Amalickiah, whom Mormon describes as “a man of cunning device. . . and. . .of many flattering words” who sought “to destroy the church of God, and to destroy the foundation of liberty which God had granted them.” Amalickiah typified consummate evil, proving the “great wickedness one very wicked man can cause.”(Alma 46:9,10)

Title of Liberty

Epic Hero defends Liberty and Family, by Winborg

“Now it came to pass that while Amalickiah had thus been obtaining power by fraud and deceit, Moroni, on the other hand, had been preparing the minds of the people to be faithful unto the Lord their God.”(Alma 48:7) Moroni told Pahoran, “Behold, I am Moroni, your chief captain. I seek not for power, but to pull it down. I seek not for honor of the world, but for the glory of my God, and the freedom and welfare of my country.”(Alma 60:36)

Amalickiah’s insatiable lust for power spawned a massive war machine, bearing down on the Nephites, seeking to crush the last breath of freedom.

But for Moroni, even a small “spark of freedom” was enough to dispel the darkness of tyranny. “Show unto me a true spirit of freedom,” he told Pahoran, “and I will come unto you.” (Alma 60:25,27)

Pahoran assured Moroni that indeed a spark of freedom remained, for the beleaguered freemen had not lost the Spirit of God, which is the spirit of freedom. (Alma 61:15)

Heartened by Moroni’s offer of help, Pahoran continued, “Therefore, my beloved brother, Moroni, let us resist evil, and whatsoever evil we cannot resist with our words, yea, such as rebellions and dissensions, let us resist them with our swords, that we may retain our freedom, that we may rejoice in the great privilege of our church, and in the cause of our Redeemer and our God.”(Alma 61:14)

“At this time, Moroni prayed that the cause of the Christians, and the freedom of the land might be favored.” (Alma 46:16) A “cause” is defined as “a principle or movement militantly, aggressively, or with combat; defended or supported.”[1]

Why did the cause of the peace-loving Christians have to be defended with combat? The king-men would not listen to words. They intended to impose their desires by force. Therefore the sword was the only thing they would understand.

So, what is our Redeemer’s cause?

When Satan sought to destroy the agency or free will of all mankind, Jesus gathered the souls of the righteous to defend freedom. Jesus set forth the glorious cause of freedom, and Michael was his commander in chief. This led to an all out war in heaven.

Temptation of Christ by Carl Bloch

Temptation of Christ by Carl Bloch

Just as Jesus and Satan clashed in heaven, so the forces of Amalickiah precipitated a great war for freedom in the choice land of promise.

Might Mormon have had Jesus and Michael in mind when he laboriously engraved this epic struggle for liberty?

Our Redeemer’s cause is liberty because the Spirit of God is also the spirit of freedom. (2 Cor. 3:17) If we miss the point of the war saga, we miss the very essence of God’s plan of salvation. Without liberty, the gospel could not flourish. Without the gospel of Jesus Christ, mankind would be doomed to spiritual bondage.

“Human liberty is the mainspring of human progress. The one great revolution in the world is the revolution for human liberty.   This was the paramount issue in the great council in heaven before this earth life. It has been the issue throughout the ages. It is the issue today. . . we also note the complacency of the people and their frequent willingness to give up their liberty for the promises of a would-be provider.”[2]

The tyrants and antichrists of the world will not prevail against God’s plan. But liberty and our salvation are not maintained by default. Mormon’s message to us is that the War in Heaven is the prototype for our sojourn on earth. The struggle is ongoing, and we must choose sides in the battle.   Will we choose the cause of our Redeemer, led by Jesus Christ— our Great Deliverer, the Giver of Liberty?

If— like the stripling warriors and other epic heroes— we obey with exactness, endure valiantly in defending our Redeemer’s cause, and trust in God, He will deliver us.


Dinner Talk

Topic: In his war chapters, Mormon shows us Christ. * Agency


  1. How can we apply Pahoran’s injunction to “resist evil” in our society today?
  2. See 2 Cor. 3:17. Why is the Spirit of God also the Spirit of freedom?
  3. Play Beethoven’s Choral Fantasy (Royal Philharmonic Orchestra, Andre Previn, conductor) and envision the glorious victory of Michael the Archangel in the War in Heaven.


Copyright 2010 © by Christine A. Davidson

            [1]Merriam Webster Dictionary, p.133

            [2]Ezra Taft Benson, Book of Mormon Student Manual, p.98

Liberal Attack on Children’s Stories, Home School

Liberal Attack on Thomas the Train


Thomas_Tank_Engine_1If you have a child or grandchild, you’re familiar with “Thomas the Tank Engine,” the gentle kid’s show featuring a fleet of talking trains. The wildly popular animated series is based on British children’s books written by the Rev. Wilbert Awdry in the early 1940s featuring the adventures of Thomas and his train friends who work for Sir Topham Hatt on the Isle of Sodor. Well—and this won’t surprise anyone who understands the left—libs despise the series. Last year, a Brit Labour transport official complained, “The only female characters are an annoyance, a nuisance, and in some cases a danger to the functioning of the railway.”

And now “social justice” writer Tracy Van Slyke has taken to the pages of The [UK] Guardian to blow her stack over the show’s “twisted” and “subversive” messages—the value of hard work and friendship. Van Slyke runs out of pejoratives as she accuses the series of “classism, sexism, anti-environmentalism bordering on racism.” Not to mention colonialism, elitism, despotism. She hates that “these trains perform tasks dictated by their imperious, little white boss,” who “orders the trains to do everything from hauling freight to carrying passengers to running whatever random errand he wants done, whenever he wants it done—regardless of their pre-existing schedules.” In other words, doing their job. The horror. ~Limbaugh Letter, September, p.4

School for Scoundrels

schoolindoctrinationThe Washington, D.C. school system has long been rated one of the most dangerous in the country. But according to Investor’s Business Daily, the feds have pressured D.C. schools to stop suspending problem kids—in favor of U.S. Education Department-approved “anger management” counseling. Why? Because the Regime doesn’t like the “racial disparity” in suspension statistics: African American students are six times more likely to be suspended than white students.

IBD reports: “Instead of kicking bullies and troublemakers out of classrooms, teachers will now have to join them in ‘restorative justice’ circles, where they’ll chat about the racial ‘root causes’ of their misbehavior. Teachers will undergo training in ‘cultural competency’ and ‘cultural responsiveness and institutional bias.’ Those who over-discipline students of color will be singled out for rebuke.”

Better suggestion: require all Washington politicians to send their kids to D.C. public schools. This crap would disappear overnight. ~Limbaugh Letter, October, p.4

Pre-election smear machine goes crazy

Exclusive: David Kupelian documents Alinsky tactics gone wild in 1 congressional race

David Kupelian

“Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counterattack ridicule.”

Well, not quite “impossible.” In fact, let’s give it a nice, big counterattack.

RushLiberalismLIES_largeThe “Ridicule” directive, of course, is the oft-cited “Fifth Rule” from “Rules for Radicals,” the left’s notorious playbook penned by Chicago Marxist Saul Alinsky, who originated “community organizing” and served as a major role model for Barack Obama.

In the run-up to the all-important Nov. 4 election, voters are being treated to an extreme example of sustained left-wing ridicule of a very good man, scientist and congressional candidate, Art Robinson. Alinsky’s dictum – that when all else fails, when you cannot credibly challenge your opponent on any other level, defame, mock and ridicule him – is taking center stage in Robinson’s challenge to the co-founder of the radical Congressional Progressive Caucus, the powerful 14-term Rep. Peter DeFazio.

Just as it was during the first match-up between these two opposite sorts of men in 2010, and again in 2012, the November 2014 congressional race epitomizes everything that is rotten – and wonderful – about America today, and about the historic choice Americans will make next month.

But first, ask yourself a question: If you were a left-wing progressive congressman – someone who played a key role in giving the nation Barack Obama as president and who has supported him all along the way – and you were being challenged by a solid, well-liked, highly intelligent, plain-talking conservative in next month’s midterms when all the polls show a majority of voters are disgusted with Obama-supporting Democrats, what would you do?

Peter DeFazio is one of the House of Representatives’ most influential progressives, having not only chaired the Congressional Progressive Caucus and supported Obamacare, but even having proposed a “Robin Hood Tax” on all financial trades, a key demand of the crazy Occupy movement and heavily supported by billionaire leftist George Soros.

What about foreign policy? DeFazio was one of only 37 House members who voted against the “Palestinian Anti-Terrorism Act” prohibiting U.S. aid to the Hamas-led Palestinian government “until it renounces violence, recognizes Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state, and accepts all previous Israeli-Palestinian agreements.”

And DeFazio has supported virtually every pro-abortion measure, even voting in favor of the ghastly partial-birth abortion procedure. In case you’ve forgotten what that is, allow me to refresh your memory: The now-outlawed intact dilation and extraction (“partial birth abortion”) procedure consists of pulling a living baby feet-first out of the womb and into the birth canal, except for the head, stabbing the base of the baby’s skull with surgical scissors, inserting a tube into the wound, sucking out the baby’s brain with a suction machine (causing the skull to collapse) and delivering a now-dead baby.

Given his crazy, left-wing voting record, the only way DeFazio stays in power decade after decade in a somewhat conservative district is by cultivating a folksy Oregonian hayseed exterior, while relying largely on far-left union financing, and especially, by ruthlessly smearing his opponent and scaring voters right before the election.

But again, what else is an entrenched, elitist progressive hack to do? He’s been in Congress so long – 28 years – he probably can’t do anything else, you know, out in the real world.

Meanwhile, Robinson, who last year was named chairman of the Oregon Republican Party, is the diametric opposite of DeFazio: He is a respected research scientist, a Reagan conservative with abundant common sense, and a man of courage and humility. In short, he’s exactly what most Americans are looking for in a congressman right now, with their beloved country just about shredded into little pieces thanks to the policies of the ultimate “progressive” president, Barack Obama.

Since DeFazio cannot – indeed, refuses to – debate the issues or his record or how to get America out of the death spiral it’s in thanks to wacko progressive policies, he really has only one possible campaign strategy, the same one he used in 2010 and 2012. Namely, ridicule your opponent, make him out to be the crazy one, unhinged, delusional, two-faced, dangerous and deceptive. In other words, exactly what you are.

Four years ago, again two years ago, and for a third time right now, DeFazio’s attack machine relies on a series of outrageous ads accusing Robinson of being funded by Big Oil, of being in the pocket of Wall Street, of planning on shutting down the nation’s public schools, of planning the demise of the Social Security system – and even of plotting to put radioactive waste in Americans’ drinking water! Oh, and he is also called a racist (of course).

Since so many voters now recognize that progressivism – a cuddly name for socialism and Marxism – has been destroying America, DeFazio’s one and only re-election strategy mirrors that of the progressive-in-chief Barack Obama: Do everything possible to demonize your opponent as a truly dangerous wacko, since most voters are so totally disgusted with you they wouldn’t send you back to Washington under any other circumstance.

Please bear with me for a moment while I tell you what kind of a man Art Robinson – whom I’ve known personally for many years – really is.

A Ph.D. research scientist of international stature, Robinson co-founded, with Nobel-winner Linus Pauling, the Linus Pauling Institute in Menlo Park, Calif. Then in 1980, with the help of his chemist wife Laurelee, Robinson, famed biochemist Martin Kamen and Nobel Laureate Bruce Merrifield founded the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine. While carrying out influential research, Art and Laurelee also raised and homeschooled their six children on 350 idyllic acres in southern Oregon.

Then tragedy struck. In 1988, Laurelee died suddenly from hemorrhagic pancreatitis, leaving Art alone to care for all those children ranging from 18 months up to 12 years of age. What did he do in such a terrible, crushing circumstance?

Art restructured their homeschooling curriculum in such a way that his children could, to a considerable extent, teach themselves. He also eventually packaged the curriculum and offered it to the homeschooling world. “The Robinson Curriculum” apparently works pretty well, as today all six of Art’s children either have doctorate degrees or will shortly. One has a chemistry Ph.D., two have doctorates in veterinary medicine, one recently received his Ph.D. in nuclear engineering, while the last two have been in the Oregon State University graduate program working toward their own nuclear engineering Ph.D.s.

Oh, and how’d they pay for all that expensive college and postgraduate schooling – six times? Sales of “The Robinson Curriculum,” which remains very popular among homeschoolers and is used as a supplement by many public schoolers. It currently has 60,000 users.

Talk about the American can-do spirit!

homeschoolrobinsonOne example of his can-do attitude: Robinson has single-handedly documented the utter lack of unanimity in the scientific community on man-made global warming through a petition he started – not an online petition, mind you, but an actual document physically signed – that to date has been signed by more than 31,000 scientists, including more than 9,000 Ph.D.s. All 31,000 agree “there is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.”

So that’s my view of Art Robinson. And while DeFazio’s view is that Robinson is – and I quote – a “pathological nut-job,” some of the nation’s most credible people think otherwise:

  • “I strongly endorse Art Robinson for election to the U.S. Congress. In the 15 years I have known Art, I have found him to be an outstanding scientist, a man of uncompromising integrity. Art’s depth of knowledge of the economic, scientific, energy, and industrial challenges that face our nation is unparalleled. Men of his ability are urgently needed in Washington.” – Steve Forbes, publisher and entrepreneur
  • “Dr. Robinson is one of the most gifted scientists I have ever met.” – Martin Kamen, Fermi Prize recipient and discoverer of Carbon 14
  • “Arthur Robinson has the respect of a very significant portion of the scientific community.” – Frederic Seitz, former president of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences
  • “In my experience with space flight, I have come to know many men of excellence. Art Robinson is the best can-do guy I know. He’s what we need in Washington, and I think Oregon voters should elect Art Robinson. He’s a treasure.” – Scott Carpenter, Mercury astronaut
  • “Art Robinson’s philosophy is that the government is far too intrusive in our lives. He understands we have to stop the spending in Washington, the growth of the national debt, and allow the Constitution to function. I strongly recommend the 4th congressional district of Oregon put Art Robinson in the Congress of the United States.” – Harrison Schmitt, Apollo astronaut and former U.S. senator

Racist? Mad scientist? Big Oil?

All that sounds great, you might be thinking, but what about those allegations from DeFazio and his proxies that Robinson is a dangerous, wacko extremist? Any truth to them?

Let’s take a look:

  • One part of “The Robinson Curriculum” is a recommendation that students read as many as possible of the 99 short, classic historical novels for children penned by celebrated British author G.A. Henty (kind of like the “Hardy Boys” books). Now it happens that in one of these 99 Victorian-era books – all of which Robinson personally reprinted on his own printing press and offered to the public as an adjunct to his homeschooling curriculum – one fictional character makes a two-sentence remark while in Africa that could be considered racially insensitive by today’s standards. Because of this, candidate Art Robinson is being labeled a racist.

Yes, I know, it’s insane. But wait – there’s more.

Character, Apparel, and Moral Standard

Dinner Topics for Wednesday

Building good character …

Courage to Choose Modesty

By Carol F. McConkie

What can we teach our sons and daughters to help them have the courage to choose modesty [in their apparel] in a world that would mock them for their virtuous choices?

keyWhy is modesty so important? Why would a hemline, a neckline, or a T-shirt matter to the Lord? I am the mother of five daughters and two sons, and as you can imagine, the topic of modesty has come up in our home once in a while. But over the years, I have learned that modesty is taught best by teaching the doctrine and setting a positive example. The doctrine will help our children understand why modesty is so important, and our example will demonstrate the blessings of modesty in happy ways.

What Is Modesty?

modestyouthModesty is a God-given principle that can help us learn to use our bodies appropriately here in mortality. The definition of modesty in True to the Faith is “An attitude of humility and decency in dress, grooming, language, and behavior.”1 Modesty is not vain or boastful. Modest people do not use their bodies or their behavior to seek approval from the world or to draw attention to their own real or supposed accomplishments or desirable attributes.

Please remember that the principles of modesty shared here apply to both men and women, sons and daughters, and remember that even as we teach and exemplify modesty, we never condemn those who choose short skirts or “rainbow hair and the many splendored rings.”2 Always we exemplify compassion and Christlike love for the individual while we remain loyal to the standards the Lord has set.

I testify that the choices we make to appear and behave modestly send a powerful message that we understand our identity as sons and daughters of God and that we have chosen to stand in holy places.

templeI love this scripture: “Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? … The temple of God is holy, which temple ye are” (1 Corinthians 3:16–17). Our bodies are the temples of our spirits. It is to this bodily temple that we invite the companionship of the Holy Ghost. I believe that when we choose to wear modest clothing and behave with a modest demeanor, we wear and we live our testimony of God the Eternal Father and of His Son, Jesus Christ. We witness by our physical appearance that we are disciples of Christ and that we live His gospel.

Why Is Modesty Important?

We live in a world of good and evil, and the physical body can be used for either righteous or wicked purposes. But we know that our precious bodies are a gift from God to each of us. They are sacred. Elder David A. Bednar of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles taught, “To those who know and understand the plan of salvation, defiling the body is an act of rebellion [see Mosiah 2:36–37] and a denial of our true identity as sons and daughters of God.”3 We choose to care for and protect our bodies so that we may be instruments in the hands of God to bring about His glorious purposes (see Alma 26:3). If we desire to stand for the Savior and do His work, we must ask ourselves, If the Savior stood beside us, would we feel comfortable in the clothing we wear?

Modesty in dress, appearance, thought, and behavior is evidence that we understand the covenants we have made that bless us, protect us, and empower us in our preparation to return to His presence. When we were baptized, we stepped out of the world and into the kingdom of God. Everything must be different for us. Elder Robert D. Hales of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles taught: “By choosing to be in His kingdom, we separate—not isolate—ourselves from the world. Our dress will be modest, our thoughts pure, our language clean.”4

Modesty is a principle that will help keep us safely on the covenant path as we progress to the presence of God. Modesty in dress and appearance and in thought and behavior will help prepare us to make and keep sacred temple covenants. To bless and protect Adam and Eve, God gave them coats of skins to clothe them before sending them out of the garden. In like manner, God has given us a covering of covenants in mortality, symbolized by our sacred temple garments.

What Are the Blessings of Modesty?

What can we teach our sons and daughters to help them have the courage to choose modesty in a world that would mock and scorn them for their pure and virtuous choices? Do they see us using our bodies to draw attention or to glorify God?

Modesty in thought, word, appearance, and behavior helps us obtain three empowering and ennobling blessings.

  1. Modesty invites the constant companionship of the Holy Ghost. Elder Hales has taught, “Modesty is fundamental to being worthy of the Spirit.”5

Let’s help our children understand that they will not want to do anything to deny themselves “the unspeakable gift of the Holy Ghost” (D&C 121:26). Help them know that precious and powerful spiritual gifts accompany His sacred companionship. God has promised, “I will impart unto you of my Spirit, which shall enlighten your mind, which shall fill your soul with joy; … By this shall you know, all things whatsoever you desire of me, which are pertaining unto things of righteousness, in faith believing in me that you shall receive” (D&C 11:13–14). Knowledge, wisdom, and testimony; joy, peace, and happiness—these are some of the great blessings we can promise our children as we invite them to live modestly and be worthy of the Holy Ghost.

One of the challenges of modest dress is that fashions and socially accepted behaviors change regularly. The standards of the Lord never change. Teach young men and young women to be sensitive to the Spirit as they make choices about what to wear, say, and do. As they live close to the Spirit, they do not need to be like the world.

Our children have received the gift of the Holy Ghost, and they are traveling the covenant path that leads to the temple and will return them to the presence of God. They need us to assure them and exemplify for them that they will be guided, protected, comforted, and purified as they live worthy of the Holy Ghost.

  1. We can teach our sons and daughters that modest appearance and behavior helps protect us from the destructive influences of the world. One of the most deceptive weapons used against all of us is the socially accepted attitude that morality is old-fashioned. Modesty is a defense against such evil influences and a protection of chastity and virtue. Listen to these words in For the Strength of Youth: “Before marriage, … do not do anything … that arouses sexual feelings.”6 Immodest appearance and behavior will often arouse sexual feelings and will break down barriers and invite increased temptation to break the law of chastity.

Elder Hales has taught: “Modesty is at the center of being pure and chaste, both in thought and deed. Thus, because it guides and influences our thoughts, behavior, and decisions, modesty is at the core of our character.”7 Teach and exemplify modesty to help our young men and young women be prepared to defend and protect the procreative powers within them. Help them hold sacred and preserve the expression of love between a husband and wife for marriage.

  1. Modesty enables us to “stand as witnesses of God at all times” (Mosiah 18:9). The Savior taught: “Hold up your light that it may shine unto the world. Behold I am the light which ye shall hold up” (3 Nephi 18:24). We have a divine mandate to be a beacon to the world, to demonstrate the joy of gospel living, to teach righteousness, and to build the kingdom of God on the earth. Each of us reflects the Light of Christ when we are modest and pure and keep the commandments. Modesty is a witness of our testimony of the Savior and of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

How beautiful and how blessed are they who are guided by the Holy Ghost, who protect themselves from worldliness, and who stand as witnesses of God to the world. And blessed are they who exemplify and teach the doctrine of modesty for all the sons and daughters of Zion.

As we have covenanted to follow the Savior and desire to receive the fulness of the blessings of His Atonement in our lives, there is really only one outfit that matters. Moroni records, “Awake, and arise from the dust, … yea, and put on thy beautiful garments, O daughter of Zion; … that the covenants of the Eternal Father … may be fulfilled” (Moroni 10:31; emphasis added).

The beautiful garments are the robes of righteousness, worn by those who have kept their covenants. Are we preparing our children to put on these beautiful garments?

I testify that salvation is in Christ and that those who have kept their covenants will “have a perfect knowledge of their enjoyment, and their righteousness, being clothed with purity, yea, even with the robe of righteousness” (2 Nephi 9:14).


Mitt Romney Spanks Obama with Identity Joke

Romney spanks Obama with identity joke

Mitt clowns about president being asked for ID

Joe Kovacs


A joke about President Obama’s identity that has been circulating on the Internet has just received a big boost from former presidential candidate Mitt Romney.

The 2012 GOP nominee voiced the zinger Sunday night in West Des Moines, Iowa, during a rally for Iowa Republican Senate candidate Joni Ernst.

“Now when you’re running for office people tell you, you shouldn’t tell jokes,” Romney explained. “But I’m not running for office, so I can tell one.”

Romney noted he “got this on the Internet from a family member.”

obamajoke1Here is Romney’s account of the joke:

President Obama went to the bank to cash a check and he didn’t have his ID. And the teller said you’ve got to prove who you are.

He said, “How should I do that?” She said the other day Phil Mickelson came in, he didn’t have his ID but he set up a little cup on the ground, took a golf ball, putted it right into that cup so they knew it was Phil Mickelson. They cashed his check.

And then Andre Agassi came in. And Andre Agassi didn’t have his ID either. He put a little target on the wall, took a tennis ball and racquet– hit it onto that target time. We knew that was Andre Agassi so we cashed his check.

And she said to him, “Is there anything you can do to prove who you are?” And [Obama] said, “I don’t have a clue.”

obamajoke2And she said, “Well, Mr. President, do you want your money in small bills or large bills?”


US Constitution Series 12: Democracy Attacks American Republic

US Constitution Series 12: The United States of America shall be a Republic

There are many reasons why the Founders wanted a republican form of government rather than a democracy.

IMPORTANT: See Republic and Democracy Defined—Read this First

democracyjeffersonThe Founders’ Basic Principles: 28 Great Ideas that changed the world

The practical application of this book review of Skousen’s educated wisdom is to leverage “We, The People’s” knowledge to easily expose ignorance, anarchy and tyranny, and hold the government accountable.


From The 5,000 Year Leap—A Miracle that Changed the World

By W. Cleon Skousen

How the American Constitutional Republic became known as a Democracy

Modern Emphasis on “Democracy”

In spite of efforts to clarify the difference between a democracy and a republic, the United States began to be consistently identified in both the press and the school books as a “democracy.”This transformation of our Constitutional republic into a “Democracy” began with the Progressives in the early 20th century. President Wilson, a leader in the Progressive movement, helped contribute to this confusion when he identified World War I as the effort to “make the world safe for democracy.” ~Skousen, 158


Socialists use a Front Group to mask their true purpose

Definition: (A Front Group is an organization that uses a false name to deceive people about their true purpose)

Two leftists, Harry Laidler and Norman Thomas, set up an organization called the Intercollegiate Socialist Society. (ISS)They spoke at campuses from coast to coast, calling America a democracy. The ISS adopted a snappy (socialist)slogan for the times: “Production for use, not for profit.”

By 1921, with the violence and brutality associated with the Communist revolution, “socialism” became repugnant to people. So ISS changed their name to “The League for Industrial DEMOCRACY.”


“Democracy” Loses Its Identification with Socialism

Following World War II, an interesting semantic transition began to take place in the American mind with reference to the use of the word “democracy.”

To begin with, the Communists, the National Socialists of Germany, and the Democratic Socialists throughout the rest of Europe had all misused the word “democracy” to the point where it had become virtually meaningless as a descriptive term. As a euphemism for socialism, the word had become totally innocuous.

The word “democracy” used to cover up the abject worldwide failure of “socialism”

obamaSocialistDemWOrkersPartyFurthermore, socialism, whether spelled with a capital or small “s”, had lost its luster. All over the world, socialist nations—both democratic and communistic—were drifting into deep trouble. All of them were verging on economic collapse in spite of tens of billions of dollars provided by the United States to prop them up. Some had acquired a notorious and abhorrent reputation because of the violence, torture, starvation, and concentration-camp tactics they had used against their own civilian population. All over the world, socialism had begun to emerge as an abject failure formula. To the extent it was tried in America (without ever being called “socialism”), it had created colossal problems which the Founding Fathers’ formula would have avoided. (Skousen, 160)


The Attack on the Constitution

With the preceding historical picture in mind, it will be readily appreciated that the introduction of the word “democracy (to describe the United States) was actually designed as an attack on the Constitutional structure of government and the basic rights it was designed to protect.

signers3As Samuel Adams pointed out, the Founders had tried to make socialism “unconstitutional.” Therefore, to adopt socialism, respect and support for traditional constitutionalism had to be eroded and then emasculated. In view of this fact, it should not surprise the student of history to discover that those who wanted to have “democracy” identified with the American system were also anxious to have Americans believe their traditional Constitution was outdated, perhaps totally obsolete. (Skousen, 160)


Next: Principle 13

A Constitution should be Structured to Permanently Protect the People from the Human Frailties of their Rulers.

US Constitution Series 11: Liberty of the People vs. Government Force


Heritage Health News Update: Marijuana Legalization Decision was Wrong

Health News Update:

Marijuana legalization decision was wrong for interest of American People …

Democrat Governor: Legalizing Pot Was ‘Reckless.’ A New Study Proves Him Right.

Cully Stimson

From Heritage Foundation

U.S. Marijuana Enthusiasts Gather For Mass Pot-Smoking CelebrationThe top Democrat in Colorado, Gov. John Hickenlooper, said Monday during a gubernatorial debate that legalizing marijuana in Colorado was “reckless.” His Republican opponent, Bob Beauprez, agreed.

According to The Huffington Post, Hickenlooper said, “I think for us to that that [legalize recreational use] without having all the data, there is not enough data, and to a certain extent you could say it was reckless.”

Hickenlooper is right and wrong.

He is certainly correct, and gets credit for admitting that legalizing the recreational use of marijuana in Colorado was reckless. As we have shown here, here, here and here, the negative social costs are proof positive that this radical experiment is not only reckless, but dangerous.

But Hickenlooper is wrong that there is “not enough data.”

As former Obama administration drug policy expert Kevin Sabet has said, the trope that marijuana is harmless and non-addictive is a myth. His book, “Reefer Sanity: Seven Great Myths About Marijuana,” is a must-read for anyone who actually wants “the data.”

But now there’s even more “data.”

A definitive study published this week by the Journal of Addiction by professor Wayne Hall of Kings College London shows that marijuana is highly addictive, causes mental health problems and is a gateway drug to other illegal dangerous drugs.

Hall’s research, conducted over the past 20 years, confirms what other studies have shown:

  • Regular adolescent marijuana users have lower educational attainment than non-using peers;
  • Those users are more likely to use other illegal drugs;
  • Adolescent use produces intellectual impairment;
  • It doubles the risk of being diagnosed with schizophrenia;
  • And, not surprisingly, increases the risk of heart attacks in middle-aged adults.


Hickenlooper’s warning to other states should be heeded. Legalizing marijuana is reckless, no matter what the pot pushers say to the contrary.

Government: Republic or Democracy?

What is the Difference between a Republic and a Democracy?

Month-Defining Moment

More Defining Moments Here

key “Well, Doctor, what have we got—a Republic or a Monarchy?”

“A Republic, if you can keep it.” ~Benjamin Franklin

We may define a republic to be …a government which derives all its powers directly or indirectly from the great body of the people, and is administered by persons holding their offices during [the people’s] pleasure for a limited period, or during good behavior. ~James Madison (Federalist Papers, No. 39, p. 241)

Because Progressives were corrupting the definition of democracy, the U.S. Army published the following explanations in their Training Manual in 1928. (Skousen, The 5,000-Year Leap, 157-158.)


Government Manual Defines a “Democracy”

democracyjeffersonDemocracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths. ~ James Madison (Federalist Papers, No. 10, p.81)

The manual had the following to say concerning the characteristics of a democracy:

  • A government of the masses.
  • Authority derived through mass meetings or any other form of “direct” expression.
  • Results in mobocracy.
  • Attitude toward property is communistic—negating property rights.
  • Attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate, whether it be based upon deliberation or government by passion, prejudice, and impulse, without restrain or regard to consequences.
  • Results in demagogism, license, agitation, discontent, anarchy.


Government Manual Defines a Republic

225px-BenFranklin2 “Well, Doctor, what have we got—a Republic or a Monarchy?”

  “A Republic, if you can keep it.” ~Benjamin Franklin

We may define a republic to be …a government which derives all its powers directly or indirectly from the great body of the people, and is administered by persons holding their offices during [the people’s] pleasure for a limited period, or during good behavior. ~James Madison (Federalist Papers, No. 39, p. 241)


The government manual then proceeded to outline the characteristics of a republic, which all of the Founders had vigorously recommended over a pure democracy or any other form of government.

  • Authority is derived through the election by the people of public officials best fitted to represent them.
  • Attitude toward property is respect for laws and individual rights, and a sensible economic procedure.
  • Attitude toward law is the administration of justice in accord with fixed principles and established evidence, with a strict regard for consequences.
  • A greater number of citizens and extent of territory may be brought within its compass.
  • Avoids the dangerous extreme of either tyranny or mobocracy.
  • Results in statesmanship, liberty, reason, justice, contentment, and progress.

Building Character: Champions of Liberty

Building Character, Champions of Liberty

Ode to the Epic Hero

Epic Hero resize medYour epic quest begins at birth

To find your purpose here on earth.

Along the way your heart will learn

How good from evil to discern.

Moments in time will come to define

Trials of your soul, to test and refine.


Discover things that will be treasured,

Perhaps not always in money measured—

Gems of knowledge, virtue, truth,

Eternal standards for families and youth—

To strengthen, protect, and to prepare

A way to escape the enemy’s snare.


biblicallampThe journey of life demands your part—

Courage, faith, and a willing heart.

You need not fall, though you may stumble,

For angels fail not to help the humble.

Your lone small flame may not seem bright,

Yet it reveals the way to greater light.


Day by day, big and little—

Answers await life’s every riddle.

Just when you think you can’t continue,

You’ll find the epic hero within you.

Honor and virtue will be your choice.

Return home triumphant, and rejoice.


Copyright 2010 © by Christine A. Davidson

Epic Heroes Quest—for Youthknightonhorse


Epic Heroes in Training