Christian News: Genesis Flood Evidence, Marriage Problems

Dinner Topics for Monday

AFA Journal, July-August 2015

Culture Wars

1) More emotional problems for kids of same sex parents

AFAssmarriage-childrenDr. Donald Paul Sullins of Catholic University of America, led a study to determine if children with same sex parents suffer any disadvantage in emotional well being. Sullins studied a representative sample of 207,007 children, including 512 with same sex parents, and found that emotional problems appeared twice as often among children with same sex parents.

In his abstract of the study, last revised March 13, 2015,  Sullins said, “The two groups are different by definition. Intact opposite sex marriage ensures children of the persistent presence of their joint biological parents; same sex marriage ensures the opposite.” The study was published in the British Journal of Education, Society and Behavioural Science., 3/13/15

divorcetroubledcouple2) Marriage Problems . . .

Cohabitation: all that glitters is not gold

The American College of Pediatricians has released data that disprove some common assumptions about couples living together before marriage:

Claim 1: Cohabitation will assure stronger marriages.
Fact: Numbers indicate that cohabitation increases the risk of divorce by 50%.

Claim 2: Cohabitation is a fiscal boon because couples pool their individual resources.
Fact: In reality, it is a financial risk, and it lacks the financial benefits of marriage. Marriage and Religion Research Institute reveals that cohabiters increase their net worth less than all other family structures.

Claim 3: Cohabitation is good because it lets a couple spend more time together.
Fact: ACP says it leads to increased negative communication, to men spending more time on personal leisure, and to the couple spending less time together. (, 5/1/15

AFAgenesisfloodmap3) Genesis Flood Evidence

Geological formations found on the floor of the Atlantic Ocean east of Barbados raise questions for evolutionists, but give creationists new evidence for the biblical flood. Jake Hebert of the Institute for Creation Research said the size and concentration of the deposits support belief in the flood.

The nodules are too large to fit the current slow rate of development. As Hebert explained, the conditions of the flood would have brought more rapid development. Also, nodules are found only in the upper 20 inches or so of sediment on the ocean floor. Hebert said the flood would explain that.

“Toward the end of the Genesis flood, sheets of water receding off the continents would have rapidly eroded and dumped enormous amounts of sediment into the ocean basins.”, 4/24/15

4) Senate message to Iran: free Saeed or no deal

obama-muslim-brotherhood2The U.S. Senate voted unanimously on a resolution calling for the freeing of American hostages held in Iran, including Pastor Saeed Abedini. The resolution was passed on May 11, separated by just a few days from the passage of legislation allowing Congress to review and vote on a nuclear deal with Iran. The implication is that the Senate would want to see the release of American citizens imprisoned in Iran before approving a nuclear deal.

As Matthew Clark with American Center for Law and Justice explained,  “The same senators who unanimously passed this demand for Pastor Saeed and the other Americans’ freedom are the same senators who will now have the authority to review any potential deal or final deal with Iran over the nuclear negotiations.”, 5/22/15

Missionary Work: Gospel Teachings

Dinner Talk Topics for Friday

Missionary Work: Gospel Teachings


Called to Serve

By Grace Gordon

Jesus-calling-the-fishermenCalled to serve Him, heavenly King of glory,

Chosen e’er to witness for his name,

Far and wide we tell the Father’s story,

Far and wide his love proclaim.


Called to know the richness of his blessing—

Sons and daughters, children of a King—

Glad of heart, his holy name confessing,

Praises unto him we bring.


Onward, ever onward, as we glory in his name;

Forward, pressing forward, as a triumph song we sing.

God our strength will be; press forward ever,

Called to serve our King.

Gospel Teachings: Labor of Love

Dinner Topics for Thursday

Labor of Love: Sharing Gospel Teachings in a Hostile Age

Tips for Christians: How to share gospel in hostile age

Greg Corombos

‘Now that we live in a more secular society, we have to change the way we communicate’

In the face of a U.S. Supreme Court decision finding a constitutional right to gay marriage and the Oklahoma State Supreme ruling a Ten Commandments monument unconstitutional, many Christians are experiencing increased intolerance in the public square. But does the increasingly secular culture mean believers need to adjust how they share the gospel?

godwitnessinclass“Yes, I mean, and no,” said Tim Keller, founding pastor at Redeemer Presbyterian Church in New York City. “No in that you don’t change the good news, but, yes, it does I think change the way you share it.”

Keller is the author of several well-known Christian books, including “Counterfeit Gods” and “The Reason for God.” His new book is “Preaching: Communicating Faith in an Age of Skepticism.” Keller said people frequently alter their method of communicating with other people based on what they know about them, and sharing Christ is no different.

“If I’m talking to somebody who’s skeptical or somebody who’s sympathetic, I change the way I talk,” Keller explained. “We’re that way with everyone. Hopefully, if you know how to communicate, you instinctively say things differently when you’re trying to bridge a barrier. Now that we live in a more secular society, we’re going to have to change the way we communicate the gospel.”

According to Keller, a key step to engaging this generation is to be able to explain your personal relationship with Christ through His word.

living-gods-truth“The gospel has to be real to you,” he said. “It has to have really changed your life. It can’t just be something you’ve adopted because you inherited it. If you simply say, ‘Well, this is the truth,’ people aren’t going to listen. Instead, you have to say, ‘Here’s how it works. Here’s how it functions in my heart, how it functions in my life.’ There’s got to be authenticity, and you’ve got to make it life-related. Otherwise, people won’t listen.”

Keller said authenticity is critical to the millennial generation, although he said young people are often quite hypocritical on this issue.

“Millennials are very high on authenticity,” he said. “They’re often self-righteous about it. I’m not sure that they’re any less self-righteous or any more tolerant than their grandparents, or parents or great-grandparents. What’s funny about the millennials is, like every other generation, whatever they value they’re self-righteous about it. ‘We have it and nobody else does.’ And then they look down their noses and so they’re no better.”

That being said, Keller said authenticity needs to be at the core of our witness.

“Paul says, ‘We didn’t just preach the gospel, but we shared our very hearts with you (1 Thessalonians 2:8).’ Therefore, you really do have to do that and it’s never been more important,” he said.

Keller is very quick to assert that engagement is meaningless unless the truth and significance of Christ’s life, death and resurrection is conveyed. He said many clergy fail to be clear, and it leads people down a road of false assurance of their salvation.

“So if you’re preaching on Malachi, where it talks about tithing and giving your money away and not spending it all on yourself – Jesus is not in the book of Malachi. It’s an Old Testament book – if you just explain that and then you end the sermon, the impression will be that I’d better give my money away or God’s not going to take me to heaven,” said Keller, calling that thinking “deadly.”

Jesus-bcome-disciple-lds-church“You don’t want to encourage people to think that it’s their moral efforts that can get them to heaven,” he said. “That creates pride and discouragement.”

Keller said every Bible passage can be logically connected to the gospel, and he said the Malachi example is no exception.

“You have to go to the gospel,” he said. “You say Jesus Christ was infinitely rich. He was in heaven with all the spiritual riches. But He became poor so that through His poverty, we might become rich. He came to earth, became immortal, He died on the cross. And He didn’t just tithe. He didn’t just give 10 percent. He gave everything.

“When you do that, you’re not only giving people an inspiring motivation, but you’re reminding people that you’re not saved through your giving of money. You’re saved through Jesus.”

Keller said all preachers, ordained or not, need to keep the gospel at the center of their messages.

“It’s not something a lot of preachers do, but it’s something they need to learn to do,” he said

Moral Support: Character Education; Heritage Foundation educates Congressmen and Senators

1) Moral Support: Character Education


The Positive Reaction to James Harrison’s Stance on Participation Trophies Proves Political Correctness Isn’t Popular

Steelers’ James Harrison Sends Back Sons’ Participation Trophies: ‘Everything in Life Should Be Earned’

PC-in-sportsJames Harrison is not a fan of participation trophies.

The Steelers linebacker had a lot to say on an Instagram post Saturday, after posting a picture of two participation trophies his sons had received.

Harrison went on to say he’s sending back the trophies until “they earn a real trophy.”

“While I am very proud of my boys for everything they do and will encourage them till the day I die, these trophies will be given back until they EARN a real trophy. I’m sorry I’m not sorry for believing that everything in life should be earned and I’m not about to raise two boys to be men by making them believe that they are entitled to something just because they tried their best,” he wrote.

I came home to find out that my boys received two trophies for nothing, participation trophies! While I am very proud of my boys for everything they do and will encourage them till the day I die, these trophies will be given back until they EARN a real trophy. I’m sorry I’m not sorry for believing that everything in life should be earned and I’m not about to raise two boys to be men by making them believe that they are entitled to something just because they tried their best…cause sometimes your best is not enough, and that should drive you to want to do better…not cry and whine until somebody gives you something to shut u up and keep you happy. #harrisonfamilyvalues

Read the full story.

Political Correctness is not popular

Rush Limbaugh

no-PCNow, this could have gone any number of ways. In our supposedly… It’s an important qualifier there. In our supposedly dominated-by-political correctness world, what should have happened is that James Harrison should have been written out of polite society, because this is a violation of everything. Political correctness has inserted itself in the sense of raising children, in school. There are no winners and there are no losers because they don’t keep score.

There are no starters and there are no bench players because everybody plays.

You get trophies for simply showing up.

We are never allowed to crown champions because not everybody can be one and to do so humiliates those who lose, and we will not do that.

This is supposedly the law of the land.  Supposedly everybody falls in line with it.  And you would think that James Harrison would be just excoriated, just ripped to shreds. But it didn’t happen.  The overwhelming response to James Harrison was overwhelming, unilateral support.  It’s a teachable moment here folks.  I want to take you back.

Now, it happened to be a comment made during the controversial moments of gay marriage, but it relates. You’ll see.  Here it is…

pc-bullyWe Have Been Ruled by a Minority

Political correctness is censorship, it is stifling, and it is bullying, and it’s being practiced by a veritable minority of people!

May 1 commentary

RUSH ARCHIVE: How can such a small number of people come to so dominate the American political system? How can less than a million people cause the havoc that they caused in Indiana recently? How can so few people end up closing down businesses, like flower shops or bakeries or photo shops or what have you. … It’s fascinating to me to watch it transpire and watch hardly any opposition rise up against it. It’s the only way it can happen. No push-back. And it’s exactly what is happening.

We are being run, this country is being run by a veritable minority, and that is of liberalism. Liberals are a minority of thought. The percentage of the country that’s liberal is less than 50. It’s not a majority. But, where are they? They are in the classroom. They’re running colleges, universities, high schools, school systems. They’re running the media: News, movies, books, television shows. So the impression — particularly with the control of the media, the impression is — that they are much larger in number than they are, much more widespread than they are, and much more powerful than they are.

Political correctness is censorship, it is stifling, and it is bullying, and it’s being practiced by a veritable minority of people!

2) Moral Support: Heritage Foundation expands education plans for Congressmen and Senators

heritage-freedom-center-blueprintThe Heritage Foundation is vastly expanding our presence in Washington D.C.—the belly of the beast.

Our headquarters in the heart of Washington, D.C. is just two city blocks from the Senate offices, three city blocks from the Capitol building, and three city blocks from the House offices. It’s from this base that we will wage a policy war with the Left and the Establishment at very close range. In politics, proximity matters. That’s why our physical presence is key and that’s why expansion is critical to future conservative victories.

To beat down Big Government, we need to expand our footprint on Capitol Hill.

heritage-freedom-centerThe Freedom Center will be only blocks from the U.S. Capitol in a remodeled structure already purchased—prime real estate once rented by far-left groups. The modernized Freedom Center will be specifically outfitted for:

  • Educating Congress about how conservative ideas solve today’s problems and help the American people;
  • Reaching the American people with an enhanced media outreach program focused on spreading conservative ideas;
  • Communicating facts to mobilize grassroots Americans;
  • And bringing together conservative groups to coordinate strategy.

3) Congress sends letter on Planned Parenthood Videos

Congress Sends Letter Requesting 7 Specific Things from Planned Parenthood — Note the Last One

As Reported By The Blaze:

abortion-defund-p-parenthoodThe House Oversight Committee on Friday penned a letter to Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards requesting seven documents or pieces of information be handed over by next week.

The letter, authored by Reps. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) and Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), noted the series of recent undercover sting videos that purport to show the abortion provider engaging in the sale of aborted fetal parts.

“Recently released videos implicate Planned Parenthood Federation of America and its affiliates in potentially unlawful transactions involving fetal tissue,” the letter said. “In the videos, Planned Parenthood representatives discuss the demand for certain body parts, the manner in which patient consent is solicited, pricing considerations, and the methods by which doctors manipulate procedures to ensure that tissues remain intact.”

It added, “The disturbing content of these videos raises questions as to whether federal funds are being used to finance the potentially illegal conduct described therein.”

The last requested piece of information requires Planned Parenthood to note “what procedures, services, or other medical treatments are available only or exclusively at a Planned Parenthood affiliate or health center that are covered by either a state’s Medicaid program or a health plan sold via a state exchange or under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.”

For Full Text of Letter:

Congress Sends Letter Requesting These Seven Things From Planned Parenthood — Make Note of Last One |

History Facts: Margaret Sanger, Racism, and Planned Parenthood

History Facts: Margaret Sanger, Racism, and Planned Parenthood


Planned Parenthood founder busted

Authors join black pastors in calling for Smithsonian to remove Margaret Sanger
By Paul Bremmer

keyIt may be uncomfortable for fans of Planned Parenthood, but it’s true – Margaret Sanger, the legendary birth control activist, was a racial eugenicist who once spoke before the Ku Klux Klan.

The evidence is right there in her own memoir, according to Paul Kengor.

margaretsanger“These are the kind of great lengths to which liberals go to ignore the writings of their own icons,” said Kengor, a professor and author of “Takedown: From Communists to Progressives, How the Left Has Sabotaged Family and Marriage.” “Pages 366 and 367 of her memoirs, published by a top New York publishing house, she talks about her 1926 speech to the Silver Lake, New Jersey, women’s chapter of the KKK. That’s right – Margaret Sanger spoke to the KKK.”

In an interview with WND, Kengor recounted Sanger’s KKK experience as documented in her memoir.

“She describes the white hoods that come through, the flaming crosses that come through,” Kengor recalled. “Then she gets up and speaks, and she spoke for so long and was such a hit that she didn’t get finished until late at night. She also said a whole bunch of additional offers to speak were proffered by her enthusiastic audience, and she finished so late that she missed the train to go back to New York. She had to spend the night there.

“And people might wonder, why would the KKK invite Margaret Sanger? Because Margaret Sanger was a racial eugenicist. She spoke openly of race improvement.”

This fact was not lost on a group of 10 black clergymen who now have sent a letter to the director of the Smithsonian Institution’s National Portrait Gallery requesting that a bust of Sanger be removed from the museum’s “Struggle for Justice” exhibit.

truth-meter-false“Ironically, Sanger’s bust is featured in the NPG’s ‘Struggle for Justice’ exhibit, alongside two of America’s most celebrated and authentic champions of equal rights – Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., and Rosa Parks,” the pastors wrote. “If Sanger had her way, MLK and Rosa Parks would not have been born.”

Neither would Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson, a radio talk-show host, speaker, and WND columnist. Peterson said he agrees with the black pastors’ demand to remove the Sanger bust.

“They should remove it because Margaret Sanger is presented as a civil-rights person, someone who was for the people and for freedom, and that wasn’t the case at all,” Peterson told WND in an interview. “Margaret Sanger believed in eugenics and she believed that black people were an underclass, they were having too many babies in the South and that they needed to be wiped out.”

Peterson, author of the soon-to-be-released book “Antidote,” charged Sanger’s desire to control the black population led her to found the American Birth Control League, which later evolved into Planned Parenthood.

“She was a hardcore racist who hated black Americans, and unfortunately 70 percent of the Planned Parenthood abortion mills are in inner cities right now,” Peterson noted. “[Sanger] was not about freedom for all people, and she wasn’t a leader in the civil rights movement or an example for the civil rights movement.”

Troy Newman, president of Operation Rescue and a leading anti-abortion activist, also supports the removal of Sanger’s likeness from the National Portrait Gallery.

“Her legacy has been one of disgusting racism and eugenics,” Newman, author of “Abortion Free: Your Manual for Building a Pro-Life America One Community at a Time,” said. “Most Americans do not understand that she was more closely associated with the ideology of the Nazis than a modern-day perspective of social justice. Reading through her writings and lectures one would easily find that she would be considered a despicable racist in today society.”

Kengor certainly agrees, pointing out Sanger once used the phrase “Birth Control: To Create a Race of Thoroughbreds” as a masthead in an issue of her publication Birth Control Review. The professor also echoed Peterson’s point that Planned Parenthood targets minority babies.

plannedParenthoodAFA“Today her Planned Parenthood clinics abort a disproportionate number of unborn African-American babies,” Kengor said. “And that’s a hard fact for liberals to accept, and they refuse to accept, and they’re right now yelling at their screen calling me names, but it’s true. It’s absolutely true. And it’s horrible, it’s disgusting, and it’s downright evil.”

“Evil” was the word Peterson also used to describe the Smithsonian Institution’s decision to honor the racist Sanger alongside the likes of King and Parks, who fought for African-American rights. He also called it a “slap in the face” to all those who suffered and died for the freedom of black Americans.

Said Peterson: “I grew up in Alabama on a plantation down there under Jim Crow laws, and to see [Sanger] standing there alongside people like that as though she was part of the civil rights movement is really – it’s evil. It’s pretty evil.”


Why Progressives Are Wrong to Revere Margaret Sanger


Paul Kengor @DrPaulKengor

Margaret Sanger is a saint in the feminist church. She is a charter member of the progressive hall of fame. Liberals revere this woman who preached “race improvement” and denounced what she called “human weeds”.

This woman is not worthy of enshrinement.

Democrats given high honors by Planned Parenthood

Hillary Clinton glows that she is “in awe of” Sanger. She said so in 2009 upon receiving Planned Parenthood’s “highest honor” that year: its coveted Margaret Sanger Award.

Likewise effusive was Nancy Pelosi when she proudly accepted the award in 2014.

obama-abortion-p-parenthoodSpeaking to Planned Parenthood a year earlier, President Barack Obama, hailed the organization founded by this racial eugenicist committed to creating a “race of thoroughbreds” and purging America’s “race of degenerates.”

“Thank you, Planned Parenthood,” and “God bless you,” said Obama to a giddy crowd of ecstatic women. The president commended Planned Parenthood’s “extraordinary” and “remarkable work,” and told the women they do a “great, great job.”

The love by liberals for Planned Parenthood and its founder seems to know no bounds. A professor, blogging at the New York Times, has argued for placing Margaret’s mug on the $20 bill.

And alas, even the Smithsonian, America’s museum, boasts a handsome bust of Sanger in its stately National Portrait Gallery.

>>> To read more on this topic: 13 Things You Probably Don’t Know About Planned Parenthood Founder Margaret Sanger 

Margaret is there enshrined in the Smithsonian’s vaunted “Struggle for Justice” exhibit.

This brings me to my reason for writing here today: a group of angry African-American pastors are demanding the removal of Sanger’s bust from the Smithsonian.

The letter from Ministers Taking a Stand states:

“Perhaps the Gallery is unaware that Ms. Sanger supported black eugenics, a racist attitude toward black and other minority babies, an elitist attitude toward those she regarded as ‘the feeble minded;’ speaking at a rally of Ku Klux Klan women; and communications with Hitler sympathizers. Also the notorious ‘Negro Project,’ which sought to limit, if not eliminate black births, was her brainchild.”

magnifying-glass-lightoftruthThe pastors quote an infamous December 1939 letter from Sanger to Dr. Clarence Gamble of the Eugenics Society, where, in the context of discussing the Negro Project, Sanger wrote: “We do not want word to get out that we want to exterminate the Negro population and the minister is the man who can straighten out the idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”

The succinct, powerful statement from the pastors adds: “Despite these well-documented facts of history, her bust sits proudly in your gallery as a hero of justice. The obvious incongruity is staggering!”

Amen to that.

truth-vs-liesLiberals must be baffled by this, confusedly scratching their heads.

This isn’t the esteemed Planned Parenthood foundress they learned to admire in their college classrooms.

Margaret Sanger, a racist? Huh? They never heard that in American History 101.

Where could these crazy charges possibly come from?

The answer is a myriad of authoritative sources. For starters, one might consult Sanger’s own words. On pages 366-367 of her 1938 autobiography, published by W.W. Norton, one of the leading New York publishing houses, she spoke warmly of her May 1926 speech to the women’s chapter of the KKK in Silverlake, New Jersey.

Sanger seemed eager to speak to the group. After getting off the train, she was escorted by car along windings roads to a literal barn hidden in the country. There, the undeterred Planned Parenthood matron waited patiently for nearly three hours while her white-hooded sisters engaged in their incendiary routine. She observed “figures parading with banners and illuminated crosses.

The Planned Parenthood founder’s KKK talk was a smash hit. Not only did it go very late, after a long wait, but it earned Sanger a dozen new invitations from the klan-sisters. The KKK was quite excited about the work of Planned Parenthood’s founder.

Thus, it hardly comes out-of-nowhere when a group of African-American pastors today asks the Smithsonian: “How can a person like Sanger, who found common cause with the racial agenda of the Ku Klux Klan (KKK), be ranked among true champions of ‘justice?’”


Such words pierce the liberal heart like a dagger. As many conservatives have experienced, when you point out to liberals that Planned Parenthood aborts (by far) a disproportionate number of unborn African-American babies, they go wild with rage and name-calling. You’re apt to be reflexively called everything from a fascist to (hey, why not?) a racist.

For liberals, facing such a stark reality precipitates uncontrollable, irrational outbursts. You can get called every name in the liberal playbook for raising this one.

As we watch weekly the ghastly Planned Parenthood video expose released by the Center for Medical Progress, in which Sanger’s organization’s “medical personnel” nonchalantly discuss dissecting baby parts while gleefully sipping Chianti and nibbling a Caesar’s salad, bear in mind that most of these babies are African-American. Which among them might have been another Rosa Parks, Ben Carson, Martin Luther King Jr., Arthur Ashe, or even Barack Obama?

These African-American pastors know that. Indeed, they show that 70 percent of Planned Parenthood abortion clinics are located in minority neighborhoods. Thus, they’re undertaking their own expose. Their letter, they say, will be but one “in a series of actions we will be taking to expose the evil of honoring Margaret Sanger and Planned Parenthood.”

Again, amen to that.

If liberals genuinely care about justice, they should join these African-American pastors in seeking the removal Margaret Sanger’s bust from the “Struggle for Justice” exhibit at America’s preeminent museum.

This woman is not worthy of enshrinement.

History Facts: Atomic Bomb and end of World War 2

History Facts: Atomic Bomb and end of World War 2

Hiroshima 70th Anniversary: A Just End to World War 2


Although there are constant attempts to condemn the bombings as unnecessary, Americans at the time were widely supportive of their use, and  tens, if not hundreds of thousands of lives were saved by avoiding an invasion of the Japanese homeland.

hiroshima-house-Getty-640x480by Jarrett Stepman

Seventy years ago, the B-29 Enola Gay, piloted by Paul Tibbets, Jr., dropped an atomic bomb, Little Boy, on the Japanese city of Hiroshima. The blast and ensuing radiation killed an estimated 150,000 people. Though the devastation from the bombing was astounding, it did not bring American’s war with Japan or World War II to an immediate end. Three days later, the United States dropped another atomic bomb, Fat Man, on Nagasaki, and the Empire of Japan’s leaders finally capitulated.

Many mainstream media organizations, such as the New York Times, clearly focus their remembrance of the occasion on those who died in the blast, or peddle a generally anti-nuke line. In this narrative, the Japanese were an aggrieved people who suffered at the hands of a cruel and remorseless United States.

Although there are constant attempts to condemn the bombings as unnecessary, Americans at the time were widely supportive of their use, and  tens, if not hundreds of thousands of lives were saved by avoiding an invasion of the Japanese homeland.

Historian Ronald H. Spector wrote in Eagle Against the Sun: The American War with Japan about the plan to invade the island nation and its potentially cataclysmic levels of casualties. In preparation for the invasion of Japan, codenamed “Downfall,” American military planners attempted to estimate the cost of the assault and the long battle to take the islands of Japan based on the recent bloodbaths in Okinawa and Iwo Jima. Specter noted that in a briefing with President Harry Truman, the Joint Chiefs of Staff presented a plan to invade the Japanese home island of Kyushu. Based on the casualty rate from Okinawa—which was around 35 percent—and the nearly million men that would be required for such an assault, the United States could reasonable expect “268,000 dead and wounded.” These would just be the initial casualties.

truth2momentThough the most recent battle over Okinawa lead to the death of almost every Japanese soldier fighting on the island, it “had the paradoxical effect of discouraging the Americans while inspiring the Japanese.” The Japanese homeland was much easier to defend, and its defenders would be just as, if not more, fanatical.

Spector concluded, “To the infantryman and marines preparing for the assault on Japan, to the sailors who had undergone the weeks of Kamikaze attacks off Okinawa, the atomic bombs seemed not the first chapter of a catastrophe for mankind, the dawn of a new age of terror, the first gun of the cold war but, in Churchill’s words, a ‘miracle of deliverance.’”

Alonzo Hamby wrote a piece in the Wall Street Journal that condemned the critics of the atomic bombing who say that the Japanese were “ready to surrender.” He wrote, “Clearly this was not the case. Japan could still muster formidable military resources. It is unlikely that resistance would have ever gotten down to teenagers armed with clubs and sticks but probable that an amphibious invasion of Kyushu would have exacted a price reminiscent of Okinawa. That possibility was unthinkable to most Americans.”

The remarkably perceptive French observer of American life in the early 19th century, Alexis de Tocqueville, fully understood the deadly power of the American people if and when they chose to take up arms. He described how Americans, the most “democratic” people in human history, would be slow to act as war approached, but once roused, would unleash more destructive force than its foes, more than any authoritarian society.

The Frenchman wrote in Democracy in America:

Alexis_de_tocquevilleWhen a war has at length, by its long continuance, roused the whole community from their peaceful occupations, and ruined their minor undertakings, the same passions which made them attach such importance to the maintenance of peace will be turned to arms. War, after it has destroyed all modes of speculation, becomes itself the great and sole speculation, to which all ambitious desires that equality engenders are exclusively directed. Hence it is that the selfsame democratic nations which are so reluctant to engage in hostilities, sometimes perform prodigious achievements when they have taken the field.

Historian Erick L. McKitrick wrote, “Democratic war would tend, by this logic, toward total involvement. The moral as well as the physical resources of the nation would eventually be organized in support of the war effort, and the conflict itself would readily take on the quality of a great crusade, fought by all society for the preservation of its principles.”

The “prodigious” achievement of World War II was unleashing the “arsenal of democracy” on the Axis powers, and the enormous Manhattan Project that created the atomic bombs. No country in the world had the power or resources to carry out such undertakings except the United States.

As with the Civil War and the attack on Fort Sumter, World War I and the attack on American shipping, World War II and the attack on Pearl Harbor, and most recently the 9/11 attacks that led to the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars and a larger war against radical Islam, the United States is the world’s most deadly nation once provoked.

Dropping atomic bombs brought a just end to World War II, a more deadly and terrible conflict than any in world history. The United States neither wanted nor started the war, but after it was dragged into the fight by the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, there was no turning back on the total war that followed.



Constitutional Law, Illegal Immigration, and Birthright Citizenship

Constitutional Law, Illegal Immigration, and Birthright Citizenship

Mark Levin: Congress can end birthright citizenship with existing Constitutional Law

It might be quicker and easier just to make Mexico the 51st state.
Check it out:

The argument that an illegal alien can step into the United States, claim legal and political jurisdiction, and confer citizenship to their child is insane. People claiming to be Constitutional experts saying that the 14th Amendment allows birthright citizenship are dead wrong. The 14th Amendment didn’t even give citizenship to Native Americans, why would it give citizenship to illegal aliens? The Constitution is on our side in a second way: Article 1 Section 8, which grants plenary power to Congress to establish a uniform rule of naturalization. We’re tired of being told someone can come into our country illegally, claim citizenship, and we’re told there’s nothing we can do about it. We have policies that promote illegal aliens and illegal alien children more than the American citizen and American child – we’re committing national suicide.

Trump Immigration Plan: Get Americans Back to Work, End Welfare Abuse

Trump Immigration Plan: Get Americans Back to Work, End Welfare Abuse

Donald Trump Releases Immigration Reform Plan Designed To Get Americans Back To Work

key“America will only be great as long as America remains a nation of laws that lives according to the Constitution.” ~Donald Trump

Matthew Boyle

Billionaire Donald Trump released a detailed immigration policy position paper on Sunday morning, a paper that walks through exactly what steps he would go through as president to help American workers.

The paper is detailed to the level of specific areas of policy, and it also calls out one of his opponents, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) the author of the last Congress’ “Gang of Eight” amnesty bill—as being the “personal senator” of billionaire Mark Zuckerberg, because Rubio is doing Zuckerberg’s bidding by pushing for an increase in H-1B visas to replace American workers in high-tech fields with cheaper foreign labor.

The paper—which really constitutes a completely new look at immigration and a complete overhaul of the current system, politicians’ priorities, and special interest involvement—starts with three principles.

illegal-immigration-difference1) Firstly, Trump argues, “a nation without borders is not a nation.”

As such, he writes, “there must be a wall across the southern border.”

2) Secondly, Trump argues, “a nation without laws is not a nation.”

“Laws passed in accordance with our Constitutional system of government must be enforced, he writes as part of his second principle.

3) Thirdly, Trump argues, “a nation that does not serve its own citizens is not a nation.”

“Any immigration plan must improve jobs, wages and security for all Americans,” he writes to flesh out the third principle.

The paper, which was clearly influenced by Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) whom Trump consulted to help with immigration policy, contains three major parts: How a President Trump would handle border security, interior enforcement, and legal immigration policy as it relates to getting Americans—at historically low workforce participation rates right now—back to work. Perhaps most importantly, Trump uses the term “immigration reform” to describe what he will do—taking that term away from those who use it to push for fundamental transformation of the United States with immigration policy.

amnesty-no“When politicians talk about ‘immigration reform’ they mean: amnesty, cheap labor and open borders,” Trump writes. “The Schumer-Rubio immigration bill was nothing more than a giveaway to the corporate patrons who run both parties. Real immigration reform puts the needs of working people first – not wealthy globetrotting donors. We are the only country in the world whose immigration system puts the needs of other nations ahead of our own. That must change.”

The plan details not just that Trump believes in putting “American workers first” over the interest of foreign workers, foreign nations, and special interests, but how he would do so. Trump is the first and only presidential candidate this cycle who has done this and gone into this level of policy detail.

Current Conditions

“Decades of disastrous trade deals and immigration policies have destroyed our middle class,” Trump’s position paper reads. “Today, nearly 40% of black teenagers are unemployed. Nearly 30% of Hispanic teenagers are unemployed. For black Americans without high school diplomas, the bottom has fallen out: more than 70% were employed in 1960, compared to less than 40% in 2000. Across the economy, the percentage of adults in the labor force has collapsed to a level not experienced in generations. As CBS news wrote in a piece entitled ‘America’s incredible shrinking middle class’: ‘If the middle-class is the economic backbone of America, then the country is developing osteoporosis.’”

Trump writes that the “influx of foreign workers holds down salaries, keeps unemployment high, and makes it difficult for poor and working class Americans – including immigrants themselves and their children – to earn a middle class wage” and that about “half of all immigrants and their US-born children currently live in or near poverty, including more than 60 percent of Hispanic immigrants.”

“Every year, we voluntarily admit another 2 million new immigrants, guest workers, refugees, and dependents, growing our existing all-time historic record population of 42 million immigrants,” Trump writes.

“We need to control the admission of new low-earning workers in order to: help wages grow, get teenagers back to work, aid minorities’ rise into the middle class, help schools and communities falling behind, and to ensure our immigrant members of the national family become part of the American dream. Additionally, we need to stop giving legal immigrant visas to people bent on causing us harm. From the 9/11 hijackers, to the Boston Bombers, and many others, our immigration system is being used to attack us. The President of the immigration caseworkers union declared in a statement on ISIS: ‘We’ve become the visa clearinghouse for the world.’”

Trump calls for a halt to the issuance of new green cards until Americans are back to work.

“Before any new green cards are issued to foreign workers abroad, there will be a pause where employers will have to hire from the domestic pool of unemployed immigrant and native workers,” Trump wrote in a section of the paper called “immigration moderation,” an area where he cites U.S. Census Bureau data and information from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. “This will help reverse women’s plummeting workplace participation rate, grow wages, and allow record immigration levels to subside to more moderate historical averages.”

He called for also increasing the prevailing wage when it comes to the issuance of H-1B visas so as to get Americans—especially Hispanics, blacks, and women—hired into corporate positions in Silicon Valley rather than foreigners.

It is here where he points out that Rubio—who along with former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush is one of the two candidates in the Republican primary against Trump that the donor class is pulling for—has put forward legislation that would drastically harm American workers’ job prospects, and he’s done so on behalf of Zuckerberg and other donors.

“We graduate two times more Americans with STEM degrees each year than find STEM jobs, yet as much as two-thirds of entry-level hiring for IT jobs is accomplished through the H-1B program,” Trump wrote. “More than half of H-1B visas are issued for the program’s lowest allowable wage level, and more than eighty percent for its bottom two. Raising the prevailing wage paid to H-1Bs will force companies to give these coveted entry-level jobs to the existing domestic pool of unemployed native and immigrant, instead of flying in cheaper workers from overseas. This will improve the number of black, Hispanic and female workers in Silicon Valley who have been passed over in favor of the H-1B program. Mark Zuckerberg’s personal Senator, Marco Rubio, has a bill to triple H-1Bs that would decimate women and minorities.”

trump-immigration-TrumpTrump also laid out his belief that there should be a requirement that companies hire Americans before hiring foreigners from visa programs.

“Too many visas, like the H-1B, have no such requirement,” Trump wrote, citing testimony before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee and a Forbes magazine report about how incomes are falling in the U.S. because people are working less. “In the year 2015, with 92 million Americans outside the workforce and incomes collapsing, we need to companies to hire from the domestic pool of unemployed. Petitions for workers should be mailed to the unemployment office, not USCIS.”

Trump called for an end to the J-1 Visa program—essentially a jobs program for foreign youths—and for it to be replaced with a jobs program for American youths in inner cities.

“The J-1 visa jobs program for foreign youth will be terminated and replaced with a resume bank for inner city youth provided to all corporate subscribers to the J-1 visa program,” Trump wrote under a section header calling for a “jobs program for inner city youth” while citing a National Public Radio report on the J-1 visa program.

Trump calls to “end welfare abuse,” as well.

“Applicants for entry to the United States should be required to certify that they can pay for their own housing, healthcare and other needs before coming to the U.S., he wrote.

He also pushes for the focus of refugee programs and asylum to shift to helping American children get more opportunities in life.

“Increase standards for the admission of refugees and asylum-seekers to crack down on abuses, he wrote, citing congressional testimony and two Breitbart News reports on welfare abuse by refugees in the U.S. and on crime among refugee communities. “Use the monies saved on expensive refugee programs to help place American children without parents in safer homes and communities, and to improve community safety in high crime neighborhoods in the United States.”

That’s all just legal immigration policy. Trump said generally when it comes to enforcement that he thinks that America needs to defend her laws and the Constitution.

constitution“America will only be great as long as America remains a nation of laws that lives according to the Constitution,”

Trump wrote before setting up a list of specific policies he would implement if elected president to protect the United States from illegal immigration. “No one is above the law. The following steps will return to the American people the safety of their laws, which politicians have stolen from them.

Trump details here many things, including that he believes there should be an end to “birthright citizenship.”

“This remains the biggest magnet for illegal immigration,” Trump wrote of birthright citizenship before citing Rasmussen Reports polling data showing Americans are opposed to it. “By a 2:1 margin, voters say it’s the wrong policy, including

Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) 2%

who said ‘no sane country’ would give automatic citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants.”

Trump thinks America needs to triple the number of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers working in the country. Trump said he’d pay for it by cutting off tax credit payments currently handed out to illegal aliens.

ObamaCatchReleaseVote“As the President of the ICE Officers’ Council explained in Congressional testimony: ‘Only approximately 5,000 officers and agents within ICE perform the lion’s share of ICE’s immigration mission…Compare that to the Los Angeles Police Department at approximately 10,000 officers. Approximately 5,000 officers in ICE cover 50 states, Puerto Rico and Guam, and are attempting to enforce immigration law against 11 million illegal aliens already in the interior of the United States. Since 9-11, the U.S. Border Patrol has tripled in size, while ICE’s immigration enforcement arm, Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO), has remained at relatively the same size.’ This will be funded by accepting the recommendation of the Inspector General for Tax Administration and eliminating tax credit payments to illegal immigrants.”

Trump also believes there should be “nationwide E-verify” and that such a “simple measure will protect jobs for unemployed Americans.”

Trump calls for a “mandatory return” of any criminal illegal aliens in the country to their home countries. “The Obama Administration has released 76,000 aliens from its custody with criminal convictions since 2013 alone,” Trump wrote. “All criminal aliens must be returned to their home countries, a process which can be aided by canceling any visas to foreign countries which will not accept their own criminals, and making it a separate and additional crime to commit an offense while here illegally.”

He also called for “detention” of illegal aliens caught crossing the border, not “catch-and-release” as has been done under President Obama.

“Illegal aliens apprehended crossing the border must be detained until they are sent home, no more catch-and-release,” Trump wrote.

trump-illegal-immigration-crime-validated1Trump believes that America should “defund sanctuary cities,” too.

The government should, he wrote, “cut-off federal grants to any city which refuses to cooperate with federal law enforcement.”

There should also, he wrote, be “enhanced penalties for overstaying a visa.”

“Millions of people come to the United States on temporary visas but refuse to leave, without consequence,” Trump wrote. “This is a threat to national security. Individuals who refuse to leave at the time their visa expires should be subject to criminal penalties; this will also help give local jurisdictions the power to hold visa overstays until federal authorities arrive. Completion of a visa tracking system – required by law but blocked by lobbyists – will be necessary as well.

In addition to that, Trump believes that the federal law enforcement should work alongside local law enforcement’s “gang task forces” to eliminate crime.

“ICE officers should accompany local police departments conducting raids of violent street gangs like MS-13 and the 18th street gang, which have terrorized the country,” Trump wrote citing news reports about the illegal alien gangs.

“All illegal aliens in gangs should be apprehended and deported. Again, quoting Chris Crane: ‘ICE Officers and Agents are forced to apply the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) Directive, not to children in schools, but to adult inmates in jails. If an illegal-alien inmate simply claims eligibility, ICE is forced to release the alien back into the community.

This includes serious criminals who have committed felonies, who have assaulted officers, and who prey on children…ICE officers should be required to place detainers on every illegal alien they encounter in jails and prisons, since these aliens not only violated immigration laws, but then went on to engage in activities that led to their arrest by police; ICE officers should be required to issue Notices to Appear to all illegal aliens with criminal convictions, DUI convictions, or a gang affiliation; ICE should be working with any state or local drug or gang task force that asks for such assistance.’”

Mexico to Pay for Wall on U.S. Border

bordersheriffIn addition to all of that, Trump laid out how he would build a wall on the U.S. border with Mexico —and how he would make Mexico pay for it.

“For many years, Mexico’s leaders have been taking advantage of the United States by using illegal immigration to export the crime and poverty in their own country (as well is in other Latin American countries),” Trump wrote.

“They have even published pamphlets on how to illegally immigrate to the United States. The costs for the United States have been extraordinary: U.S. taxpayers have been asked to pick up hundreds of billions in healthcare costs, housing costs, education costs, welfare costs, etc. Indeed, the annual cost of free tax credits alone paid to illegal immigrants quadrupled to $4.2 billion in 2011. The effects on jobseekers have also been disastrous, and black Americans have been particularly harmed.”

Illegal Alien Crimes

ImmigrationCriminalsHe noted that the impact from crime by illegal aliens has been “tragic,” yet the government of Mexico profits off U.S. incompetence.

“In recent weeks, the headlines have been covered with cases of criminals who crossed our border illegally only to go on to commit horrific crimes against Americans,” Trump wrote.

“Most recently, an illegal immigrant from Mexico, with a long arrest record, is charged with breaking into a 64 year-old women’s home, crushing her skull and eye sockets with a hammer, raping her, and murdering her. The Police Chief in Santa Maria says the ‘blood trail’ leads straight to Washington. In 2011, the Government Accountability Office found that there were a shocking 3 million arrests attached to the incarcerated alien population, including tens of thousands of violent beatings, rapes and murders. Meanwhile, Mexico continues to make billions on not only our bad trade deals but also relies heavily on the billions of dollars in remittances sent from illegal immigrants in the United States back to Mexico ($22 billion in 2013 alone).”

That means, Trump wrote, that Mexico’s government “has taken the United States to the cleaners” and that “they are responsible for this problem, and they must help pay to clean it up.”

trump-illegal-immigration-validated“The cost of building a permanent border wall pales mightily in comparison to what American taxpayers spend every single year on dealing with the fallout of illegal immigration on their communities, schools and unemployment offices,” Trump wrote. “Mexico must pay for the wall and, until they do, the United States will, among other things: impound all remittance payments derived from illegal wages; increase fees on all temporary visas issued to Mexican CEOs and diplomats (and if necessary cancel them); increase fees on all border crossing cards – of which we issue about 1 million to Mexican nationals each year (a major source of visa overstays); increase fees on all NAFTA worker visas from Mexico (another major source of overstays); and increase fees at ports of entry to the United States from Mexico [Tariffs and foreign aid cuts are also options].

 We will not be taken advantage of anymore.”



Amazing Grace: Liberty and Slavery

Dinner Topics for Monday

wilberforceAmazing Grace: William Wilberforce

If you have not seen the movie “Amazing Grace” by Walden Media, I highly recommend it. It is a wonderful portrayal of Wilberforce’s heroic achievement. Note that his law made slave trade in Britain illegal, but total emancipation in the United States was not achieved until January 1, 1863, when Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation, after the United States fought a bitter civil war over this issue.

~C.A. Davidson

Wilberforce headed the parliamentary campaign against the British slave trade for twenty-six years until the passage of the Slave Trade Act of 1807.

William Wilberforce (24 August 1759 – 29 July 1833) was a British politician, philanthropist, and a leader of the movement to abolish the slave trade. A native of Kingston upon Hull, Yorkshire, he began his political career in 1780, eventually becoming the independent Member of Parliament for Yorkshire (1784–1812). In 1785, he underwent a conversion experience and became an evangelical Christian, resulting in major changes to his lifestyle and a lifelong concern for reform. In 1787, he came into contact with Thomas Clarkson and a group of anti-slave-trade activists, including Granville Sharp, Hannah More and Charles Middleton. They persuaded Wilberforce to take on the cause of abolition, and he soon became one of the leading English abolitionists. He headed the parliamentary campaign against the British slave trade for twenty-six years until the passage of the Slave Trade Act of 1807.

Wilberforce was convinced of the importance of religion, morality and education. He championed causes and campaigns such as the Society for Suppression of Vice, British missionary work in India, the creation of a free colony in Sierra Leone, the foundation of the Church Mission Society, and the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. His underlying conservatism led him to support politically and socially repressive legislation, and resulted in criticism that he was ignoring injustices at home while campaigning for the enslaved abroad.


In later years, Wilberforce supported the campaign for the complete abolition of slavery, and continued his involvement after 1826, when he resigned from Parliament because of his failing health. That campaign led to the Slavery Abolition Act 1833, which abolished slavery in most of the British Empire; Wilberforce died just three days after hearing that the passage of the Act through Parliament was assured. He was buried in Westminster Abbey, close to his friend William Pitt.



In February 1785, Wilberforce returned to the United Kingdom temporarily, to support Pitt’s proposals for parliamentary reforms. He rejoined the party in Genoa, Italy, from where they continued their tour to Switzerland. Milner accompanied Wilberforce to England, and on the journey they read The Rise and Progress of Religion in the Soul by Philip Doddridge, a leading early 18th-century English nonconformist.[36]

Wilberforce’s spiritual journey is thought to have begun at this time. He started to rise early to read the Bible and pray and kept a private journal.[37] He underwent an evangelical conversion, regretting his past life and resolving to commit his future life and work to the service of God.[7] His conversion changed some of his habits but not his nature: he remained outwardly cheerful, interested, and respectful, tactfully urging others towards his new faith.[38] Inwardly, he underwent an agonising struggle and became relentlessly self-critical, harshly judging his spirituality, use of time, vanity, self-control, and relationships with others.[39]

At the time religious enthusiasm was generally regarded as a social transgression and was stigmatised in polite society. Evangelicals in the upper classes, such as Sir Richard Hill, the Methodist MP for Shropshire, and Selina Hastings, Countess of Huntingdon were exposed to contempt and ridicule,[40] and Wilberforce’s conversion led him to question whether he should remain in public life. Wilberforce sought guidance from John Newton, a leading Evangelical Anglican clergyman of the day and Rector of St Mary Woolnoth in the City of London.[41][42] Both Newton and Pitt counselled Wilberforce to remain in politics, and he resolved to do so “with increased diligence and conscientiousness”.[7] Thereafter, his political views were informed by his faith and by his desire to promote Christianity and Christian ethics in private and public life.[43][44] His views were often deeply conservative, opposed to radical changes in a God-given political and social order, and focused on issues such as the observance of the Sabbath and the eradication of immorality through education and reform.[45] As a result, he was often distrusted by progressive voices because of his conservatism, and regarded with suspicion by many Tories who saw Evangelicals as radicals, bent on the overthrow of church and state.[24]

Abolition of the slave trade

Initial decision

The British initially became involved in the slave trade during the 16th century. By 1783, the triangular route that took British-made goods to Africa to buy slaves, transported the enslaved to the West Indies, and then brought slave-grown products such as sugar, tobacco, and cotton to Britain, represented about 80 percent of Great Britain’s foreign income.[49][50] British ships dominated the trade, supplying French, Spanish, Dutch, Portuguese and British colonies, and in peak years carried forty thousand enslaved men, women and children across the Atlantic in the horrific conditions of the middle passage.[51] Of the estimated 11 million Africans transported into slavery, about 1.4 million died during the voyage.[52]

The British campaign to abolish the slave trade is generally considered to have begun in the 1780s with the establishment of the Quakers‘ antislavery committees, and their presentation to Parliament of the first slave trade petition in 1783.[53][54] The same year, Wilberforce, while dining with his old Cambridge friend Gerard Edwards,[55] met Rev. James Ramsay, a ship’s surgeon who had become a clergyman on the island of St Christopher (later St Kitts) in the Leeward Islands, and a medical supervisor of the plantations there. What Ramsay had witnessed of the conditions endured by the slaves, both at sea and on the plantations, horrified him. Returning to England after fifteen years, he accepted the living of Teston, Kent in 1781, and there met Sir Charles Middleton, Lady Middleton, Thomas Clarkson, Hannah More and others, a group that later became known as the Testonites.[56] Interested in promoting Christianity and moral improvement in Britain and overseas, they were appalled by Ramsay’s reports of the depraved lifestyles of slave owners, the cruel treatment meted out to the enslaved, and the lack of Christian instruction provided to the slaves.[57] With their encouragement and help, Ramsay spent three years writing An essay on the treatment and conversion of African slaves in the British sugar colonies, which was highly critical of slavery in the West Indies. The book, published in 1784, was to have an important impact in raising public awareness and interest, and it excited the ire of West Indian planters who in the coming years attacked both Ramsay and his ideas in a series of pro-slavery tracts.[58]

In early 1787, Thomas Clarkson, a fellow graduate of St John’s, Cambridge, who had become convinced of the need to end the slave trade after writing a prize-winning essay on the subject while at Cambridge,[56] called upon Wilberforce at Old Palace Yard with a published copy of the work.[63][64] This was the first time the two men had met; their collaboration would last nearly fifty years.[65][66] Clarkson began to visit Wilberforce on a weekly basis, bringing first-hand evidence [67] he had obtained about the slave trade.[65] The Quakers, already working for abolition, also recognised the need for influence within Parliament, and urged Clarkson to secure a commitment from Wilberforce to bring forward the case for abolition in the House of Commons.[68][69]

Following Pitt’s death in January 1806 Wilberforce began to collaborate more with the Whigs, especially the abolitionists. He gave general support to the Grenville-Fox administration, which brought more abolitionists into the cabinet; Wilberforce and Charles Fox led the campaign in the House of Commons, while Lord Grenville advocated the cause in the House of Lords.[118][139]

Lord Grenville, the Prime Minister, was determined to introduce an Abolition Bill in the House of Lords rather than in the House of Commons, taking it through its greatest challenge first.[147] When a final vote was taken, the bill was passed in the House of Lords by a large margin.[149] Sensing a breakthrough that had been long anticipated, Charles Grey moved for a second reading in the Commons on 23 February 1807. As tributes were made to Wilberforce, whose face streamed with tears, the bill was carried by 283 votes to 16.[144][150] Excited supporters suggested taking advantage of the large majority to seek the abolition of slavery itself but Wilberforce made it clear that total emancipation was not the immediate goal: “They had for the present no object immediately before them, but that of putting stop directly to the carrying of men in British ships to be sold as slaves.”[151] The Slave Trade Act received the Royal Assent on 25 March 1807.