Dedication–This story is dedicated to the memory of Continental Army Drummer Alexander Milliner, who served in General George Washington’s Lifeguard Unit. He lived past the age of one-hundred four years, and stood as witness to the surrender of the British at Yorktown. Likewise, to the memory of Continental Army Private Lemuel Cook, a boy like Milliner, just a year older, in fact. He stood by Milliner and watched as the British soldiers stacked their arms on an open field. General Washington ordered the Continental Army to not laugh or jeer at the surrendering Redcoats. Washington said, “It is bad enough to surrender without being insulted.”
Vision of Yorktown
A Short Story
By Charles W. Henderson
For the soldier pitched to battle, glory does not exist. For him there is only survival, sacrifice and tribute. In truth, glory is a false ideal born in the minds of poets and politicians.
The sun had not yet broken over the treetops that stood distant across the broad clearing when the boy struggled to the top of the parapet. Tears filled his eyes and his throat choked with the pain of grief, knowing well what his orders meant.
A drum hung at the boy’s waist by a strap that looped over his shoulder and bore the royal crest of Major General Lord Charles Cornwallis’ army. When they had begun this fight, the strap had shown stark white across his uniform’s blue blouse; now it lay dark with black and brown stains that came from grease and soot of guns and cannons, and from tears and sweat and blood spilled in nine days of battle. Blood of soldiers who fell at the boy’s side. Good soldiers who tried to live; who the boy tried to help to live, but who died anyway. His tears, his sweat, their lives.
The drummer boy called Tom Scott, a good English name, from a family south of Kent, had accompanied Lord Cornwallis and his army of 8,300 Red Coats through much of this campaign that swept through the Carolinas, leaving a swath of destruction and death behind them, and settled in Virginia in May of 1781. By August, they had occupied the point of ground between the York and James rivers where Cornwallis hoped to establish a British naval base because of the York’s deep water and easy access to the Chesapeake Bay.
General George Washington and Lieutenant General Comte de Rochambeau, and their army of more than 17,600 French and American soldiers attacked Yorktown on October 9, after the French fleet had successfully turned away the British ships in the Chesapeake, leaving Cornwallis’ army cut off.
Washington’s Colonial Artillery bombarded Cornwallis’ forces for four days. Finally, on the night of October 14, Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Hamilton led a small force of Continental soldiers on a surprise attack and began the land battle that turned the cleared farm fields below the parapet where drummer boy Tom Scott now stood into a crucible of flesh, bone and blood.
This morning of October 17, 1781, the crispness of fall in the wet air accented the sun which bled a sky filled with red that matched the crimson field below where young Tom stood. The crack of gunfire and the haunting cries of wounded and dying men stole any sense of peace that might have otherwise existed at that moment.
The lad’s uniform–a blue jacket and red trousers–which hung twisted and loose over his small, immature frame, had torn at most seams and bends, and across every panel of its woolen cloth carried dark stains from the battle. He had skinned his hide at most of his joints, and he ached as badly as any man twice his thirteen years of life. Yet as he began to rap two wooden sticks over the goat skin stretched across the head of his drum, beating out a signal that sent every British soldier’s heart sinking in final relief, he stood not as a boy but as a man. A soldier. A veteran of war. He felt what those who carried the muskets and fought the bayonet attacks and fell wounded under the exploding artillery shells felt: Beaten.
A dirty, bruised and scarred, battle-weary lad whose face had yet to show hair more coarse than a kitten’s stood at the top of the parapet, above his general and beside an officer who waived a white piece of cloth tied to his saber, and beat out the order to cease fire.
The fighting began to subside, and in the distance, as he continued to rap, rap, rap the loud but depressing signal from his drum, the boy could hear cheers shouted from the Colonial Army’s lines. For all of them knew that this battle, and this American Revolution had come to its end.
The boy stared straight out across the battlefield, his vision blurred by tears that tracked through the dirt that covered his face while the lieutenant at his side who waived the white cloth stepped down the front of the parapet and then stood at attention while two Colonial soldiers blindfolded the officer and led him away. The boy watched and continued to beat his drum as the men disappeared behind the distant trees to deliver Lord Cornwallis’ proposal to meet with Washington and discuss British surrender.
Yet despite the joy that this boy’s rap, rap, rapping on a goat-skin drum brought to the victors, and the significance that it meant, there still remains this mournful picture of a gaunt and dirty youngster, wearing a tattered uniform. He stands atop a parapet, beating his drum while below him, scattered across acres of tilled and cleared land lay the bodies of the dead and dying. Their blood filling the furrows. Their last gasps, moans and cries of pain, the music that accompanies the boy’s drum, reminds British, French and American alike that their’s is the price that has been paid for what has been gained and lost here.
As the sun turned from red to gold to yellow and the day grew bright, and the boy stepped from that parapet. As the last British soldier laid down his arms while his officers cried like school boys at the sight. As he sailed home, grew old and told of the war. And as generation after generation continued to tell of it, this vision of the last horrible moment of the last great battle of the American Revolution remains.
Copyright 1988 by Charles W. Henderson
By Charles Henderson
Today marks 50-years since President John Fitzgerald Kennedy died from two gunshot wounds from bullets fired by Lee Harvey Oswald’s rifle. Oswald shot three times, missing once. That day in Dallas, Texas changed America forever. Sadness unlike any other in history shrouded the people of the United States and much of the world.
Where were you when Kennedy was killed? Maybe people asked that question after Abraham Lincoln’s assassination too. When a President means a lot to the people, the event of his murder etches itself indelibly in our minds. Where was I?
Artesia, New Mexico, one time-zone west of Dallas. I had celebrated my 15th birthday on August 26, 1963, and we were now anticipating Thanksgiving holidays. I sat in the backseat of Tommy Burkhart’s 1958 Chevrolet Bel-Air two-door hardtop coupe. We roared down 13th Street in Artesia, driving past Zia Junior High School, going to get lunch at Tommy’s house, listening to KBIM AM radio from Roswell, the nearest station that played rock-and-roll, when the news broke. President Kennedy has been shot.
Even unruly 15-year old boys’ hearts jumped. Stunned at the news. All us in that car, Tommy and me, Bill Mays and Wesley Jones, exclaimed our anguish. Even kids our age took the news hard. Deeply hurt.
A friend of mine said today, that during Kennedy’s time as President of the United States he liked most Democrats. I think that most people who vote conservative today, registered Republicans like Ronald Reagan, strongly supported John F. Kennedy. I know that I did. I loved him as our President. He had great courage and profound leadership, and when he spoke to the nation it was with grace and identity. We Americans knew him. He was one of us. We trusted him, and we revered him.
John F. Kennedy stood apart yet with us. A war hero, awarded the Navy Cross, second only to the Medal of Honor. He had stood nose to nose against the Russians, holding America’s ground with unflinching courage and a determined will. He was America’s President.
Last Sunday, long-time CBS News correspondent and anchor, Bob Schieffer, commented that the day President Kennedy died America lost its innocence. I can appreciate that sentiment. The days of Kennedy were good days for many Americans. However, I have to disagree that it was the day that America lost its innocence. I believe that it was the day that America awakened to its ugliness.
Schieffer might call it innocence, but that is not it. We were oblivious to the pain that people suffered. In America there existed many different worlds, and while they overlapped, most people saw little past their own small world.
My world was safe. White people in a small New Mexico community. We never locked our doors. Everyone went to church on Sundays. Family values were strong. Innocence? Perhaps, but blind innocence. And were people really that blind? Or did they just have it good in the white middle class world and did not want those “other people” messing it up?
Yes, I remember those days quite well. If a person was white and middle classed, life was innocent and good. It seemed. Yet we had in the coal towns of eastern Kentucky and Tennessee and western North Carolina and West Virginia the most abject of poverty one can imagine.
The coal companies enslaved these people, who owed their souls to the Company Store. Mostly white, uneducated and wretchedly poor. Coal companies paid their workers with Script, not cash. Script was only good at the Company Store. Life depended on the coal company. John F. Kennedy fought to break those chains of slavery. He fought to bring the Appalachian poor into the 20th Century. Part of his presidential campaign was fought on that impoverished ground. When Kennedy died, he had broken the company chains but left the people adrift and Lyndon B. Johnson did precious little to help them. Hardly anything innocent about the strife of those poor people.
In my innocence, I recall singing songs at grade school like “Old Black Joe,” and reading the classic Mark Twain novels, Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn. In those unrevised editions we read in elementary school, Jim was not simply Jim but Nigger Jim. Aunt Polly’s slave that ran away, and Huck Finn went with him. While Mark Twain objected to slavery and wrote about Jim with great sympathy, he used the words, “Nigger” and “Negro” and “Nigra” and “Coloreds” without second thought. And use of that objectionable word and associated words that causes such great pain and represents the most deplorable aspect of American history was common place in my young world too.
My mother taught me from birth that all people are God’s beloved children, regardless of color or birth. Jesus loves us all. All the little children. She taught all of her children to see people as people, not us and them. The Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King spoke of a dream that reflected those ideals. I share his dream today. As a nation we could desire nothing greater.
I will never forget my first painful encounter with bigotry. In my hometown we had few people of African origin. My parents, as well as my Aunt Winnie and Uncle Owen Hensley had a strong friendship with one such African-American family. Billy and Lillie Belle Johnson. They had a son and two daughters, Billy Junior, Jo Ella and Amanda. Billy worked at the school system as a custodian and Mrs. Johnson worked at various jobs. They were wonderful people. Gifted with wonderful musical talent. Jo Ella could sing like an angel.
My mother taught piano lessons, and had worked a trade agreement with Lillie Belle. Mrs. Johnson came to our home for piano lessons, and Amanda, who was my age, played with me in our backyard. We were small children and had a great friendship going. Until one day.
Some older boys who lived nearby saw Amanda in my backyard with me, and started calling her names. They made fun of her color. They threw rocks at both of us. I will never forget the pain I felt, and my anger, because it hurt little Amanda Johnson much worse than me. Horrible names to call such a sweet little girl. My playmate. My friend. It taught me a life-long lesson.
Mrs. Johnson stopped coming for piano lessons after that day.
I also recall at about that same time in my life, going to spend summers with my Grandmother Henderson. She lived in a small town in southern Oklahoma, surrounded by her sisters and other extended family of not just hers but my grandfather’s too. There were no black families in that small town. They were not accepted there. They had their town and the white people had our town.
Again, I was oblivious of it. I did not see the pain or poverty, secure in my white world. Yet, segregation became real to me one day as my grandmother and my Aunt Margaret, along with my cousin Ida Nell went shopping in Wichita Falls, Texas. There at Woolworth’s department store I went to get a drink from a water fountain. A store clerk stopped me and pointed to a sign above the fountain. It read, “Colored.” Then he led me to the other fountain that had a sign above it that read, “White Only.”
I began to notice more signs. Not just in Woolworth’s but everywhere in Wichita Falls. I asked my grandmother about it and she told me that’s just the way some people are. She reminded me that in the eyes of Jesus we are all the same. That’s the way we need to be, she said.
One of the greatest changes in America, a change that I believe made America better, were the first steps to break the walls of segregation that President Kennedy initiated. He and his brother, the Attorney General, Robert F. Kennedy, heard the voice of the Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King.
Under the leadership of President Kennedy, and carried forward after his death by Bobby Kennedy and President Lyndon Johnson, the American people began to awaken to the ugliness and stupidity of racism and bigotry. It was not simply a matter of passing laws requiring Civil Rights, but a change in outlook and attitude drawn through the chaotic decades of the 1960s and 1970s.
When Kennedy died America’s innocence did not die. America was not innocent. America was complicit and blind. The changes that took place caused pain and upheaval.
Corporate greed took us to war in Viet Nam, and America bled and suffered even more in the division of the nation.
Sex, drugs, rock-and-roll undermined the strong system of family values, and damaged America to this day. No it was not the music, nor the free sex, nor even the illegal drugs themselves, but the attitudes that they bore with them, disregard of principles, loss of values and morals, and the increasing denial of God. Lies, deceit and personal greed prevailed, and took over every aspect of life, business and government.
Americans went to party and not to church. Divorce became easy and common.
A lot of goodness in America did die with President Kennedy, a victim of the awakening of America to its ugliness.
Today, we look around and see a much better America. Civil Rights have come light years ahead. Kennedy would be proud. Yet we have a long way to go in order to return America to its once high values where a family could leave the doors to its home unlocked without worry.
Betrayal by the United States Government of its Retired Military Veterans just keeps getting worse. I spent more than two decades in the United States Marine Corps, and when I retired in 1993 with full benefits for myself and my wife and other dependents if I had any, we were guaranteed full medical benefits for life.
I enrolled in Tricare Prime, an unpleasant surprise just before retirement, because the Department of Defense had decided that Military Retirees ought to at least pay some sort of premium for medical benefits since the DOD saw fit to farm out medical care coverage of Active Duty and Retired Military to civilian medical care insurance companies. A way of saving money. So, I went from nothing to paying a small premium for annual coverage for my whole family. My last premium that I paid this year, yes this year, and that is important to remember, was $413.00. It provided for hospitalization, doctors visits, medicines, the whole ball of wax basically.
I tuned 65 years old this year, August 26. In May, I received a letter announcing to me that on August 1, 2013 I would no longer have military medical benefits through Tricare Prime. I would be moved to Tricare for Life. I am ordered to enroll in Medicare Part A, which I had already paid for with my decades of Medicare Taxes, and Medicare Part B, which requires an adjustable premium, based on how much the Medicare eligible recipient earns in the tax year. Some unlucky souls can pay as much as $246.00 per month, and the lowest of the low end is $105.10 per month.
Hold on a minute,” I protested. “What about my guaranteed Medical Benefits for Life that I earned by risking my life and limb for my country for more than two decades? How come I am now getting hosed for Part B medical coverage, which only covers seeing a doctor, and covers only me, for the tune of $630.60 every six months, or $1261.20 per year, when I paid $413.00 per year for myself and my whole family, and that covered everything!!!?”
Sorry, but you got “hosed” by President Bill Clinton in 1997 when he declared the “Peace Dividend.” Part of that “Peace Dividend” was Clinton kicking all honorably retired U. S. Military Retirees out of Tricare Prime–robbing them of their earned benefits–and forcing them into Medicare Part A and B. And they pay the Medicare Premiums! It is as if the Retired Military Member never served a day.
Oh, Tricare for Life works as a “supplemental” insurance, in case Medicare A and B don’t quite get it all. Almost the same as nothing.
I took this to Congressman Doug Lamborn, our United States Representative for the 5th Congressional District of Colorado. He offered me sympathy and agreed, that it was not right. It is the “Age Penalty” tax charged to all military retirees when they turn 65. Even if you do not collect Social Security–which I do not collect–we still pay the stinking premium or we get no medical care at all.
The cause I took up was for Congressman Lamborn to author a bill, an amendment to the Military Authorization Act for this coming budget, or maybe even next year, and give back to all Military Retirees aged 65 and older who were robbed by President Bill Clinton in 1997, by the same Military Authorization Act of that year. I would think that a Republican Congressman would jump at the chance to do something righteous for the Retired Military Veteran. After all, we gave the best parts of our lives to this nation!
Congressman Lamborn said he would look into it. A staff member in Washington, DC, name Keith, called me. I expressed my frustrations, and he sympathized with me. I proposed that instead of penalizing Military Retirees when they turn 65, keep them in the Tricare Prime program, let them keep paying the same premiums that all Active Duty and Retired Military under 65 years of age pay. And have Medicare Taxes, which all the military active and retired pay, and have paid for decades, transferred to the Department of Defense for the supplementation of Tricare benefits. Yes, he said that sounded like a good idea.
Then, Keith called me back. He said he had words with the Veterans Administration, which has absolutely NOTHING to do with retired military medical care, but everything to do with disabled veterans care (and I am 30-percent disabled) and the Veterans Administration Disability Medical Benefits earned by Disabled Veterans is not affected. My brother who is fully disabled from Agent Orange disability, gets full medical benefits, doctors office visits and all medications with zero premiums to pay and because he is Disabled under VA, he does not use his Medicare A or B or anything, nor does he have to pay.
At any rate, Keith called back and said he spoke to the VA about the issue (I smell a lie) and that there is nothing that Congressman Lamborn can do at this time.
“Don’t you see,” said Keith, “during this time of sequestration, Congressman Lamborn cannot go to Congress and ask them to fund something? Not when we are cutting everywhere else.”
I tried to argue that it is not asking for additional funding of anything, but simply giving back what Bill Clinton robbed from Retired Military Veterans, and stop them from getting Penalized for Being Old!!!
Very quickly I realized it was useless. The politicians give us lip service, and little else. They proclaim how they stand up for our Military Warriors, but in truth they cut our bloody throats!
Only days after I had my kiss off from Keith, I saw in the news that Department of Defense had given Full Benefits—Medical and the whole nine yards—to gay married members. They also extended other services and benefits, costing millions more.
I felt the hose slide in deeper.
On August 1, I enrolled in Medicare Part A and B. The woman who enrolled me at the Social Security Administration said that in a few months I would get a bill for the first quarter premiums. Oh, and by the way, when I enrolled, as I sat in the Social Security Administration outer waiting area, waiting my turn into the bureaucratic termite mound that is the SSA office, I counted 200 people waiting with me. All there regarding their Social Security Benefits. Most of the people were young, in their 20s and 30s. For the most part they looked like they lived in boxes somewhere, dressed in baggy pants, tattoos, flat billed caps, chains, heavy smokers. There were two people visibly disabled, and they were both in their late middle ages, not young or able bodied at all. There were 10 people, I counted them, who looked like they were in their 60s or older, Social Security eligible ages. The rest were young, appearing able bodied, and scummy looking, there to get disability benefits, I am sure. Oh, and all of them had cell phones. Yes, cell phones. Part of the free benefits given deadbeats who choose to not work these days.
Anyway, the Social Security Administration representative that I saw told me I would get a bill that would cover the first quarter of my Part B coverage in about three months. October, I thought.
Today, in the mail, I received my Medicare Part A and/or Part B premium bill, covering 08/01/2013 to 12/31/2013, and the amount is $524.50. It is due no later than 09/25/2013.
The top on my bottle blew its cork. The hose just went in all the way.
My first thoughts were of Congressman Doug Lamborn, and his words of encouragement to me. And then Keith came to mind. Then I looked at the bill once more.
It covers just me, and only covers me going to the doctor. What a rip-off. What a hose job! Yes I feel thoroughly betrayed.
I retired in 1993 with the belief that I had medical benefits for myself and my family for life. I had put my life at stake and that was one of my rewards. Solid medical care. I did not have to worry!
Think again. They robbed me four years after I retired and did not even have the decency to tell me that the train was coming. They don’t tell anyone. When someone is sticking a knife in your back, they don’t tell you about it before they do it.
Nobody cares that most military retirees live only 20 years after retirement. That means that most don’t even draw Social Security and most never use Medicare Part A or B. I am one of the retirees askew who have survived 20 years beyond my retirement. Yes, this year, on July 1, 2013 I was 20 years retired from the Marine Corps. Still alive.
But darned if I am not angrier than ever. Totally betrayed by the country that I spent the best part of my adult life defending. Defending at risk of my life and my limbs.
Congressman Lamborn, come election time, don’t come asking for my support. Nor should you ask for the support of any other Military Veteran. You aided and abetted the screwing we all got.
Today, 85 members of the United States Congress filed an Amicus Brief before the United States Supreme Court in support of religious liberty, as part of the biggest case that addresses the First Amendment’s rights affording Freedom to Worship in more than a half century.
Among those penning his name to this brief is Colorado 5th District Congressman Doug Lamborn. I applaud and support Congressman Lamborn in this case.
I pray that the Supreme Court will be guided by the original intent of the writers of the Constitution, guaranteeing all people the Freedom to Worship and the Freedom to Not Worship, as they so choose. It is a matter of Free Will. While no one should be forced or coerced to pray, likewise no one should be prohibited from praying.
Impact of the Supreme Court’s decision in this matter will be significant. It may well open the door for expressions of faith and freedom to pray to return to school graduations, football games and other public events.
The case is the Town of Greece (New York) v. Susan Galloway and Linda Stephens. The Amicus Brief just filed, signed by the 85 members of the US Congress, can be read at the following link:
Ken Klukowski, J.D., director of the Center for Religious Liberty at the Family Research Council (FRC) filed the Amicus Brief before the US Supreme Court for the 85 members of Congress in support of the Town of Greece, the petitioners.
“It is likely that the town of Greece will prevail before the U.S. Supreme Court in this case, and a victory for them will be a victory for all Americans of faith and for the Constitution itself,” Klukowski said in a statement to the Press. “Given that the Court has looked approvingly to legislative prayer dating to the Founding, it is likely that the Court will not only affirm prayer but significantly strengthen the religious liberty rights of Americans in public life and the public square.”
The Respondents, Galloway and Stephens, held that the town council holding prayer before they met in session violated the First Amendment’s “Establishment Clause.” They said that holding prayer established a religion by the State. The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled that the use of public prayer before town meetings in the Town of Greece, New York violated the First Amendment’s clause that prohibits an establishment of religion.
The Town of Greece, New York included all faiths and non-faiths, including Wiccans and atheists, in their town meetings’ opening procedures, affording all people the opportunity to express their faith, and to not participate in those expressions of faith. Wiccans were given opportunity to express faith. Atheists were also given the floor to disavow faith in God if they chose.
In my opinion, such is exactly what Thomas Jefferson and the other authors of the Constitution of the United States had in mind when they wrote the First Amendment in 1789 and presented it within the Bill of Rights before the first assembly of Congress. The Government of the United States should not require a person to have faith, nor should they require a person to not have faith. Thus they wrote:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”
Where the Town of Greece, New York may well prevail before the United States Supreme Court, and thereby win back for the people their freedom to pray, is that the Town of Greece did nor force nor coerce anyone to participate in any prayer or expression of religious faith. Affording the People free will to choose to exercise their religious faith or to not participate is key.
Praying before a football game, praying before a city council meeting, praying at the opening of a session of Congress does not make any kind of law establishing any religion. Making a law that respects the “establishment of religion,” is to say that the government picks a faith, like King Henry VIII did when he established the Church of England, and requires all citizens to be members of that faith.
Yet, even King Henry could not eliminate other faiths, and that led to bloody purges by his heirs–Bloody Mary re-establishing Catholic faith and Elizabeth I then killing them. Our founding fathers recognized this and wished to avoid such horrors.
Religious faith should be free will, just as God has given us, His children, Free Will. God gives us the freedom to make our own choices, even whether to believe in Him or to not believe in Him. Likewise our Constitution mirrors this logic.
Thomas Jefferson called the established churches of his time the “Anti-Christ.” And their dogmas (often judgmental, hate filled and murderous) a dung hill. Jefferson was impassioned that We the People should have the Freedom to worship as we wish, without a dogmatic dictatorship ordering us our faith. Therefore, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.”
But, so very important in the same sentence is “…or prohibiting the free exercise thereof….”
Free exercise thereof means that We the People should and have the Right to pray and exercise our faith anyplace we wish and at anytime we wish. Therefore, Prayer at a football game, asking God to protect our players and to instill good sportsmanship, is appropriate. Prayer before a city council meeting, asking God to guide the wisdom of the elected officials, is appropriate. Prayer before the opening of a Congress is appropriate. And all are protected under the clause “…the free exercise thereof….”
The idea of a separation of Church and State is the notion expressed by Thomas Jefferson that there should be a “wall of separation between the church and the state.” He certainly did not intend that to ban faith from government, but to keep religious dogma from dictating to government, as it did in England.
In 1963, the Abington School District v. Schempp case before the United States Supreme Court held that a child could not be forced to pray or to participate in prayer when prayer was said over the intercom. This is reasonable and consistent with the Constitution. The key operative here is, Forced. Likewise, Torcaso v. Watkins in 1961 similarly held that an elected official could not be forced to affirm that he or she believed in God or had any faith. Again correct, and the key operative is also the word, Forced. This is also consistent with Jefferson’s ideal of the wall of separation. The fact that these people were being FORCED to accept or affirm Faith, or being FORCED to participate in prayer did violate their Constitutional freedom to choose to not affirm faith or to not pray. It is the exercise of Free Will. Just as forcing a person to pray denies their free will, so does prohibiting them the exercise of prayer equally denies free will.
However, threats of lawsuits by atheist groups, often hand in hand with the ACLU, intimidate school boards to deny people freedom of religion and free expressions of their faith. These anti-God zealots have today distorted the correct interpretations of religion being forced upon people to that of merely the presence of religious expression violating the ideal of the wall of separation.
When the National Anthem is played or the US flag enters a room, people stand in respect and cover their hearts. They do so freely. They are not FORCED to do it.
The same Constitutional Freedom of expression that allows us to stand or not stand in respect of the National Anthem or Flag, based on the Free-Will logic, applies to public prayer. No one is FORCED to pray, they are FREE to not pray.
And that is the key element in the Supreme Court decisions respecting prayer and the wall of separation, which is NOT part of the Constitution, but is accepted as the logic behind the First Amendment guaranteeing the People Freedom to pray or not pray, as they wish.
by Charles Henderson
Recently, one of my extended family members became angry with me, because I would not accept that in her church they had what I regarded a liberalized view of God’s Scripture, adjusted to accommodate today’s accepted social values.
She took offense at me insisting that women serving in the pulpit and in other similar leadership capacities, such as deacons, in any church, was contrary to Scripture.
In our conversation, she asked me, “Don’t you believe that there are women perfectly capable of leading a church?”
I replied that it did not matter what I thought, or what she thought. The Bible tells us that women cannot lead a church. It says so in several verses of Scripture, but most clearly in 1 Timothy 2:12.
We had a few other differences of opinion and faith, which did not help. She is a mainstream Protestant, going to a church that reads prayers from a book, sprinkles babies for baptism, and has no Invitation in their services. I am an evangelical Christian. We do not baptize babies. Baptism follows a profession of faith in Jesus Christ, repentance of all sin of the former life, and commitment to a new life in Christ, striving to follow His righteousness–Born Again, per John 3:3, “I assure you: Unless someone is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” Baptism for my faith is full emersion in the water, just as Christ was baptized, representing the death of the old life and resurrection of new life in Christ. We adhere to the Bible, chapter and verse. For me, the Bible is God’s Word. Written by 40 different authors over 1,500 years time, each of them directly inspired by God, the Bible is without contradiction. It has no flaw, no error nor any conflict or contradictions because it is from a single source–God. His Word is Holy, and no part of it can be added to or taken away.
More moderate faiths allow for adjustments of the Bible, and they regard the Bible as an historical book of laws, prophesies and histories, but not living. In my faith, I believe that as I read the Bible, I am indwelt with the Holy Spirit–God–who speaks to me as I read His Word.
I am heartsick because this family member won’t talk to me. I have begged her forgiveness for hurting her feelings. I certainly did not intend to insult her faith, and I am sorry for hurting her. However, I cannot compromise what I believe, and what God’s Scriptures say.
When Paul wrote in 1 Timothy 2:12, that women should not teach or have authority over men, he was writing what God instructed him. Today, such a statement is strong kindling. But it is Scripture.
Like I said, I am evangelical Christian. I stand firm in my faith. It comes straight from the Bible, not from some adjusted doctrines softened by mankind to conform to our social traditions.
Sunday, at my church, I heard a sermon that underscored my position. Our associate pastor preached about Standing the Line for Christ. As a Marine, I know what Standing the Line means. We do not compromise our faith. We adhere to God’s Word and His commands. The sermon came in part from the Book of Isaiah, chapter five.
Isaiah 5:20-24 (HCSB)
20 Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness, who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.
21 Woe to those who are wise in their own opinion and clever in their own sight.
22 Woe to those who are heroes at drinking wine, who are fearless at mixing beer,
23 who acquit the guilty for a bribe and deprive the innocent of justice.
24 Therefore, as a tongue of fire consumes straw and as dry grass shrivels in the flame, so their roots will become like something rotten and their blossoms will blow away like dust, for they have rejected the instruction of the LORD of Hosts, and they have despised the word of the Holy One of Israel.
Our associate pastor posed us a question: How do you respond when a person asks you about your opinion of gay marriage? It is a controversial topic today. While most Christians do not support it, society pressures us to compromise.
Quite simply, my opinion of marriage has to do with my Christian faith, and I believe quite strongly that no government has any business dictating laws that address these matters of faith. Marriage is a covenant between a man and a woman before God, a pledge made to each other and to God. I think government has no business even defining marriage at all. My definition of marriage comes from my faith in God and His definition of it in the Bible.
I will also reassure the person who asks me about my view of gay marriage and homosexuality that God loves all people, including gay people. We have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. We are human, born into sin and we sin almost every day of our lives. If we are saved, born again in Christ, we strive to live in His righteousness.
I live according to my faith in Christ. Far from perfect, I strive to live righteously in God’s eyes. I still sin and fall short of His glory, but I try my best to serve Him and live in His way. Gay marriage, homosexuality, just as it is with adultery or lying, or coveting are not in keeping with living righteously in God’s way, therefore, I cannot support it.
But there are churches that now support homosexuality, gay marriage and other popular political and social trends. They have gay clergy. They perform gay marriage. They also have women church leaders. This stands in direct contradiction with God’s Word. Churches are compromising their doctrines of faith to accommodate the traditions of society–striving to please the politically correct rather than complying with the commands of God.
In the Book of Matthew, we see Jesus confront the scribes and Pharisees, who had accosted Jesus and His disciples for defiling their traditions by not washing their hands before eating. Jesus was quite blunt with them for breaking God’s commands in favor of their manmade traditions.
Matthew 15:1-9 (HCSB)
1 Then Pharisees and scribes came from Jerusalem to Jesus and asked,
2 “Why do Your disciples break the tradition of the elders? For they don’t wash their hands when they eat!”
3 He answered them, “And why do you break God’s commandment because of your tradition?
4 For God said: Honor your father and your mother; and, The one who speaks evil of father or mother must be put to death.
5 But you say, ‘Whoever tells his father or mother, “Whatever benefit you might have received from me is a gift committed to the temple “—
6 he does not have to honor his father.’ In this way, you have revoked God’s word because of your tradition.
7 Hypocrites! Isaiah prophesied correctly about you when he said:
8 These people honor Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me.
9 They worship Me in vain, teaching as doctrines the commands of men.”
Compromising our faith today, in favor of political correctness is no different.
When I object to a woman serving as pastor or “bishop” of my church, or a woman serving as a deacon, the stand I take is not one of bias against anyone, but of recognition of Scripture and living in faith with God’s Word. In 1 Timothy 2, verses 8 through 15, Scripture is unambiguous and very clear.
1 Timothy 2:8-15 (HCSB)
8 Therefore, I want the men in every place to pray, lifting up holy hands without anger or argument.
9 Also, the women are to dress themselves in modest clothing, with decency and good sense, not with elaborate hairstyles, gold, pearls, or expensive apparel,
10 but with good works, as is proper for women who affirm that they worship God.
11 A woman should learn in silence with full submission.
12 I do not allow a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; instead, she is to be silent.
13 For Adam was created first, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and transgressed.
15 But she will be saved through childbearing, if she continues in faith, love, and holiness, with good judgment.
Then in 1 Timothy 3:1-13 we read the qualifications of church leaders. The “overseer,” or the pastor, is to be the “husband of one wife.” Deacons should likewise be “husbands of one wife.”
1 Timothy 3:1-13 (HCSB)
1 This saying is trustworthy: “If anyone aspires to be an overseer, he desires a noble work.”
2 An overseer, therefore, must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, self-controlled, sensible, respectable, hospitable, an able teacher,
3 not addicted to wine, not a bully but gentle, not quarrelsome, not greedy— 4 one who manages his own household competently, having his children under control with all dignity.
5 (If anyone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he take care of God’s church?)
6 He must not be a new convert, or he might become conceited and fall into the condemnation of the Devil.
7 Furthermore, he must have a good reputation among outsiders, so that he does not fall into disgrace and the Devil’s trap.
8 Deacons, likewise, should be worthy of respect, not hypocritical, not drinking a lot of wine, not greedy for money,
9 holding the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience.
10 And they must also be tested first; if they prove blameless, then they can serve as deacons.
11 Wives, too, must be worthy of respect, not slanderers, self-controlled, faithful in everything.
12 Deacons must be husbands of one wife, managing their children and their own households competently.
13 For those who have served well as deacons acquire a good standing for themselves, and great boldness in the faith that is in Christ Jesus.
To cite 1 Timothy 2:12 today calls for arguments from many people. It will draw strong reactions from the politically correct.
Yet, the two books of Timothy are as much of the New Testament Scripture as Matthew or John, or any of the other epistles of Paul. Do we discount what Paul wrote to Timothy because we disagree, and believe that women can be pastors and deacons? God’s Word says, no.
Likewise, 1 Peter 3 addresses how husbands and wives should live. And tells wives to submit to their husbands, and that husbands should live with their wives with understanding and honor as coheirs of the grace of life. Is that wrong today too? A wife submitting to her husband is not popular in many marriages today.
I subscribe to following God’s Holy Scripture, period. If people disagree with me, so be it. I am assured of my belief with what Peter wrote of being an eyewitness of Christ. Peter knew Jesus, walked on the water with Jesus, and saw Jesus die on the cross and then live again. Jesus forgave Peter for his denying Christ three times during the trial of Jesus. He charged Peter, in John 21:15-19 to shepherd and feed His sheep, and to “Follow Me.” Peter saw Christ ascend into heaven, and heard the two angels say (Acts 1:11), “Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking up into heaven? This Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come in the same way that you have seen Him going into heaven,” assuring us of Christ’s return in this same way. Thus I have no doubts, and I stubbornly adhere to the path of Christ shown to me by Scripture.
2 Peter 1:16-21 (HCSB)
16 For we did not follow cleverly contrived myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ; instead, we were eyewitnesses of His majesty. 17 For when He received honor and glory from God the Father, a voice came to Him from the Majestic Glory: This is My beloved Son. I take delight in Him!
18 And we heard this voice when it came from heaven while we were with Him on the holy mountain.
19 So we have the prophetic word strongly confirmed. You will do well to pay attention to it, as to a lamp shining in a dismal place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts.
20 First of all, you should know this: No prophecy of Scripture comes from one’s own interpretation,
21 because no prophecy ever came by the will of man; instead, men spoke from God as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.
If we compromise our churches to accommodate the traditions of our society, are we now bowing to the false prophets and evil teachers that Peter warns us about in 2 Peter 2?
2 Peter 2:1-22 (HCSB)
1 But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, and will bring swift destruction on themselves.
2 Many will follow their unrestrained ways, and the way of truth will be blasphemed because of them.
3 They will exploit you in their greed with deceptive words. Their condemnation, pronounced long ago, is not idle, and their destruction does not sleep.
4 For if God didn’t spare the angels who sinned but threw them down into Tartarus and delivered them to be kept in chains of darkness until judgment;
5 and if He didn’t spare the ancient world, but protected Noah, a preacher of righteousness, and seven others, when He brought a flood on the world of the ungodly;
6 and if He reduced the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to ashes and condemned them to ruin, making them an example to those who were going to be ungodly;
7 and if He rescued righteous Lot, distressed by the unrestrained behavior of the immoral
8 (for as he lived among them, that righteous man tormented himself day by day with the lawless deeds he saw and heard)—
9 then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trials and to keep the unrighteous under punishment until the day of judgment,
10 especially those who follow the polluting desires of the flesh and despise authority. Bold, arrogant people! They do not tremble when they blaspheme the glorious ones;
11 however, angels, who are greater in might and power, do not bring a slanderous charge against them before the Lord.
12 But these people, like irrational animals—creatures of instinct born to be caught and destroyed—speak blasphemies about things they don’t understand, and in their destruction they too will be destroyed,
13 suffering harm as the payment for unrighteousness. They consider it a pleasure to carouse in the daytime. They are spots and blemishes, delighting in their deceptions as they feast with you. 14 They have eyes full of adultery and are always looking for sin. They seduce unstable people and have hearts trained in greed. Children under a curse!
15 They have gone astray by abandoning the straight path and have followed the path of Balaam, the son of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness
16 but received a rebuke for his transgression: A donkey that could not talk spoke with a human voice and restrained the prophet’s irrationality.
17 These people are springs without water, mists driven by a whirlwind. The gloom of darkness has been reserved for them.
18 For by uttering boastful, empty words, they seduce, with fleshly desires and debauchery, people who have barely escaped from those who live in error.
19 They promise them freedom, but they themselves are slaves of corruption, since people are enslaved to whatever defeats them.
20 For if, having escaped the world’s impurity through the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in these things and defeated, the last state is worse for them than the first.
21 For it would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness than, after knowing it, to turn back from the holy command delivered to them.
22 It has happened to them according to the true proverb: A dog returns to its own vomit, and, “a sow, after washing itself, wallows in the mud.”
In the Book of Revelation, Jesus speaks to us, assuring us of His promise. We must be watchful of the dogs who invade our churches, and must adhere to God’s own Scripture as our lamp. Hear the words of our Lord Jesus, and follow Him.
Revelation 22:12-17 (HCSB)
12 “Look! I am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me to repay each person according to what he has done.
13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.
14 “Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they may have the right to the tree of life and may enter the city by the gates.
15 Outside are the dogs, the sorcerers, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices lying.
16 “I, Jesus, have sent My angel to attest these things to you for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, the Bright Morning Star.”
17 Both the Spirit and the bride say, “Come!” Anyone who hears should say, “Come!” And the one who is thirsty should come. Whoever desires should take the living water as a gift.
By Charles Henderson
Had President Barak Obama, who professes himself a Christian, spent more time in Sunday School and Bible Study, rather than showing up in church for a little face time and ticket punching, he would understand what most Christians and Jews have long known about Israel, and that nation’s position on the disputed territories along the “West Bank” of the Jordan River, which are largely populated by Palestinians. As the very gifted foreign affairs scholar and newsman Arnaud de Borchgrave points out in his latest commentary posted at UPI.com, “Obama’s Gordian Knot,” http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Analysis/de-Borchgrave/2013/03/25/Commentary-Obamas-Gordian-Knot/UPI-19101364209300/ President Obama’s proposal would work if Israel was Belgium and the West Bank was Luxembourg.
Israel’s position in the matter—a dispute with the nation of Jordan, and the Palestinian people, over territory rather than an occupation of conquered lands from the 1969 Six Day War—is drawn from the Tanakh (or Tanach) the Jewish Holy Scriptures, Prophets and Law, written more than three-thousand years ago, and promises made more than five thousand years ago.
The Israeli claims of the West Bank lands, and other adjoining territories, come directly from the Torah, the five books of Moses, and several of the books contained in the Books of the Prophets, Navi or Nevi’im: Yehoshua (Joshua), Shoftim (Judges), Shmuel I and II (I and II Samuel), Melachim I and II (I and II Kings), Yeshayahu (Isaiah), Yirmiyahu (Jeremiah), Yechezkel (Ezekiel) and Zechariah. These are the lands given to Israel by God, for eternity. A claim of land rights that date back more than five-thousand years, when God made His covenant with Abraham, repeated with Isaac and Jacob, and again three thousand years ago when Yehoshua (Joshua) led God’s People across the Jordan into the Promised Land. Among those lands were Canaan, Judea and Samaria—the West Bank territories. A brief description comes in the last book of the Torah, Book of Devarim or D’varim, which is called Deuteronomy in the Christian Bible.
Deuteronomy 1:6-8 (HCSB)
6 ”The LORD our God spoke to us at Horeb: ‘You have stayed at this mountain long enough. 7 Resume your journey and go to the hill country of the Amorites and their neighbors in the Arabah, the hill country, the Judean foothills, the Negev and the sea coast—to the land of the Canaanites and to Lebanon as far as the Euphrates River. 8 See, I have set the land before you. Enter and take possession of the land the LORD swore to give to your fathers Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and their future descendants.’
In Chapter 15 of the Book of Bereshit (Genesis), God first made His covenant with Abraham, whose descendants grew into the Jewish, Christian and Muslim faiths.
Abraham had two sons, Ishmael, by his wife, Sarah’s servant, Hagar, and Isaac, by his wife, Sarah. Before Ishmael was born, God had told Hagar:
Genesis 16:12 (HCSB)
12 This man will be like a wild donkey. His hand will be against everyone, and everyone’s hand will be against him; he will live at odds with all his brothers.
God instructed Abraham to send Hagar and Ishmael into the wilderness to live, where Ishmael became a hunter and great archer. Ishmael had twelve sons that became twelve tribes in the Arabian lands, and gave birth to Islam.
Isaac had two sons, Esau and Jacob, twins. Esau emerged from Rebekah first, followed by Jacob, who held onto Esau’s heel. Although born second, Jacob won Isaac’s inheritance by scheming and manipulation of a near-blind father and help of a doting mother, Rebekah. But Jacob was chosen by God to be His Nation, and thus God re-named Jacob, Israel. Jacob had twelve sons by three wives, among whom was Joseph, one of two sons born of Rachael, the other being Benjamin. Joseph was sold into slavery in Egypt, yet rose to great power. Famine brought Israel (Jacob) and his sons and their families to Egypt, where they lived among the House of Joseph in the land of Goshen.
According to the Book of Shemot (Exodus, Chapter 1), with the death of the King of Egypt, the Pharaoh who knew and held high regard for Joseph, the new King took the Children of Israel and placed them into forced labor. For more than four hundred years, the Children of Israel (the families and descendants of Jacob’s twelve sons—The Twelve Tribes of Israel) suffered under abject poverty and slavery in Egypt.
Moses was a descendent of Jacob, born in the House of Levi, a Hebrew. At the time of Moses’ birth, Pharaoh had decreed that all male children born to Hebrew mothers should be thrown into the Nile, and only the daughters of Hebrews would live. Moses’ mother hid him for three months, but keeping him hidden became impossible, so she made a reed basket, coated it with tar, and set it at the edge of the Nile water. Pharaoh’s daughter found the baby, saw he was beautiful, and sent her slave to find a Hebrew woman to nurse the baby. They found Moses’ mother, and she raised Moses to a weaning age, then he was given to Pharaoh’s daughter as her son. She named him Moses—from the water—because she drew him out of the water.
Moses grew to manhood, and did not like seeing the oppression of the Hebrew people. One day he killed an Egyptian taskmaster. This angered Pharaoh, and he sought to kill Moses. So Moses fled to Midian where he became a shepherd, married and had a son, Gershom. God called Moses from the “burning bush,” and instructed Moses to return to Pharaoh and lead the Children of Israel out of Egypt, to a land that God would give His chosen people, Israel, for the rest of time.
Exodus 6:2-11 (HCSB)
2 Then God spoke to Moses, telling him, “I am Yahweh. 3 I appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as God Almighty, but I did not reveal My name Yahweh to them. 4 I also established My covenant with them to give them the land of Canaan, the land they lived in as foreigners. 5 Furthermore, I have heard the groaning of the Israelites, whom the Egyptians are forcing to work as slaves, and I have remembered My covenant. 6 ”Therefore tell the Israelites: I am Yahweh, and I will deliver you from the forced labor of the Egyptians and free you from slavery to them. I will redeem you with an outstretched arm and great acts of judgment. 7 I will take you as My people, and I will be your God. You will know that I am Yahweh your God, who delivered you from the forced labor of the Egyptians. 8 I will bring you to the land that I swore to give to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and I will give it to you as a possession. I am Yahweh.” 9 Moses told this to the Israelites, but they did not listen to him because of their broken spirit and hard labor. 10 Then the LORD spoke to Moses, 11 ”Go and tell Pharaoh king of Egypt to let the Israelites go from his land.”
Moses led God’s people, the Children of Jacob, who He had named, Israel, out of Egypt to Mount Sinai, where God gave Moses the Law, and instructed Moses on how to build God’s Tabernacle and the Arc of the Covenant. After years of wandering, and forty years of waiting, Yehoshua (Joshua) led the Children of Israel into their Promised Land.
Included in this land was the east bank of the Jordan, which the children of Benjamin occupied, and all of the lands to the west as far as they could see, including Judea and Samaria, which is the West Bank: The lands Israel holds under dispute with the Palestinian state and the King of Jordan.
After World War II, the Jewish people returned to the lands of their birthrights. The lands promised to them by God, promised to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and all their decedents for all of time. What the Children of Israel received was a small fraction of that land, and only a partial stake in the Holy City of Jerusalem, the most sacred place on earth for all Christians and Jews.
Thus when Mr. Borchgrave writes in his commentary: “Ending its colonization and military occupation of the West Bank to make room for an independent Palestinian state is anathema to Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and his new coalition government.” That is no understatement. For Israel, this is the land of Judea and Samaria, given to them by God. And only God can take this land from them.
Today, more and more world powers call for Israel to surrender the West Bank, to give the Palestinian people a homeland there. Within that land is Jerusalem, Zion, the home of David, the Temple to God built by Solomon, the place where Jesus Christ was crucified, and the tomb from where He arose. It is the city that the people of Israel call their capitol. It is within Jerusalem that the very soul of Israel resides. Bethlehem, the place of Christ’s birth, also lies in this disputed land.
For people of Faith in God and in Jesus Christ to surrender this land, given to the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob for all time, a Covenant that dates back five-thousand years, is no less than if the nation of Italy decided to kick the Pope out of Vatican City, take it over, and use it for a housing development for Muslims.
Simply put, the West Bank of the Jordan is not an option for a separate nation for the Palestinian people. A less important land, perhaps on the east side of the Jordan River, would do much better.
It is interesting to consider that Hawaii has the fewest murders of any state in the USA, with 7 murders in 2011, of which one murder was committed with a firearm, a rifle, and the six remaining were committed with knives or other odd weapons or no weapons at all. Yet ask the average American who watches TV and Hawaii Five-0, one of televisions more popular shows, and they will consider that Hawaii is right up there with plenty of gun violence. They do sling a lot of lead on Hawaii Five-0. The point is that much of America’s hand-wringing over violent crime is media driven.
Comparing states and their murder numbers, weapons used, and population is also interesting. Iowa compares closely with Colorado and Oklahoma with unrestrictive gun laws. The three states have low population density given area of land and are fairly comparable in total population, Iowa 3.1 million, Oklahoma 3.8 million and Colorado 5.2 million people. Interestingly, Oklahoma leads with homicides at 204, firearms accounting for 131 of those murders. Colorado is next with 147 homicides, of which firearms accounted for 73 of the murders. Then comes the state of Iowa with only 44 murders, of which 19 were committed with firearms.
All three states are consistent with the national average of 67 percent of homicides committed with firearms. Yet Colorado, with the greatest population, nearly two-million more people than Oklahoma, has fewer murders than Oklahoma. Iowa with a near comparable population to Oklahoma has a fraction of the number of homicides, only 44 committed in the year 2011.
Gun laws in Iowa are less restrictive than most states, and compare well with Colorado and Oklahoma. So, why is gun violence so much less in Iowa than Oklahoma and Colorado, and much less than the national averages? The US Census Bureau may hold some answers.
Average annual median household income for Colorado is $49,863.00 per year. Median household income in Iowa is $50,451.00. Oklahoma median household income is significantly less with $44,287.00. Both Iowa and Colorado have comparable median household income, but Oklahoma is more than $5-thousand dollars a year less. This might be a clue to the significantly greater percentage of murders in Oklahoma. And, as I said, gun laws of the three states are much the same, unrestrictive with no registration required anywhere.
In Iowa, 85 percent of the people have lived in the same household for more than one year, and 90.3 percent of the population graduated high school, with 25 percent graduating college. Iowa’s population is 93 percent “white” with 3 percent “black” and 5 percent “Latino.” More than 73 percent of people in Iowa own their own homes.
In Colorado, 81 percent of the people have lived in the same household for more than one year, and 89.7 percent of the population graduated high school, with 36 percent graduating college. Colorado’s population is 88 percent “white” with 4.3 percent “black” and 21 percent “Latino.” Nearly 69 percent of people in Colorado own their own homes.
In Oklahoma, 81 percent of the people have lived in the same household for more than one year, and 85.9 percent of the population graduated high school, with 23 percent graduating college. Oklahoma’s population is 75.8 percent “white” with 7.7 percent “black” and 9.2 percent “Latino.”Nearly 68 percent of people in Oklahoma own their own homes. Nearly 9 percent of Oklahoma’s population reports that they are “American Indian.” Iowa has only one-half of one percent, and Colorado has 1.6 percent.
The telling difference between Oklahoma, Iowa and Colorado is the median household income, with Oklahomans earning more than $5-thousand dollars a year less than Colorado or Iowa, and nearly $8-thousand dollars a year less than the US national average. Does this equate to more murders?
West Virginia is $5-thousand dollars a year less than Oklahoma’s median household income, with $39,550.00 per household, but only 74 murders took place in West Virginia in 2011, of which 43 involved firearms. Education wise, West Virginia falls behind Oklahoma, Colorado and Iowa, but in racial demographics compares with Iowa. Population of West Virginia is just less than 2 million people.
What the US Census Bureau and FBI do not tell us is which states have strong family values. Which states have the most people going to church on Sunday? Perhaps that may have more bearing on commissions of violent crime and murder than anything else.
But in the end, murder by firearm for most states is a small number compared to greater population. Is gun control really a priority, or is it a political hot topic and high agenda item for greater, other objectives that have nothing at all to do with violent crime by guns?