Archive for Manhattan Declaration

Glenn Beck Interviews Alveda King, Ted Nugent, And Robert George speak about Civil Rights

Posted in Abortion, Alveda King, Civil Rights, Glenn Beck with tags , , , , , , , , , on April 21, 2010 by saynsumthn

04/20/10

Watch Alveda King talk about Black Genocide today in a film: Maafa21 (Clip Below )

‘Glenn Beck’: History of Nonviolence

Wednesday, April 21, 2010

FC1
ADVERTISEMENT

This is a rush transcript from “Glenn Beck,” April 20, 2010. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

GLENN BECK, HOST: I have to tell you, sometimes this job sucks beyond belief. Other times, it is the coolest job in the world.

Tonight, I was telling — I was telling my niece, I said, tonight, I get to go home and say to my wife, I spent an hour today with Martin Luther King’s — Martin Luther King, Jr.’s niece, a rock legend and one of the smartest guys I’ve ever met.

Joining me now: Dr. Alveda King, pastoral associate at Priests for Life. She is the niece of Dr. Martin Luther King. The daughter of King’s brother, A.D. King.

And music legend — this has never happened before — you keep your randy hands to yourself.

TED NUGENT, ROCKER: This is our first date, Glenn.

BECK: And music legend, Ted Nugent.

And then, joining us from Princeton, Princeton University’s McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence, Robert George.

Wow!

All right. So, here’s why I collected you three. I’ve collected you because Dr. King, you know history, you were there.

DR. ALVEDA KING, NIECE OF DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING JR.: Absolutely.

BECK: And I want to talk about history. Martin Luther King had it nailed. I’m convinced he has the answer for today.

KING: Absolutely.

BECK: Nuge, you’re here because you’re an outspoken guy and you are also — I think a lot of people to me would go, he’s a gun nut.

NUGENT: Have you noticed that?

BECK: Yes. I have noticed that. But you’re also dedicated to peace and sometimes — it sounds like —

NUGENT: Absolute nonviolence.

BECK: Yes.

NUGENT: Absolute nonviolence and peace and demonstrating “We the People” in the most peaceable way we can.

BECK: Right.

And then I have Robert George — because, Robert, you are — you are just a — you are a guy that consults with presidents and popes and is a big thinker. And I thought you could also help kind of stitch all of this together so we could help the American people. So —

ROBERT GEORGE, PRINCETON UNIVERSITY PROFESSOR: Well, thank you for inviting me on to the show, Glenn.

BECK: You bet.

Let me start with Dr. King.

Do you see parallels between the 1960s and today?

KING: There are parallels between the 1960s and now, because during the 1960s, people were being slaughtered, their lives were being taken, there was violence, greed, drugs were rising — just all of this. And my uncle was saying, you’ve got to come back to faith, hope and love. Now, you get the translation and say faith, hope and charity — faith, hope and love.

And he got that from his father, Daddy King. And he got that from his ancestors, you know? And so, coming forth, you’ve got to love each other and you have to have faith. And you never lose hope. Even when things are really, really, really bad — there’s always hope.

So today, we have the same conditions. People being slaughtered, war and rumors of war, abortion, drugs, sicknesses, disease — all of this is going on. Greed — America has gone crazy with greed. I really have to say that.

And so, in the midst of all of this, people caring more about themselves than the least of these, than others. And so, the answer is going to always be the same: You’ve got to have faith. You’ve got to begin to continue to hope and not give up on others.

And then the other thing: You hate evil, but you don’t hate the people that do evil. So, hate has to go out the window.

BECK: Let me go to you, Ted, because that’s where I think people confuse the truth with hate. I don’t — I don’t have — if I met President Obama, he’s the president of the United States and he is a human being.

NUGENT: You respect him.

BECK: I greatly disagree with, but I don’t hate the man. So —

NUGENT: It’s pretty simple. You know, I’m honored to be here with Dr. King.

KING: Thanks.

NUGENT: And I think it’s best to just quote Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., if I get it accurate: Those of us who engage in nonviolent direct action are not responsible for the tension. We’re merely bringing to the surface a tension that already exists.

That’s the experiment in self-government where corruption metastasizes if not monitored by the boss, we the people. The boss is coming in and saying, you guys are out of control. We want accountability. We want you to conduct yourself in responsible manner the way our families do. And that’s where you’re going to get peace and love. That’s where you’re going to get hope and faith in a government that represents you accurately.

So, if there’s tension, we are not the cause of tension. We are the monitors of tension. And we want it reduced to a peaceful assembly.

BECK: So, Professor George, Martin Luther King, if I’m not mistaken, said that he actually didn’t mind tension.

GEORGE: Tension is necessary, yes.

BECK: Yes. But everybody else is trying to — well, you have Bill Clinton saying, you know, you can’t speak out. You can’t say these things. You have a responsibility.

So, in other words, if any nut-job goes and grabs a gun, then I’m responsible.

KING: You have an obligation to speak out.

BECK: You have a duty.

KING: You know, the question comes back: Am I my brother’s keeper? Well, of course, you’re your brother’s keeper. And if you see your brother about to be harmed and somebody is doing something, you must speak out. It takes courage to do that. Then you have to come out of yourself to do that.

(CROSSTALK)

KING: A selfish person says, hey, me and my four at home and no more and whatever happens to you is OK. But it can’t be that way. It cannot be that way.

BECK: Professor George — let me go — if we can bring it up on the screen the line from the Manhattan Doctrine. Can you explain what the Manhattan Doctrine is?

GEORGE: That’s the Manhattan Declaration, Glenn, and that’s a declaration was put together by leading Catholic, evangelical, Protestant and Eastern Orthodox Christians, pledging themselves to three great foundational principles of our civilization. One is the sanctity of human life in all stages and conditions.

BECK: OK.

GEORGE: The dignity of marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife is the second.

And the need for respect for religious liberty and the rights of conscience is the third. And it began with about 100 leading religious figures and spread. It’s on the Internet, at http://www.manhattandeclaration.org.

BECK: You’re part of this, too, Dr. King?

KING: I actually signed the document. I definitely —

GEORGE: Alveda signed and she is one of 400,000 — roughly 450,000 American citizens — ordinary folks from all walks of life who joined the religious leaders in signing on.

BECK: OK.

The reason why I bring this up — pull the full screen up, please, about Caesar. This is — I believe you’re lying, professor. And I think this is unbelievable. “We will fully and ungrudgingly render to Caesar what is Caesar’s. But under no circumstance will we render to Caesar what is God’s.”

Is that your line?

NUGENT: Bingo.

KING: Yes.

BECK: That is one of the — is that your line, professor?

GEORGE: Well, of course, I’m drawing it from the scripture. Jesus said that when confronted with Caesar’s coin, to render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s but unto God what is God’s.

This was echoed by Martin Luther King, Alveda’s — Alveda’s uncle, who had great respect for law and for the rule of law but said there comes a point at which a law can be so unjust it is necessary openly, lovingly and with a willingness to accept the consequences to refuse to comply with a greatly unjust law.

NUGENT: Civil disobedience — the core of American defiance against kings and emperors.

BECK: So what is the difference between — I mean, because for a lot of people, me included, abortion is murder. And it just becomes clearer and clearer the closer you get to birth. I mean, it’s just so — I think if you had a womb with a window, it would never happen.

KING: Absolutely.

You know, my uncle said that America will not reject racism until America sees racism. Well, then you saw the guns and their dogs and the billy clubs. Today, over at Priests for Life, Fr. Frank Pavone says America won’t reject abortion until America sees abortion.

And you know, we are going to be getting on a bus in a few weeks to do that Pro-Life freedom ride. And so what you’ve got if you are slaughtering people because of skin color or gestational age is still wrong. It’s just wrong.

BECK: OK. So now, I want to go — when we come back, I’ve got to ask you about — that is such a clear-cut case. But what about the Tea Parties and what’s going on?

KING: Yes.

BECK: Well, they’re next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING, CIVIL RIGHTS ACTIVIST: The Negro citizens of Montgomery, Alabama will return to the buses on a non-segregated basis.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

BECK: I had a lady call me on my radio show today and it’s a phone call I won’t — I don’t think I will ever forget. She was very passionate. God love her. She was so passionate.

And she said, Glenn, tell us — tell us the way out. I can’t figure it out. Tell us a way out. And I said, “I’m doing the best I can. I’m doing the best I can.”

And quite honestly, if I can get all Jesus with you here for a second, I feel God is a little cryptic at times. You know, it’s like, “Figure it out, dummy.” Faith, hope and charity — faith, hope and charity — those are the tools he gave me. Ad I keep circling around it.

But I’m telling you, in about five minutes — five minutes — I’m going to lay something out: History is the answer. I’m going to lay something that I found out today that we happen to have the perfect person to explain it to you.

I’m with Dr. Alveda King. She is the niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Music legend Ted Nugent — gun-lover. And Princeton University’s Robert George.

Professor, let me start with you. We know like we were talking a minute ago about abortion. And people — if you think about it, you generally go one way or the other and you’re strong in that view.

But that one is pretty easy for people. The media keeps looking at these Tea Parties and saying, “Well, it’s about high taxes.” It’s not.

Can you explain and distill what people are feeling? Or what can you compare this to? How would you explain what people are gathering for?

GEORGE: Tea Partiers see themselves in the tradition as the original Boston Tea Party. What they are united and standing up for is the principle of constitutional government, the rule of law.

In the United States, under the Constitution we have, this is principle of limited government. I think people see that we are really here at a hinge — a hinge of history. We are going to go in one direction or the other.

We’re either going to go in the direction of European-style social democracies or we’re going to go back in the direction of limited government under our Constitution. The Tea Partiers are very clear about where they want to be.

Now, those who favor European-style social democracies are not bad people. That’s a legitimate point of view. It happens to be not one that I share, but it’s a legitimate point of view. The argument can be made.

But the argument can also be made — and I believe that it’s a powerful argument, it’s the argument that Tea Partiers are making — that the real future of America, the best future for ourselves and our children, is to go back in the direction of limited government restrained by the Constitution.

So what the Tea Parties are standing for is constitutional principle. It’s not fundamentally about tax rates or whether to have a consumption tax or an income tax. It’s about adherence to Constitution and the principle of limited government.

NUGENT: Well, the Tea Party — their battle cry is not coincidental that they rallied against taxation without representation. And that is such an egregious violation by this current government and has been metastasizing for years.

Certainly, nobody can stand up and go, yes, they are spending our tax dollars really good. They’re very accountable.

There is no accountability. That was the battle cry of the original Tea Party and it is the battle cry of this Tea Party. But it’s only the tip of the culture war spear. The government is out of control. The corruption is absolutely vulgar at this point.

Power corrupts and there is way too much corrupted power. So we, the people, just like Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., said stand up and monitor the government that is supposed to work for us. That’s what the Tea Party represents.

It’s so simple, it’s stupid.

BECK: So, Dr. King, before I get to what I think Dr. Martin Luther King did brilliantly, let’s talk a little bit about the culture of the ’60s. You talk about how it was out of control on all fronts and reflects today’s culture in many ways.

KING: Yes.

BECK: But it was — I don’t think I’ve — I have never considered — I never considered going to jail before. I am a law-abiding citizen. I have never considered that.

And my wife and I have had a conversation recently going, “You know, I think these guys could say, ‘You know what? Something happened. You caused it. Get your butt in jail.'”

And I started thinking about Martin Luther King. What was that like because you went to jail?

KING: I actually went to jail and my Uncle Martin went to jail several times. My father, Rev. A.D. King, his brother, was jailed often, especially in Birmingham. You know, our home was bombed in Birmingham and all of that.

When I went to jail, we were demonstrating and we were marching. And we had a covenant or an agreement that we would not be violent and that we would conduct ourselves in a certain way.

One of my friends was thrown down by the police officers and they began to kick her. And so I went to rescue her and there actually was a tussle. So in the midst of that, I went to jail.

And I remember calling home crying and I said, “Daddy, come and get me.” He says, “No. Why don’t you just take the night in jail and think about what non-violence really means.” So I already knew.

(CROSSTALK)

KING: But after that, I further committed myself. I was very committed because Daddy meant it. My Uncle Martin meant it. So to live in a time when you were jailed just because of the color of your skin, and having courage like the Tea Party people —

NUGENT: God bless you.

KING: I pray they don’t end up in jail. But you know, speaking out with courage and conviction peacefully for what is right. And that’s why they went to jail.

BECK: Back in just a second.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: We’re back with Dr. Alveda King, niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., music legend Ted Nugent and Princeton University’s Robert George.

I think we could do about three hours here, because we’re running out of time. But I have to get to this. And tomorrow on the show, I’m going to take you to this chalkboard. It is absolutely amazing. Tell me what this is.

KING: Well, now, this is a pledge that we made during the days of the civil rights movement. I’ve actually made the pledge myself. And there are 10 points if I can move quickly.

BECK: Yes.

KING: And you agree to meditate on the teachings of Jesus every day.

Remember that the non-violent movement seeks justice and reconciliation, not victory — or not just victory.

Walk and talk in manner of love or charity, for God is love.

Pray daily to be used by God, sacrifice personal needs and so greed has to go out of the window. Because you have to believe God can take care of you so you don’t have to worry about that.

Observe with both friend and foe the ordinary rules of courtesy.

Seek to perform regular service for others and for the world.

Refrain from the violence of fist, tongue or heart. And heart is real important.

Strive to be in good spiritual and bodily health. Because how are you going to do all that marching if you are not in good health?

And follow directions of the movement and of captain on a demonstration.

BECK: And if you marched, you had to sign it.

KING: If you marched, you had to sign it and to keep yourself accordingly.

GEORGE: Beautiful. I like it.

BECK: This is the kind of thing that I think we need. And I’ll be following this here in the next few days. Professor George, you said something?

GEORGE: No, I just said that’s very beautiful, Alveda. Thank you for that.

KING: Thank you.

GEORGE: I am going to put that on my website.

BECK: That is amazing. Let me ask you this — seeks justice and reconciliation and not victory.

KING: Right.

BECK: How do you do that in today’s world?

KING: Well, justice means that we want life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for all people. If people are being downtrodden and mistreated, it’s our obligation, it’s our responsibility to speak out, not just for ourselves but for others.

NUGENT: When we see others victimized —

KING: When we see others victimized we must speak out. We have to seek justice for everybody.

BECK: But I was saying, reconciliation, not victory.

KING: Well, reconciliation means — in victory, I win and you’re wrong, and then you lose.

BECK: Got it. Got it.

KING: You’re out. You’re wrong. I hate you. I can’t stand you. Reconciliation with truth being the real winner. And —

NUGENT: We’re all Americans, after all.

KING: And we’re on the side of truth. When the truth emerges, then we reconcile ourselves to truth and unity and in charity or in love.

GEORGE: What Alveda is saying here is really deeply rooted in our Judeo-Christian civilization. The idea is that we don’t seek to destroy our enemies. After all, Jesus taught that our love must extend even to enemies. It’s a remarkable teaching. Not to destroy enemies, but to convert hearts, to win people over to the cause of justice.

NUGENT: Sounds like the Ten Commandments and the Golden Rule to me.

KING: Absolutely.

BECK: And it sounds like the opposite of what Malcolm X was doing at first and Martin Luther King — Malcolm X fails and Martin Luther King succeeds.

KING: Yes.

BECK: Back in a second.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: I have to apologize to all three of my guests, because I’ve had — well, I’ve had one guest on this program that was a waste of an hour. And if I could get that hour back, I’d put it on right now.

Dr. Alveda King is with us, music legend Ted Nugent, Princeton University’s Robert George.

I guess I just — I want to ask this question. And I’ve really got about two minutes now. And I apologize to you three for bringing you in for this so short. I really thought if I could make a case, people would wake up. And —

NUGENT: They are.

BECK: I know they are. They are. I am talking, I guess, maybe about the media.

NUGENT: They aren’t. They aren’t.

BECK: How do you get people who just are still playing politics? When you saw dogs attack, everybody in America went whoa, whoa, whoa.

KING: Right. Right.

BECK: Well, what is it that it’s going to take?

KING: When people saw the dogs, the guns and the billy clubs and yet the face of my uncle, my father and a little later, my face and there was love and compassion there, it caused the human hearts to begin to melt.

So the media has a responsibility. And we can’t let them totally get away because they have to let the truth be seen and be told. So we have to have shows like yours. We have to have Internet streaming with truth out there. We have to have folks who are peacefully protesting, telling the truth. And the heart of America will begin to melt in the face of truth and charity.

NUGENT: I think the far-left media represents the dogs attacking the protestors.

KING: Hey, the far-left media is going to have to start telling the truth.

BECK: The media did the same thing, though, in the 1990s.

KING: They did for a very long time. And they would not report the truth. Finally, you have young members of the media who bravely begin to say they’re telling the truth. We need to show this. And that’s what happened.

BECK: All three of my guests, I can’t thank you enough. God bless you.

Chuck Colson on Huckabee- Manhattan Declaration

Posted in Chuck Colson, Church with tags , , , , on November 25, 2009 by saynsumthn

Chuck Colson and Pastors “enough is enough”: Manhattan Declaration: a wake-up call, a call to conscience, for the church

Posted in Abortion, Chuck Colson, Church, Civil Rights, pro-choice, Pro-Life, Religion with tags , , , , , , , , , on November 20, 2009 by saynsumthn

The Manhattan Declaration
Defending Life, Marriage, and Freedom
By Chuck Colson|Published Date: November 20, 2009

11-20-2009

Today at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., I and a dozen evangelical, Catholic, and Orthodox leaders face the microphones to announce the release of an historic document—one of the most important documents produced by the American church, at least in my lifetime.

It is called the Manhattan Declaration, and signed by over 140 leaders representing every branch of American Christianity.

The Manhattan Declaration is a wake-up call—a call to conscience—for the church. It is also crystal-clear message to civil authorities that we will not, under any circumstances, stand idly by as our religious freedom comes under assault.

The Declaration begins by reminding readers that for 2,000 years, Christians have borne witness to the truths of their faith. This witness has taken various forms—proclamation, seeking justice, resisting tyranny, and reaching out to the poor, oppressed, and suffering.

Having reminded readers about why and how Christians have spoken out in the past, the Declaration then turns to what especially troubles us today—the threats to the sanctity of human life, the institution of marriage, and religious freedom.

The Declaration notes with sadness that although “public sentiment has moved in a pro-life direction,” pro-abortion ideology “prevails today in our government.” Both in the administration and in Congress, there are many “who want to make abortions legal at any stage of fetal development, and…provide abortions at taxpayer expense.”

The Declaration isn’t a partisan statement. It acknowledges that since Roe v. Wade, “elected officials and appointees of both major political parties have been complicit in giving legal sanction to the ‘Culture of Death.’”

The result of this bipartisan complicity is an increasingly prevalent belief that “lives that are imperfect, immature, or inconvenient are discardable.” This lethal logic produces such evils as euthanasia and the “industrial mass production of human embryos to be killed” for their stem cells.

The response to this kind of assault on the sanctity of human life requires what the Manhattan Declaration calls the “gospel of costly grace.” This starts with the willingness to put aside our comfort and serve those whom the broader culture would deem outside the scope of its concern and legal protection.

The cost may be higher. Christians may have to choose between the demands of what St. Augustine called the “City of Man” and the “City of God”—which, for the Christian, is really no choice at all.

This kind of principled non-cooperation with evil won’t be easy—there are signs of a reduced tolerance for that most basic of American values, religious freedom. As we’ve discussed many times on BreakPoint, Christian organizations are losing tax-exempt status for refusing to buy in to homosexual “marriage.” Some are going out of business rather than cave into immoral demands—such as placing children for adoption with homosexual couples. Conscientious medical personnel are being sued or being fired for obeying their consciences.

I say, enough is enough. The Church must take a stand. And with the release of the Manhattan Declaration, that’s exactly what we are doing.

I am asking Christians by the thousands to come to ColsonCenter.org, where you’ll be able to read and sign the document.

Please stand with us today. Tell the world you stand for the sanctity of life and traditional marriage—and that you cherish your God-given freedom.

Website referred to above: ColsonCenter.org

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Declaration and Signers:

Manhattan Declaration: A Call of Christian Conscience
October 20, 2009

Preamble


Christians are heirs of a 2,000-year tradition of proclaiming God’s word, seeking justice in our societies, resisting tyranny, and reaching out with compassion to the poor, oppressed and suffering.

While fully acknowledging the imperfections and shortcomings of Christian institutions and communities in all ages, we claim the heritage of those Christians who defended innocent life by rescuing discarded babies from trash heaps in Roman cities and publicly denouncing the Empire’s sanctioning of infanticide. We remember with reverence those believers who sacrificed their lives by remaining in Roman cities to tend the sick and dying during the plagues, and who died bravely in the coliseums rather than deny their Lord.

After the barbarian tribes overran Europe, Christian monasteries preserved not only the Bible but also the literature and art of Western culture. It was Christians who combated the evil of slavery: Papal edicts in the 16th and 17th centuries decried the practice of slavery and first excommunicated anyone involved in the slave trade; evangelical Christians in England, led by John Wesley and William Wilberforce, put an end to the slave trade in that country. Christians under Wilberforce’s leadership also formed hundreds of societies for helping the poor, the imprisoned, and child laborers chained to machines.

In Europe, Christians challenged the divine claims of kings and successfully fought to establish the rule of law and balance of governmental powers, which made modern democracy possible. And in America, Christian women stood at the vanguard of the suffrage movement. The great civil rights crusades of the 1950s and 60s were led by Christians claiming the Scriptures and asserting the glory of the image of God in every human being regardless of race, religion, age or class.

This same devotion to human dignity has led Christians in the last decade to work to end the dehumanizing scourge of human trafficking and sexual slavery, bring compassionate care to AIDS sufferers in Africa, and assist in a myriad of other human rights causes – from providing clean water in developing nations to providing homes for tens of thousands of children orphaned by war, disease and gender discrimination.

Like those who have gone before us in the faith, Christians today are called to proclaim the Gospel of costly grace, to protect the intrinsic dignity of the human person and to stand for the common good. In being true to its own calling, the call to discipleship, the church through service to others can make a profound contribution to the public good.

Declaration

We, as Orthodox, Catholic, and Evangelical Christians, have gathered, beginning in New York on September 28, 2009, to make the following declaration, which we sign as individuals, not on behalf of our organizations, but speaking to and from our communities. We act together in obedience to the one true God, the triune God of holiness and love, who has laid total claim on our lives and by that claim calls us with believers in all ages and all nations to seek and defend the good of all who bear his image. We set forth this declaration in light of the truth that is grounded in Holy Scripture, in natural human reason (which is itself, in our view, the gift of a beneficent God), and in the very nature of the human person. We call upon all people of goodwill, believers and non-believers alike, to consider carefully and reflect critically on the issues we here address as we, with St. Paul, commend this appeal to everyone’s conscience in the sight of God.

While the whole scope of Christian moral concern, including a special concern for the poor and vulnerable, claims our attention, we are especially troubled that in our nation today the lives of the unborn, the disabled, and the elderly are severely threatened; that the institution of marriage, already buffeted by promiscuity, infidelity and divorce, is in jeopardy of being redefined to accommodate fashionable ideologies; that freedom of religion and the rights of conscience are gravely jeopardized by those who would use the instruments of coercion to compel persons of faith to compromise their deepest convictions.

Because the sanctity of human life, the dignity of marriage as a union of husband and wife, and the freedom of conscience and religion are foundational principles of justice and the common good, we are compelled by our Christian faith to speak and act in their defense. In this declaration we affirm: 1) the profound, inherent, and equal dignity of every human being as a creature fashioned in the very image of God, possessing inherent rights of equal dignity and life; 2) marriage as a conjugal union of man and woman, ordained by God from the creation, and historically understood by believers and non-believers alike, to be the most basic institution in society and; 3) religious liberty, which is grounded in the character of God, the example of Christ, and the inherent freedom and dignity of human beings created in the divine image.

We are Christians who have joined together across historic lines of ecclesial differences to affirm our right – and, more importantly, to embrace our obligation – to speak and act in defense of these truths. We pledge to each other, and to our fellow believers, that no power on earth, be it cultural or political, will intimidate us into silence or acquiescence. It is our duty to proclaim the Gospel of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ in its fullness, both in season and out of season. May God help us not to fail in that duty.

Life
So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. Genesis 1:27

I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full. John 10:10

Although public sentiment has moved in a pro-life direction, we note with sadness that pro-abortion ideology prevails today in our government. The present administration is led and staffed by those who want to make abortions legal at any stage of fetal development, and who want to provide abortions at taxpayer expense. Majorities in both houses of Congress hold pro-abortion views. The Supreme Court, whose infamous 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade stripped the unborn of legal protection, continues to treat elective abortion as a fundamental constitutional right, though it has upheld as constitutionally permissible some limited restrictions on abortion. The President says that he wants to reduce the “need” for abortion – a commendable goal. But he has also pledged to make abortion more easily and widely available by eliminating laws prohibiting government funding, requiring waiting periods for women seeking abortions, and parental notification for abortions performed on minors. The elimination of these important and effective pro-life laws cannot reasonably be expected to do other than significantly increase the number of elective abortions by which the lives of countless children are snuffed out prior to birth. Our commitment to the sanctity of life is not a matter of partisan loyalty, for we recognize that in the thirty-six years since Roe v. Wade, elected officials and appointees of both major political parties have been complicit in giving legal sanction to what Pope John Paul II described as “the culture of death.” We call on all officials in our country, elected and appointed, to protect and serve every member of our society, including the most marginalized, voiceless, and vulnerable among us.

A culture of death inevitably cheapens life in all its stages and conditions by promoting the belief that lives that are imperfect, immature or inconvenient are discardable. As predicted by many prescient persons, the cheapening of life that began with abortion has now metastasized. For example, human embryo-destructive research and its public funding are promoted in the name of science and in the cause of developing treatments and cures for diseases and injuries. The President and many in Congress favor the expansion of embryo-research to include the taxpayer funding of so-called “therapeutic cloning.” This would result in the industrial mass production of human embryos to be killed for the purpose of producing genetically customized stem cell lines and tissues. At the other end of life, an increasingly powerful movement to promote assisted suicide and “voluntary” euthanasia threatens the lives of vulnerable elderly and disabled persons. Eugenic notions such as the doctrine of lebensunwertes Leben (“life unworthy of life”) were first advanced in the 1920s by intellectuals in the elite salons of America and Europe. Long buried in ignominy after the horrors of the mid-20th century, they have returned from the grave. The only difference is that now the doctrines of the eugenicists are dressed up in the language of “liberty,” “autonomy,” and “choice.”

We will be united and untiring in our efforts to roll back the license to kill that began with the abandonment of the unborn to abortion. We will work, as we have always worked, to bring assistance, comfort, and care to pregnant women in need and to those who have been victimized by abortion, even as we stand resolutely against the corrupt and degrading notion that it can somehow be in the best interests of women to submit to the deliberate killing of their unborn children. Our message is, and ever shall be, that the just, humane, and truly Christian answer to problem pregnancies is for all of us to love and care for mother and child alike.

A truly prophetic Christian witness will insistently call on those who have been entrusted with temporal power to fulfill the first responsibility of government: to protect the weak and vulnerable against violent attack, and to do so with no favoritism, partiality, or discrimination. The Bible enjoins us to defend those who cannot defend themselves, to speak for those who cannot themselves speak. And so we defend and speak for the unborn, the disabled, and the dependent. What the Bible and the light of reason make clear, we must make clear. We must be willing to defend, even at risk and cost to ourselves and our institutions, the lives of our brothers and sisters at every stage of development and in every condition.

Our concern is not confined to our own nation. Around the globe, we are witnessing cases of genocide and “ethnic cleansing,” the failure to assist those who are suffering as innocent victims of war, the neglect and abuse of children, the exploitation of vulnerable laborers, the sexual trafficking of girls and young women, the abandonment of the aged, racial oppression and discrimination, the persecution of believers of all faiths, and the failure to take steps necessary to halt the spread of preventable diseases like AIDS. We see these travesties as flowing from the same loss of the sense of the dignity of the human person and the sanctity of human life that drives the abortion industry and the movements for assisted suicide, euthanasia, and human cloning for biomedical research. And so ours is, as it must be, a truly consistent ethic of love and life for all humans in all circumstances.

Marriage
The man said, “This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called woman, for she was taken out of man.” For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh. Genesis 2:23-24

This is a profound mystery – but I am talking about Christ and the church. However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband. Ephesians 5:32-33

In Scripture, the creation of man and woman, and their one-flesh union as husband and wife, is the crowning achievement of God’s creation. In the transmission of life and the nurturing of children, men and women joined as spouses are given the great honor of being partners with God Himself. Marriage then, is the first institution of human society – indeed it is the institution on which all other human institutions have their foundation. In the Christian tradition we refer to marriage as “holy matrimony” to signal the fact that it is an institution ordained by God, and blessed by Christ in his participation at a wedding in Cana of Galilee. In the Bible, God Himself blesses and holds marriage in the highest esteem.

Vast human experience confirms that marriage is the original and most important institution for sustaining the health, education, and welfare of all persons in a society. Where marriage is honored, and where there is a flourishing marriage culture, everyone benefits – the spouses themselves, their children, the communities and societies in which they live. Where the marriage culture begins to erode, social pathologies of every sort quickly manifest themselves. Unfortunately, we have witnessed over the course of the past several decades a serious erosion of the marriage culture in our own country. Perhaps the most telling – and alarming – indicator is the out-of-wedlock birth rate. Less than fifty years ago, it was under 5 percent. Today it is over 40 percent. Our society – and particularly its poorest and most vulnerable sectors, where the out-of-wedlock birth rate is much higher even than the national average – is paying a huge price in delinquency, drug abuse, crime, incarceration, hopelessness, and despair. Other indicators are widespread non-marital sexual cohabitation and a devastatingly high rate of divorce.

We confess with sadness that Christians and our institutions have too often scandalously failed to uphold the institution of marriage and to model for the world the true meaning of marriage. Insofar as we have too easily embraced the culture of divorce and remained silent about social practices that undermine the dignity of marriage we repent, and call upon all Christians to do the same.

To strengthen families, we must stop glamorizing promiscuity and infidelity and restore among our people a sense of the profound beauty, mystery, and holiness of faithful marital love. We must reform ill-advised policies that contribute to the weakening of the institution of marriage, including the discredited idea of unilateral divorce. We must work in the legal, cultural, and religious domains to instill in young people a sound understanding of what marriage is, what it requires, and why it is worth the commitment and sacrifices that faithful spouses make.

The impulse to redefine marriage in order to recognize same-sex and multiple partner relationships is a symptom, rather than the cause, of the erosion of the marriage culture. It reflects a loss of understanding of the meaning of marriage as embodied in our civil and religious law and in the philosophical tradition that contributed to shaping the law. Yet it is critical that the impulse be resisted, for yielding to it would mean abandoning the possibility of restoring a sound understanding of marriage and, with it, the hope of rebuilding a healthy marriage culture. It would lock into place the false and destructive belief that marriage is all about romance and other adult satisfactions, and not, in any intrinsic way, about procreation and the unique character and value of acts and relationships whose meaning is shaped by their aptness for the generation, promotion and protection of life. In spousal communion and the rearing of children (who, as gifts of God, are the fruit of their parents’ marital love), we discover the profound reasons for and benefits of the marriage covenant.

We acknowledge that there are those who are disposed towards homosexual and polyamorous conduct and relationships, just as there are those who are disposed towards other forms of immoral conduct. We have compassion for those so disposed; we respect them as human beings possessing profound, inherent, and equal dignity; and we pay tribute to the men and women who strive, often with little assistance, to resist the temptation to yield to desires that they, no less than we, regard as wayward. We stand with them, even when they falter. We, no less than they, are sinners who have fallen short of God’s intention for our lives. We, no less than they, are in constant need of God’s patience, love and forgiveness. We call on the entire Christian community to resist sexual immorality, and at the same time refrain from disdainful condemnation of those who yield to it. Our rejection of sin, though resolute, must never become the rejection of sinners. For every sinner, regardless of the sin, is loved by God, who seeks not our destruction but rather the conversion of our hearts. Jesus calls all who wander from the path of virtue to “a more excellent way.” As his disciples we will reach out in love to assist all who hear the call and wish to answer it.

We further acknowledge that there are sincere people who disagree with us, and with the teaching of the Bible and Christian tradition, on questions of sexual morality and the nature of marriage. Some who enter into same-sex and polyamorous relationships no doubt regard their unions as truly marital. They fail to understand, however, that marriage is made possible by the sexual complementarity of man and woman, and that the comprehensive, multi-level sharing of life that marriage is includes bodily unity of the sort that unites husband and wife biologically as a reproductive unit. This is because the body is no mere extrinsic instrument of the human person, but truly part of the personal reality of the human being. Human beings are not merely centers of consciousness or emotion, or minds, or spirits, inhabiting non-personal bodies. The human person is a dynamic unity of body, mind, and spirit. Marriage is what one man and one woman establish when, forsaking all others and pledging lifelong commitment, they found a sharing of life at every level of being – the biological, the emotional, the dispositional, the rational, the spiritual – on a commitment that is sealed, completed and actualized by loving sexual intercourse in which the spouses become one flesh, not in some merely metaphorical sense, but by fulfilling together the behavioral conditions of procreation. That is why in the Christian tradition, and historically in Western law, consummated marriages are not dissoluble or annullable on the ground of infertility, even though the nature of the marital relationship is shaped and structured by its intrinsic orientation to the great good of procreation.

We understand that many of our fellow citizens, including some Christians, believe that the historic definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman is a denial of equality or civil rights. They wonder what to say in reply to the argument that asserts that no harm would be done to them or to anyone if the law of the community were to confer upon two men or two women who are living together in a sexual partnership the status of being “married.” It would not, after all, affect their own marriages, would it? On inspection, however, the argument that laws governing one kind of marriage will not affect another cannot stand. Were it to prove anything, it would prove far too much: the assumption that the legal status of one set of marriage relationships affects no other would not only argue for same sex partnerships; it could be asserted with equal validity for polyamorous partnerships, polygamous households, even adult brothers, sisters, or brothers and sisters living in incestuous relationships. Should these, as a matter of equality or civil rights, be recognized as lawful marriages, and would they have no effects on other relationships? No. The truth is that marriage is not something abstract or neutral that the law may legitimately define and re-define to please those who are powerful and influential.

No one has a civil right to have a non-marital relationship treated as a marriage. Marriage is an objective reality – a covenantal union of husband and wife – that it is the duty of the law to recognize and support for the sake of justice and the common good. If it fails to do so, genuine social harms follow. First, the religious liberty of those for whom this is a matter of conscience is jeopardized. Second, the rights of parents are abused as family life and sex education programs in schools are used to teach children that an enlightened understanding recognizes as “marriages” sexual partnerships that many parents believe are intrinsically non-marital and immoral. Third, the common good of civil society is damaged when the law itself, in its critical pedagogical function, becomes a tool for eroding a sound understanding of marriage on which the flourishing of the marriage culture in any society vitally depends. Sadly, we are today far from having a thriving marriage culture. But if we are to begin the critically important process of reforming our laws and mores to rebuild such a culture, the last thing we can afford to do is to re-define marriage in such a way as to embody in our laws a false proclamation about what marriage is.

And so it is out of love (not “animus”) and prudent concern for the common good (not “prejudice”), that we pledge to labor ceaselessly to preserve the legal definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman and to rebuild the marriage culture. How could we, as Christians, do otherwise? The Bible teaches us that marriage is a central part of God’s creation covenant. Indeed, the union of husband and wife mirrors the bond between Christ and his church. And so just as Christ was willing, out of love, to give Himself up for the church in a complete sacrifice, we are willing, lovingly, to make whatever sacrifices are required of us for the sake of the inestimable treasure that is marriage.

Religious Liberty
The Spirit of the Sovereign LORD is on me, because the LORD has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim freedom for the captives and release from darkness for the prisoners. Isaiah 61:1

Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s. Matthew 22:21

The struggle for religious liberty across the centuries has been long and arduous, but it is not a novel idea or recent development. The nature of religious liberty is grounded in the character of God Himself, the God who is most fully known in the life and work of Jesus Christ. Determined to follow Jesus faithfully in life and death, the early Christians appealed to the manner in which the Incarnation had taken place: “Did God send Christ, as some suppose, as a tyrant brandishing fear and terror? Not so, but in gentleness and meekness…, for compulsion is no attribute of God” (Epistle to Diognetus 7.3-4). Thus the right to religious freedom has its foundation in the example of Christ Himself and in the very dignity of the human person created in the image of God – a dignity, as our founders proclaimed, inherent in every human, and knowable by all in the exercise of right reason.

Christians confess that God alone is Lord of the conscience. Immunity from religious coercion is the cornerstone of an unconstrained conscience. No one should be compelled to embrace any religion against his will, nor should persons of faith be forbidden to worship God according to the dictates of conscience or to express freely and publicly their deeply held religious convictions. What is true for individuals applies to religious communities as well.

It is ironic that those who today assert a right to kill the unborn, aged and disabled and also a right to engage in immoral sexual practices, and even a right to have relationships integrated around these practices be recognized and blessed by law – such persons claiming these “rights” are very often in the vanguard of those who would trample upon the freedom of others to express their religious and moral commitments to the sanctity of life and to the dignity of marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife.

We see this, for example, in the effort to weaken or eliminate conscience clauses, and therefore to compel pro-life institutions (including religiously affiliated hospitals and clinics), and pro-life physicians, surgeons, nurses, and other health care professionals, to refer for abortions and, in certain cases, even to perform or participate in abortions. We see it in the use of anti-discrimination statutes to force religious institutions, businesses, and service providers of various sorts to comply with activities they judge to be deeply immoral or go out of business. After the judicial imposition of “same-sex marriage” in Massachusetts, for example, Catholic Charities chose with great reluctance to end its century-long work of helping to place orphaned children in good homes rather than comply with a legal mandate that it place children in same-sex households in violation of Catholic moral teaching. In New Jersey, after the establishment of a quasi-marital “civil unions” scheme, a Methodist institution was stripped of its tax exempt status when it declined, as a matter of religious conscience, to permit a facility it owned and operated to be used for ceremonies blessing homosexual unions. In Canada and some European nations, Christian clergy have been prosecuted for preaching Biblical norms against the practice of homosexuality. New hate-crime laws in America raise the specter of the same practice here.

In recent decades a growing body of case law has paralleled the decline in respect for religious values in the media, the academy and political leadership, resulting in restrictions on the free exercise of religion. We view this as an ominous development, not only because of its threat to the individual liberty guaranteed to every person, regardless of his or her faith, but because the trend also threatens the common welfare and the culture of freedom on which our system of republican government is founded. Restrictions on the freedom of conscience or the ability to hire people of one’s own faith or conscientious moral convictions for religious institutions, for example, undermines the viability of the intermediate structures of society, the essential buffer against the overweening authority of the state, resulting in the soft despotism Tocqueville so prophetically warned of.1 Disintegration of civil society is a prelude to tyranny.

As Christians, we take seriously the Biblical admonition to respect and obey those in authority. We believe in law and in the rule of law. We recognize the duty to comply with laws whether we happen to like them or not, unless the laws are gravely unjust or require those subject to them to do something unjust or otherwise immoral. The biblical purpose of law is to preserve order and serve justice and the common good; yet laws that are unjust – and especially laws that purport to compel citizens to do what is unjust – undermine the common good, rather than serve it.

Going back to the earliest days of the church, Christians have refused to compromise their proclamation of the gospel. In Acts 4, Peter and John were ordered to stop preaching. Their answer was, “Judge for yourselves whether it is right in God’s sight to obey you rather than God. For we cannot help speaking about what we have seen and heard.” Through the centuries, Christianity has taught that civil disobedience is not only permitted, but sometimes required. There is no more eloquent defense of the rights and duties of religious conscience than the one offered by Martin Luther King, Jr., in his Letter from a Birmingham Jail. Writing from an explicitly Christian perspective, and citing Christian writers such as Augustine and Aquinas, King taught that just laws elevate and ennoble human beings because they are rooted in the moral law whose ultimate source is God Himself. Unjust laws degrade human beings. Inasmuch as they can claim no authority beyond sheer human will, they lack any power to bind in conscience. King’s willingness to go to jail, rather than comply with legal injustice, was exemplary and inspiring.

Because we honor justice and the common good, we will not comply with any edict that purports to compel our institutions to participate in abortions, embryo-destructive research, assisted suicide and euthanasia, or any other anti-life act; nor will we bend to any rule purporting to force us to bless immoral sexual partnerships, treat them as marriages or the equivalent, or refrain from proclaiming the truth, as we know it, about morality and immorality and marriage and the family. We will fully and ungrudgingly render to Caesar what is Caesar’s. But under no circumstances will we render to Caesar what is God’s.

1Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America

Drafting Committee

* Robert George
Professor, McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence, Princeton University
* Timothy George
Professor, Beeson Divinity School, Samford 
University
* Chuck Colson
Founder, The Chuck Colson Center for Christian Worldview (Lansdowne, Va.)

Signers (as of November 19, 2009)

1. Dr. Daniel Akin
President, Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary (Wake Forest, N.C.)
2. Most Rev. Peter J. Akinola
Primate, Anglican Church of Nigeria (Abika, Nigeria)
3. Randy Alcorn
Founder and Director, Eternal Perspective Ministries (EPM) (Sandy, Ore.)
4. Rt. Rev. David Anderson
President and CEO, American Anglican Council (Atlanta)
5. Leith Anderson
President of National Association of Evangelicals (Washington, D.C.)
6. Charlotte K. Ardizzone
TV Show Host and Speaker, INSP Television (Charlotte, N.C.)
7. Kay Arthur
CEO and Co-founder, Precept Ministries International (Chattanooga, Tenn.)
8. Dr. Mark L. Bailey
President, Dallas Theological Seminary (Dallas)
9. Gary Bauer
President, American Values; Chairman, Campaign for Working Families
10. His Grace, The Right Reverend Bishop Basil Essey
The Right Reverend Bishop of the Diocese of Wichita and Mid-America (Wichita, Kan.)
11. Joel Belz
Founder, World Magazine (Asheville, N.C.)
12. Rev. Michael L. Beresford
Managing Director of Church Relations, Billy Graham Evangelistic Association (Charlotte, N.C.)
13. Ken Boa
President, Reflections Ministries (Atlanta)
14. Joseph Bottum
Editor of First Things (New York)
15. Pastor Randy & Sarah Brannon
Senior Pastor, Grace Community Church (Madera, Calif.)
16. Steve Brown
National Radio Broadcaster, Key Life (Maitland, Fla.)
17. Dr. Robert C. Cannada, Jr.
Chancellor and CEO, Reformed Theological Seminary (Orlando, Fla.)
18. Galen Carey
Director of Government Affairs, National Association of Evangelicals (Washington, D.C.)
19. Dr. Bryan Chapell
President, Covenant Theological Seminary (St. Louis)
20. Most Rev. Charles J. Chaput
Archbishop, Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Denver
21. Timothy Clinton
President, American Association of Christian Counselors (Forest, Va.)
22. Chuck Colson
Founder, The Chuck Colson Center for Christian Worldview (Lansdowne, Va.)
23. Most Rev. Salvatore Joseph Cordileone
Bishop, Roman Catholic Diocese of Oakland, Calif.
24. Dr. Gary Culpepper
Associate Professor, Providence College (Providence, R.I.)
25. Jim Daly
President and CEO, Focus on the Family (Colorado Springs, Colo.)
26. Marjorie Dannenfelser
President, Susan B. Anthony List (Arlington, Va.)
27. Rev. Daniel Delgado
Board of Directors, National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference; Pastor, Third Day Missions Church (Staten Island, N.Y.)
28. Dr. James Dobson
Founder, Focus on the Family (Colorado Springs, Colo.)
29. Dr. David Dockery
President, Union University (Jackson, Tenn.)
30. Most Rev. Timothy Dolan
Archbishop, Roman Catholic Diocese of New York, N.Y.
31. Dr. William Donohue
President, Catholic League (New York)
32. Dr. James T. Draper, Jr.
President Emeritus, LifeWay (Nashville, Tenn.)
33. Dinesh D’Souza
Writer and Speaker (Rancho Santa Fe, Calif.)
34. Most Rev. Robert Wm. Duncan
Archbishop and Primate, Anglican Church in North America (Ambridge, Pa. )
35. Joni Eareckson Tada
Founder and CEO, Joni and Friends International Disability Center (Agoura Hills, Calif.)
36. Dr. Michael Easley
President Emeritus, Moody Bible Institute (Chicago)
37. Dr. William Edgar
Professor, Westminster Theological Seminary (Philadelphia)
38. Brett Elder
Executive Director, Stewardship Council (Grand Rapids, Mich.
39. Rev. Joel Elowsky
Drew University (Madison, N.J.)
40. Stuart Epperson
Co-Founder and Chariman of the Board, Salem Communications Corporation (Camarillo, Calif.)
41. Rev. Jonathan Falwell
Senior Pastor, Thomas Road Baptist Church (Lynchburg, Va.)
42. William J. Federer
President, Amerisearch, Inc. (St. Louis)
43. Fr. Joseph D. Fessio
Founder and Editor, Ignatius Press (Ft. Collins, Colo.)
44. Carmen Fowler
President and Executive Editor, Presbyterian Lay Committee (Lenoir, N.C.)
45. Maggie Gallagher
President, National Organization for Marriage (Manassas, Va.)
46. Dr. Jim Garlow
Senior Pastor, Skyline Church (La Mesa, Calif.)
47. Steven Garofalo
Senior Consultant, Search and Assessment Services (Charlotte, N.C.)
48. Dr. Robert P. George
McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence, Princeton University (Princeton, N.J.)
49. Dr. Timothy George
Dean and Professor of Divinity, Beeson Divinity School at Samford University (Birmingham, Ala.)
50. Thomas Gilson
Director of Strategic Processes, Campus Crusade for Christ International (Norfolk, Va.)
51. Dr. Jack Graham
Pastor, Prestonwood Baptist Church (Plano, Texas)
52. Dr. Wayne Grudem
Research Professor of Theological and Biblical Studies, Phoenix Seminary (Phoenix)
53. Dr. Cornell “Corkie” Haan
National Facilitator of Spiritual Unity, The Mission America Coalition (Palm Desert, Calif.)
54. Fr. Chad Hatfield
Chancellor, CEO and Archpriest, St. Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Seminary (Yonkers, N.Y.)
55. Dr. Dennis Hollinger
President and Professor of Christian Ethics, Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary (South Hamilton, Mass.)
56. Dr. Jeanette Hsieh
Executive Vice President and Provost, Trinity International University (Deerfield, Ill.)
57. Dr. John A. Huffman, Jr.
Senior Pastor, St. Andrews Presbyterian Church (Newport Beach, Calif.); Chairman of the Board, Christianity Today International (Carol Stream, Ill.)
58. Rev. Ken Hutcherson
Pastor, Antioch Bible Church (Kirkland, Wash.)
59. Bishop Harry R. Jackson, Jr.
Senior Pastor, Hope Christian Church (Beltsville, Md.)
60. Fr. Johannes L. Jacobse
President, American Orthodox Institute; Editor, OrthodoxyToday.org (Naples, Fla.)
61. Jerry Jenkins
Chairman of the Board of Trustees, Moody Bible Institute (Black Forest, Colo.)
62. Camille Kampouris
Publisher, Kairos Journal
63. Emmanuel A. Kampouris
Editorial Board, Kairos Journal
64. Rev. Tim Keller
Senior Pastor, Redeemer Presbyterian Church (New York)
65. Dr. Peter Kreeft
Professor of Philosophy, Boston College (Mass.) and at the Kings College (N.Y.)
66. Most Rev. Joseph E. Kurtz
Archbishop, Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Louisville, Ky.
67. Jim Kushiner
Editor, Touchstone (Chicago)
68. Dr. Richard Land
President, The Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the SBC (Washington, D.C.)
69. Jim Law
Senior Associate Pastor, First Baptist Church (Woodstock, Ga.)
70. Dr. Matthew Levering
Associate Professor of Theology, Ave Maria University (Naples, Fla.)
71. Dr. Peter Lillback
President, The Providence Forum (West Conshohocken, Pa.)
72. Dr. Duane Litfin
President, Wheaton College (Wheaton, Ill.)
73. Rev. Herb Lusk
Pastor, Greater Exodus Baptist Church (Philadelphia)
74. His Eminence Adam Cardinal Maida
Archbishop Emeritus, Roman Catholic Diocese of Detroit
75. Most Rev. Richard J. Malone
Bishop, Roman Catholic Diocese of Portland, Maine
76. Rev. Francis Martin
Professor of Sacred Scripture, Sacred Heart Major Seminary (Detroit)
77. Dr. Joseph Mattera
Bishop and Senior Pastor, Resurrection Church (Brooklyn, N.Y.)
78. Phil Maxwell
Pastor, Gateway Church (Bridgewater, N.J.)
79. Josh McDowell
Founder, Josh McDowell Ministries (Plano, Texas)
80. Alex McFarland
President, Southern Evangelical Seminary (Charlotte, N.C.)
81. Most Rev. George Dallas McKinney
Bishop, Founder and Pastor, St. Stephen’s Church of God in Christ (San Diego)
82. Rt. Rev. Martyn Minns
Missionary Bishop, Convocation of Anglicans of North America (Herndon, Va.)
83. Dr. C. Ben Mitchell
Graves Professor of Moral Philosophy, Union University (Jackson, Tenn.)
84. Dr. R. Albert Mohler, Jr.
President, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary (Louisville, Ky.)
85. Dr. Russell D. Moore
Senior Vice President for Academic Administration and Dean of the School of Theology, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary (Louisville, Ky.)
86. Most Rev. John J. Myers
Archbishop, Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Newark, N.J.
87. Most Rev. Joseph F. Naumann
Archbishop, Roman Catholic Diocese of Kansas City, Kan.
88. David Neff
Editor-in-Chief, Christianity Today (Carol Stream, Ill.)
89. Tom Nelson
Senior Pastor, Christ Community Evangelical Free Church (Leawood, Kan.)
90. Niel Nielson
President, Covenant College (Lookout Mt., Ga.)
91. Most Rev. John Nienstedt
Archbishop, Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis
92. Dr. Tom Oden
Theologian, United Methodist Minister; Professor, Drew University (Madison, N.J.)
93. Marvin Olasky
Editor-in-Chief, World Magazine; Provost, The Kings College (New York)
94. Most Rev. Thomas J. Olmsted
Bishop, Roman Catholic Diocese of Phoenix
95. Rev. William Owens
Chairman, Coalition of African-American Pastors (Memphis, Tenn.)
96. Dr. J.I. Packer
Board of Governors’ Professor of Theology, Regent College (Canada)
97. Metr. Jonah Paffhausen
Primate, Orthodox Church in America (Syosset, N.Y.)
98. Tony Perkins
President, Family Research Council (Washington, D.C.)
99. Eric M. Pillmore
CEO, Pillmore Consulting LLC (Doylestown, Pa.)
100. Dr. Everett Piper
President, Oklahoma Wesleyan University (Bartlesville, Okla.)
101. Todd Pitner
President, Rev Increase
102. Dr. Cornelius Plantinga
President, Calvin Theological Seminary (Grand Rapids, Mich.)
103. Dr. David Platt
Pastor, Church at Brook Hills (Birmingham, Ala.)
104. Rev. Jim Pocock
Pastor, Trinitarian Congregational Church (Wayland, Mass.)
105. Fred Potter
Executive Director and CEO, Christian Legal Society (Springfield, Va.)
106. Dennis Rainey
President, CEO, and Co-Founder, FamilyLife (Little Rock, Ark.)
107. Fr. Patrick Reardon
Pastor, All Saints’ Antiochian Orthodox Church (Chicago)
108. Bob Reccord
Founder, Total Life Impact, Inc. (Suwanee, Ga.)
109. His Eminence Justin Cardinal Rigali
Archbishop, Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Philadelphia
110. Frank Schubert
President, Schubert Flint Public Affairs (Sacramento, Calif.)
111. David Schuringa
President, Crossroads Bible Institute (Grand Rapids, Mich.)
112. Tricia Scribner
Author (Harrisburg, N.C.)
113. Dr. Dave Seaford
Senior Pastor, Community Fellowship Church (Matthews, N.C.)
114. Alan Sears
President, CEO, and General Counsel, Alliance Defense Fund (Scottsdale, Ariz.)
115. Randy Setzer
Senior Pastor, Macedonia Baptist Church (Lincolnton, N.C.)
116. Most Rev. Michael J. Sheridan
Bishop, Roman Catholic Diocese of Colorado Springs, Colo.
117. Dr. Ron Sider
Director, Evangelicals for Social Action (Wynnewood, Pa.)
118. Fr. Robert Sirico
Founder, Acton Institute (Grand Rapids, Mich.)
119. Dr. Robert Sloan
President, Houston Baptist University (Houston)
120. Charles Stetson
Chairman of the Board, Bible Literacy Project (New York)
121. Dr. David Stevens
CEO, Christian Medical and Dental Association (Bristol, Tenn.)
122. John Stonestreet
Executive Director, Summit Ministries (Manitou Springs, Colo.)
123. Dr. Joseph Stowell
President, Cornerstone University (Grand Rapids, Mich.)
124. Dr. Sarah Sumner
Professor of Theology and Ministry, Azusa Pacific University (Azusa, Calif.)
125. Dr. Glenn Sunshine
Chairman of the History Department, Central Connecticut State University (New Britain, Conn.)
126. Luiz Tellez
President, The Witherspoon Institute (Princeton, N.J.)
127. Dr. Timothy C. Tennent
Professor, Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary (South Hamilton, Mass.)
128. Michael Timmis
Chairman, Prison Fellowship and Prison Fellowship International (Naples, Fla.)
129. Mark Tooley
President, Institute for Religion and Democracy (Washington, D.C.)
130. H. James Towey
President, St. Vincent College (Latrobe, Pa.)
131. Juan Valdes
Middle and High School Chaplain, Florida Christian School (Miami, Fla.)
132. Todd Wagner
Pastor, WaterMark Community Church (Dallas)
133. Dr. Graham Walker
President, Patrick Henry College (Purcellville, Va.)
134. Alexander F. C. Webster
Archpriest, Orthodox Church in America; Associate Professorial Lecturer, The George Washington University (Ft. Belvoir, Va.)
135. George Weigel
Distinguished Senior Fellow, Ethics and Public Policy Center (Washington, D.C.)
136. David Welch
Houston Area Pastor Council Executive Director, US Pastors Council (Houston)
137. Dr. James Emery White
Founding and Senior Pastor, Mecklenburg Community Church (Charlotte, N.C.)
138. Dr. Hayes Wicker
Senior Pastor, First Baptist Church (Naples, Fla.)
139. Mark Williamson
Founder and President, Foundation Restoration Ministries/Federal Intercessors (Katy, Texas)
140. Parker T. Williamson
Editor Emeritus and Senior Correspondent, Presbyterian Lay Committee
141. Dr. Craig Williford
President, Trinity International University (Deerfield, Ill.)
142. Dr. John Woodbridge
Research Professor of Church History and the History of Christian Thought, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School (Deerfield, Ill.)
143. Don M. Woodside
Performance Matters Associates (Matthews, N.C.)
144. Dr. Frank Wright
President, National Religious Broadcasters (Manassas, Va.)
145. Most Rev. Donald W. Wuerl
Archbishop, Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Washington, D.C.
146. Paul Young
COO and Executive Vice President, Christian Research Institute (Charlotte, N.C.)
147. Dr. Michael Youssef
President, Leading the Way (Atlanta)
148. Ravi Zacharias
Founder and Chairman of the Board, Ravi Zacharias International Ministries (Norcross, Ga.)
149. Most Rev. David A. Zubik
Bishop, Roman Catholic Diocese of Pittsburgh

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Manhattan Declaration: How to maintain American freedoms

With the recent political turmoil of the healthcare debate, the elimination of the conscience clause, federal funding for abortion, and the expansion of hate-crime laws, Christians have every reason to question whether or not the role of the Church will be stable in the years to come. Watch Chuck Colson as he discusses the role of the Church as the most vital organ in the intermediate structures of society.

Listen to Chuck here