Last Ounce of Courage – A Family Friendly Flick?

"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free."

   Ronald Reagan

Flag of the United States

UPDATE (9/13/12) – I did not spend much time investigating the Last Ounce of Courage and should have seen it before commenting.   It opens in theaters tomorrow, and I will be posting a thorough review next week.  I do not endorse the Christmas wars and did not realize that Doug Phillips is promoting this movie.    I apologize for offending anyone in our readership. 


Last Sunday I watched Emmanuel Baptist Church's worship service live.  After Wade Burleson delivered his sermon, another Emmanuel Enid pastor introduced a movie that opens in theaters this Friday.  It's called Last Ounce of Courage.  Then they showed the trailer (featured below). 

Here is a synopsis:

Bob Revere is a small town Mayor and combat decorated veteran. He faces a root of bitterness from his past filled with heartbreaking loss. His grandson comes back into his life after many years to ask the most important question, “What are we doing with our life to make a difference?” Bob had grown apathetic along with an entire town. Now with the help of children, a group of people all band together to inspire hope, take back the freedoms that are being lost and take a stand for truth.

The movie features Marshall R. Teague (Roadhouse), Jennifer O'Neill (Summer of '42),  Fred Williamson. (Black Caesar), and Jenna Boyd (Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants).  The rest of the cast, which includes Bill O'Reilly (playing himself), are listed here.

LAST OUNCE OF COURAGE was produced by Veritas Communications.  The movie's website includes this information about Veritas:

VERITAS is a film company dedicated to making films with a purpose. Excellence in filmmaking with a theme of courage, character and conviction are the core elements to the film's future endeavors. Currently, the film company is releasing LAST OUNCE OF COURAGE.

"We are committed to making films for God and Country and believe there is a void in the marketplace for this genre", said Kevin McAfee, filmmaker whose background includes BEYOND THE GATES OF SPLENDOR and END OF THE SPEAR from FOX FAITH. The director/producer is focusing the company's film efforts to films and television efforts that highlight patriotism, faith and family from a perspective of values.

An article in The Sacramento Bee states:

"Last Ounce of Courage," the freedom, family and faith film that honors our military men and women and the freedoms for which they fought, will premier nationally in more than 500 theaters across America on 9/11 in commemoration of Patriot Day, prior to opening on more than 1,200 screens Sept. 14…

"This is a film about courage and character, traits that our brave military possess and on which they act every day in order to protect our nation," said Veritas Entertainment President and CEO Steve Griffin. "We hope 'Last Ounce of Courage' can serve as a reminder that freedom isn't free – even here in the U.S., where apathy all too often leads to an erosion of our personal liberties."…

Filmmakers hope "Last Ounce of Courage" serves not only as a source of entertainment, but more significantly will stir a national conversation on values. To that end, in conjunction with the release of the film, the producers have launched StandUSA, an unprecedented social broadcasting platform that gathers individuals, thought leaders and local and national organizations into an integrated community where they can express and share values.

For those interested, here is some information about The Last Ounce of Courage's content:

CCC, BBB, V, A, M) Very strong Christian, biblical worldview about a mayor and his family who are standing up for Christmas against the forces of the ACLU; no foul language; bloody wound on motorcyclist, war footage with soldier dying, perilous situations; no sexual immorality; no nudity; some alcohol use; no smoking or drugs; and, politically correct ACLU and anti-Christian friends intimidate, lie and bully.  

I plan to see the movie and will be reviewing it for our TWW audience.

Lydia's Corner:   Exodus 5:22-7:25   Matthew 18:21-19:12   Psalm 23:1-6   Proverbs 5:22-23




Last Ounce of Courage – A Family Friendly Flick? — 190 Comments

  1. I am *absolutely* seeing red over this article. And, in fact, I will not watch a film which has “Very strong Christian, biblical worldview about a mayor and his family who are standing up for Christmas against the forces of the ACLU.” It’s flat-out propaganda, not inspiring in the least.

    I live in the Intermountain West, and we depend on the ACLU keeping a certain dominant religion in check. In fact, right now the ACLU is representing a Protestant church (called the Main Street Church) against Brigham City, Utah, because the city has put legal barriers (i.e. requiring people to get permits) on passing out literature in Brigham City. This specifically came up because the church in question wants to hand out literature to Mormons going to the open house of the new Brigham City temple.

    You all are probably not going to like me saying this, but Christians have got to stop acting like they are special snowflakes whose rights are being infringed when other religions and non-religious people decide they want the same rights Christians have always taken for granted.

    Let me be clear: I’m not a member of the ACLU (and, in fact, I’m annoyed by the constant solicitation for money, so not likely to become one any time soon). But the ACLU has stood up for minority religious groups in an area of the country where there is a dominant religion that you all would not consider to be Christian.

    I’m very disappointed you wrote this, Deb.

  2. politically correct ACLU and anti-Christian friends intimidate, lie and bully

    I am afraid the truth is very different from what Conservative and Republicans currently (in the past 30 years) are believing. I will not spoil your truth.

  3. Hey guys, did it ever occur to you that you are doing what others do that you cannot stand? Attempting to censor by shaming and insulting?

  4. Sadly, I have to agree with Eagle, et al. As I read this post – particularly the promotional materials quoted – there was a loud warning in the head of this conservative saying, “Propaganda, propaganda.”

  5. SD, Eagle, and Jeannette,

    I laughed when I read your comments, because you have expressed the sentiment that I and another pastor at Emmanuel have had about this movie as well. What you will find particularly ironic is that the message I preached from Hebrews last Sunday (the message which will be shown at E-church at Wartburg this weekend) is the anti-thesis of the theme of the film. The writer of Hebrews shows how the believer is to have his eye on “the Fatherland” – that is the city and the country that God is building for His people – and nothing in this life, including one’s home, one’s country, one’s possession, and one’s job is to take the place of our loyalty to the Fatherland. The writer of Hebrews says Abraham, Sarah and the patriarchs of the faith were were looking for “a country of their own” (Hebrews 11:14. That phrase “country of their own” translates the single Greek word patrida. This word comes from the Greek word pater, which means “father” and the word is better translated Fatherland. Interestingly, we get our English word patriotism from this Greek word patrida.

    I showed in the message how our greatest loyalty as believers is to God and His Kingdom and never any to any President, political party, or to even to one’s country (i.e. ‘the USA’). I explained how love for the Kingdom should transcend any love in your heart for your country, just as Abraham was able to leave Chaldea because of his commitment to the Fatherland. I also encouraged people to understand that EVERYTHING in this life will one day be lost, but the Fatherland is part of the unshakable kingdom that God gives to His kingdom, and for this reason, we should “seek first the kingdom of God.”

    Well, our church has a number of announcements at the end of the service, and a few of our very fine folks put together a promo for “Last Ounce of Courage.” I had never seen the promo until it was played after our first service (of four). It was then one of our pastors mentioned to me the “juxtaposition” between the video promo and my message. Someone else asked if I would stop the promo from being shown in the following services.

    I laughed and said, “Of course not!” When they asked why, I responded. “People can think for themselves, they don’t need me to tell them how to think.” By the way, what I taught on Sunday morning could be wrong (though I don’t think it is, or I wouldn’t teach it). My point is, this world (and my church) is big enough for people with differing viewpoints, differing philosophies, and differing world views.

    In addition, I know the people who head up Veritas Films and am friends with the producer of “The Last Ounce of Courage.” These folks are really good people and they are desiring to make films that are family friendly. Sure, I may find the movie a little cheesy, the patriotism for this country over-the-top for Christians, and it may not be in my wheelhouse in terms of movies I like, BUT….

    There are many people like Wanda, who will see the preview, who will go see the movie, and who leave the theatre very moved by what they have seen (I know, because I have heard from many who saw the premiere last night).

    My point for this long comment is simply this: Churches who have leaders that refuse to allow people to think for themselves, who refuse to have positions or philosophies presented that are opposite of the leaders, and who try to control everything and anything people see and hear in their church are not very good leaders. 🙂

    I would, as well, say that about blogs and blog commenters as well.

    I, for one, am grateful that Wanda is intrigued enough to go see the movie. Whether or not she likes is yet to be seen, but I am quite confident she is capable of seeing through any propaganda to come to an accurate conclusion of the value of the movie for herself.

    I am grateful to be in a church where people have a variety views on the same subject, and the corresponding freedom to express those views without shame or embarrassemnt. That, to me, is the purpose of a place of grace.

  6. Wade, I know you discount any praise or criticism of your sermons. Your last message The Joy of Faith in God’s Promises was excellent. I listen to each of your messages, many, many times and I always find them nourishing and I do not tire of listening and re-listening to them. As I said earlier, it is because the message is driven by The Word. Thank you for the effort you put into them.

  7. Deb – what the hell???!!!

    Sorry, but this post is outrageous and should not be here.

    Or did TWW just turn political??!!

  8. Well, I guess I’m a bit confused about the responses here. We had a week long, civil discussion about Gay issues (which people have varying views on) but a post goes up about a family oriented movie, which none of us has seen, and this thread gets a bit hot. I guess I’m confused (squishy face goes here). Am I the only one thinking this?

  9. it had nothing from Fox OR the infamous ted Baehr.

    i.e., it wasn’t political. it was about sexual ethics, and lots of other things, but not activism and politics.

    (the readership here is very diverse, politically and otherwise.)

  10. I agree. The readership is very diverse, politically and otherwise. Does that mean we can’t discuss a movie in a civil way? I don’t think Deb was intending to offend anyone. She didn’t even give any analysis of it, probably because she hasn’t seen it yet. She might not like it at all when she sees it. She might think it’s cheesy and goes overboard in areas. It doesn’t matter to me how she feels about it, even if her assessment is extremely different than mine. She is not forcing me to believe anything about it.

    Is Fox the enemy, or Baehr? I don’t even know who Baehr is (time for education).

    Is Patriotism wrong? And I think America has a lot if ugly in it’s history, but I also think it has some really good stuff. This is similar to all countries. I am glad I live in the US. I don’t think we are superior to other countries. I also don’t think the US is wicked. I think we have a superior government structure (if all the “politicians” would get out of the process or grow up). As far as I can twll, we are a country full of humanity like every other country.

    I’m not trying to be difficult, just trying to understand why we can’t reason together about a movie.

  11. As a foreigner here at WWW, seeing the promo for this ‘family friendly’ film just makes me tired.

    I have a great deal of respect for the ACLU(ACLO in the film) and am weary of the nationalistic Christianity I see in the US.
    Yes, it’s propaganda.
    From the promo:

    “…powerful Washington interests seek to stamp out religious expression”?


    I would have been under the pew or out the door if I’d been visiting Wades church. I wasn’t – so carry on, and God Bless America.

  12. I agree with the above comments that it’s clearly a film with blinkers on. Christians are NOT oppressed in America, and if these guys are so fond of truth, they shouldn’t be putting out stories like that. All it will do is fan fundamentalist flames of ‘our way or highway’.

  13. What BeneD said –

    I have a great deal of respect for the ACLU(ACLO in the film) and am weary of the nationalistic Christianity I see in the US.
    Yes, it’s propaganda.

    From the promo:

    “…powerful Washington interests seek to stamp out religious expression”?


  14. I think what makes this different to the discussions a few weeks back is that the film, from the description and the preview, looks to do the typical lazy demonisation of ‘liberals’. There’s the naughty bad liberal organisation trying to suppress good upstanding small-town folk, and it isn’t even subtle, it’s completely overt. The blurb about the film spells it out completely, and doesn’t try to hide it.
    Also, from what I understand of the ACLU, they’re an organisation that stand up for and support freedom of speech, which I know Americans are very protective of. So it strikes me as odd that the shadowy group suppressing free speech are described as ACLU-like, because I know that I’ve heard of cases of the ACLU specifically backing Christian groups for their rights to free speech and holding events – and I’m in Australia, so there’s probably a lot more I haven’t heard of.
    If it was just a film set in some unspecified time where an unspecified government/group had banned Christmas and the community decided to take a stand, that’d be fine. But once a very specific political agenda is brought in, it cheapens it.

  15. Pam – not to mention that the film is about the supposed “war on Christmas,” which is… well.

    Let me just say that my mixed Jewish-gentile hometown radio stations and newspaper were running ads and jingles with “Happy holidays” in them when I was a kid, in the 1950s and 60s.

    There’s nothing particularly new about that greeting, nor – imo – is there *anything* suggesting that people who say it are promoting a “war on Christmas.”

    Mostly, they’re just being polite.

  16. Pam – you are also correct about the ACLU’s backing some Christian groups.

    But the organization is presented as the bogeyman by many over here. Go figure.

  17. I’m going to shift the subject now, and talk about the last film I went to see: The Sapphires ( It’s an Australian film, so I’m not sure when the rest of you will get to see it, but I recommend you do. It’s based on fact and is fun, but with serious backdrop and undertones. It’s about four Aboriginal women in the late 60s who form a singing group and go to Vietnam to perform for the troops over there. It also talks a lot about racism. It’s not completely a family film – it’s rated PG in Australia, but our ratings tend to be less strict than in the USA; the violence and swearing rule it out for younger kids, and there are quite a few sex references although nothing shown and nothing explicit, and there’s lots of alcohol/drunkenness (it’s an Australian film, after all!) – but I’d recommend it for teens and up.

  18. Pam – thanks so very much for the movie rec! sounds great – hope I can find a legal copy of it to watch.

  19. And… both “White Christmas” and “Happy Holiday” were written by Irving Berlin (né Israel Isidore Baline), one of the premiere NYC-based musical theatre and pop music composer-lyricists of the 20th century.

    without him – and many other Jewish musical comedy composers like him – our holidays would be significantly duller and drearier. 🙂

  20. I haven’t noticed any incivility in the comments, just strong, but legitimate reactions to the post (not to Deb personally). I think it can be more respectful to friends to voice disagreement than to think a relationship depends on constantly maintaining superficial niceness and agreement.

    This post made me all the more eager to read Greg Boyd’s ‘Myth of a Christian Nation’. Deb, I so appreciate you and Dee, but this post troubled me. I agree with much of what others have expressed.

    Had to chuckle at the description of the film: “politically-correct ACLU and anti-Christian friends intimidate, lie and bully”. I think most of us here at TWW have personal experience of the fact that Christians are also perfectly capable of intimidation, lying and bullying!

  21. Folks,

    I just heard about this movie last Sunday, and I haven’t seen it yet.  I did see The End of the Spear (produced by this group), and I thought it was O.K.  Dissenting opinions don’t hurt my feelings. 


    Thanks for your perspective.  All I did was put the information out there.  Who knows, I may hate the movie.

  22. The “War on Christmas” is a Christian Right Wing creation, a myth. And the ACLU is not a part of any such. The movie is perpetuating a lie, at least according to the trailer.

    It may be a wonderful movie in other respects, but the basis is a lie and it should not be supported by thinking Christians for that reason.

    Is it not bullying for Christians to create a boycott of businesses where people say “Happy Holidays” in respect of Christmas, New Years and other holidays of that season? So why does not the movie deal with that bullying instead? Because it does not support the right wing agenda!

  23. JJ:

    You said:” I think most of us here at TWW have personal experience of the fact that Christians are also perfectly capable of intimidation, lying and bullying!”

    That comment by you is so true. For some christian leaders you agree with them on everything or they will have no use for you and if they have to make an example of you for others they will.

  24. I guess my thoughts on the movie and timing of it is–Does it have anything to do with a Presidential election in about 8 weeks?

  25. Yeah…

    I don’t think Deb meant to offend, and she can go see any movie she wants. I also didn’t think the strong opinions upthread were rude or uncivil. But I saw this trailer on FB a few days ago and I rolled my eyes. Hardly original, folks. It appears to be yet another “War on Christmas” movie (judging by all the snow in the trailer) being released just close enough to the holiday season to get American Christians pumped for for their favorite annual Christmas ritual: whining ad nauseam about materialism and “putting Christ back in Christmas,” thus telling the world that what Christians do on Christmas is sigh a lot and fight with anyone who objects to their nativity scene.

    As a confirmed Christmas elf, let me tell you: if I was an unbeliever, Christians’ attitude toward their own holiday would REALLY turn me off. Heck, I’m a Christian and it STILL turns me off. So no, I don’t participate in the Great Christmas Whine that rises like incense from the American church every December. I just enjoy my holiday, give gifts, and string holly and ivy all over my Christmas tree. (That’s right. Three “pagan” symbols for the price of one.)

    Okay, off Christmas rant. Moving on to the religio-politics. I’m a registered Republican and the trailer still seems corny to me on that front (and yeah, pretty hard to miss the timing just weeks before the election). Plus, I just don’t like “Christian” films, never have. They’re always so contrived. I guess I’ve just never been afraid enough of the other guy’s worldview. I honestly expected to see Doug Phillips’ name attached to the trailer when I first saw it.

    Also, did anyone else think it was totally lame and cheesy that the villain is a black lawyer smoking a cigar?

  26. Also, that content review makes it sound like non-Christians have the corner on intimidation, lying and bullying. Deb, you of all people, after fighting spiritual abuse, really ought to know that that is the misrepresentation of the century.

  27. This country does not practice any Civil Liberties as mentioned in the Constitution. It only grants to who the elites favor to do. All others are abrogated.

    I am sorry to say USA is now and has been a banana republic.

  28. Guys, are you sure it was Deb or Dee who wrote this article?

    I haven’t seen the film so can’t comment on its veracity, production values or artistic integrity! But I know the “culture wars” in the US still push a lot of hot buttons.

    I think as Christians it is right to love one’s country and if necessary fight for it, provided that one recognises (as Pastor Burleson says) that our ultimate allegiance is not to the state or nation in which we were born but to the Kingdom of Heaven.

    My concerns with film at the moment are more about this inflammatory “film” being pushed by Terry Jones and Steve Klein, which appears to have very dodgy “production values”. While these men are sitting ensconced in a country where (despite Klein’s claims) they are in little danger of being killed by an armed mob, their ill-judged, vulgar and unhelpful little effort is endangering the lives of NATO soldiers and of local Christians around the world.

  29. PS I do not believe in Islam, I do not believe the claims of the Qu’ran and I think Mohammad was wrong…. but how is “Innocence of Muslims” going to contribute towards the work of spreading the gospel (in the genuine, not neo-Reformed sense!) among Muslims? And how is gratuitously insulting people’s beliefs going to win a hearing for the gospel?

  30. @ Hester 8:03

    Yes to everything you said plus…

    “I honestly expected to see Doug Phillips’ name attached to the trailer when I first saw it.”

    He says they are his dear friends…that good enough?

    “Some very dear friends have labored long and hard to put a film in the theaters this weekend which they hope will encourage many to stand against the tide of indifference in the face of the Marxism and anti-Christian bigotry which is redefining the public square. The film which features many home educators is called “The Last Ounce of Courage” will be opening on more than a thousand screens this weekend.”

  31. And this was interesting to read…about the Headricks:

    “The Lord spoke, ‘I will give you a story for a movie,'” Richard Headrick said. It was a Thursday evening. By the following Monday morning, the plot was finished. Campbell, who appears in the film in a comic role, then wrote the screenplay.”

  32. @ Diane

    Lazy accusations of Marxism – gaah! Poor usage of political terminology always annoys me, and calling anything and everything Marxist/socialist/fascist (the last one from both sides of the spectrum) drives me batty. It’s a way to win a debate by demonising your opponent, and it’s completely insincere.

  33. @ Pam

    Yes, I thought that was just plain funny. 🙂 Doug does not disappoint.

    Silly wabbit twail–

    Is it just me, or is the word dear becoming overused like the word gospel?I see it everywhere: my dear friend…some of my dearest friends…he ia a dear, dear friend of mine…he is the dearest of all my dear friends…so and so, a dear friend of mine, …. you get it. How about a good friend. or just a friend of mine. Is every friend a dear? It reminds me of writing a letter–Dear so and so…when the person is anything but a dear to you, lol.

  34. Pam, completely agree with you – sometimes this stuff sounds more like bar-room/pub talk.

    And Diane, yes, words seem to go in and out of fashion, during which process they’re abused to the point of making them meaningless!

  35. “You fascist hyena….” “Come outside and say that, you Marxist running dog!”…. cue to the drunken brawl in the car park.

  36. The rest of the cast, which includes Bill O’Reilly (playing himself), are listed here.

    Bill O’Reilly playing himself.

    1) I’m already suspicious. Especially since this is released two months before the Presidential Election.

    2) Well, at least it wasn’t Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck “playing himself”.

    I am *absolutely* seeing red over this article. And, in fact, I will not watch a film which has “Very strong Christian, Biblical worldview about a mayor and his family who are standing up for Christmas against the forces of the ACLU.” — SW Discomfort

    Come on, guys. Could you be any more obvious? This is about on a level with that Original Star Trek episode with the half-black/half-white guys from a world “in the extreme Southern part of the galaxy.” (Or that spate of My Little Pony fanfics last year where I learned more about Equestria’s gay scene than I ever wanted to know — including the persecutions by ponies quoting a “Book of Celestia” chapter-and-verse.)

    And the buzzword bingo in that quote has so many overtones of doubleplusduckspeak…

  37. OK—lol–I am done with the Headricks. This sounds horrible.

    “Suddenly the whole cast of nearly 50 started shooting toward the trapped deer from around the circle. Bullets bounced all around the frightened American visitors. “Paige spent most of his time on the ground, dodging the bullets,” Richard jokes about his friend and former Southern Baptist Convention president.”

  38. Erm – citing ted baehr’s never a good look guys… — Richard

    Ted Baehr. Now that’s a name I remember from the Eighties. Ran some sort of Christian Movie Review organization. Credited with originating the Christian Movie Review that consists of checklists of “1253 occurrences of Sin A, 457 occurences of Sin B, 324 1/2 occurrences of Sin C, etc.”

    And I remember the name because I always found it funny. Ted Baehr… Teddy Bear….

  39. “The Lord spoke, ‘I will give you a story for a movie,’” Richard Headrick said. It was a Thursday evening. By the following Monday morning, the plot was finished. Campbell, who appears in the film in a comic role, then wrote the screenplay.” — Diane

    Any preacher-man who has endured a “Word Of Prophecy” or “The LORD Laid This Song On My Heart” from someone in his congregation (the completely tone-deaf lady who’s convinced “The LORD Gifted Me To Sing” is a classic) is going to be automatically suspicious of this statement.

    Plus I am normally skeptical of this type of statement. All too often “The LORD Spoke” is used as a thoughtstopper; Internet Monk once wrote “The LORD Spoke to me” should always be followed by “So YOU SHUT UP!” for truth in advertising. Even if it’s for real, how can you tell?

  40. From the promo:

    “…powerful Washington interests seek to stamp out religious expression”?

    — Bene D

    Now that “powerful interests”/”powerful forces” quote just says “Conspiracy Crackhead”.

  41. Kolya brings up a good point. I can get annoyed by a film like “Last Ounce of Courage” perpetuating old, worn-out stereotypes of all sorts, but I don’t see it having any major (or minor) political or social effect here in the USA.

    I can’t say the same thing for the (I can’t think of words to describe it) film that has inflamed tensions in the Middle East (and may have acted as cover to the murders of four diplomats). I saw the “trailer” and was absolutely gobsmacked. At least the films from Sherwood have good production values. (A friend of mine who has worked in films said it’s obvious they spent money on the film, as blue screens and the lenses used don’t come cheap, but it’s obvious they didn’t know HOW to spend their money.)

    But the issue here is that apparently some people who describe themselves as Christian decided this, uh, “film” should see the light of day. It also appears apparent that the “Christians” even deceived the cast and crew in making the film, then, when they had the scenes in the can, dubbed over the offensive language. How can people expect good things to happen when the whole enterprise is based on deception? But when your whole effort is designed to inflame emotions–all sorts of terrible things can happen.

    I’d also note for my fellow Americans something my non-American friends have emphasized over and over again the last two days. We here in the USA have a very expansive view of free speech and there’s very little against the law (e.g., exposing national security secrets, child pornography). On top of that, our courts take a very dim view of pre-publication censorship, as in, there’s got to be an EXCEPTIONALLY GOOD reason to shut down publication of a book, magazine, film, etc., prior to actual publication. The US view on freedom of speech is unusual in the wider world. In some places, people don’t understand why the US government doesn’t step in and tell YouTube to take down the offending video, because it’s caused harm. Our government can’t–people like me who find the film disgusting would be unhappy, because, then, who’s next?

    I’m not sure where I’m going with this, maybe just putting this out there for discussion.

  42. @Diane

    If you are hearing way more “dear” and derivatives of the word then it just means you are in the company of southern speakers. Or those imitating them. And the southern usage of the word has multiple meanings. Both good and bad. It is all in the inflection and context. 🙂

  43. SWD, that is a good point. Islam makes no distinction between the state and religion, and some Muslims in traditionally Islamic countries seem to find it hard to understand that that is not the way of the West. However hopefully as their experience of democracy improves they may come to realise this.

    Another problem with this “film” is that it is a dangerous distraction. It allows governments like the Iranian ayatollahdom to demonise the West and divert attention from their own dismal record of human abuse, and it distracts the attention of Pakistanis from pressing issues such as the appalling failure to uphold health and safety standards which resulted in 280 people dying in a textile factory fire this week.

    The people that made this “film” are parasitically taking advantage of free speech in an irresponsible manner, and appear to have made it in a way that far from glorifying God appears to be deceptive and hateful.

  44. @ Guy–

    “you are in the company of southern speakers.”

    lol–or “southern plantees” ala CJ Mahaney. Darn it if he didn’t leave the dearest place on earth though.

    Is Kentucky southern? This midwesterner wants to know.

  45. General overview of posting:

    Main character named “Bob Revere”… Is his middle name “Paul” by any chance?

    Website blurb and filmmaker’s quote in Sacramento Bee… Can we say “pretentious”?

    And the blurbs quoted say next to nothing about the movie itself, only it’s Godliness and Significance. That is usually a bad sign.

    One of the comments mentioned the main plot point is the War on Christmas(TM). Well, the official annual mobilization for the War on Christmas is almost two months away, after the one-month War Against “The Devil’s Holiday” and the elections. You can set your clock by it — October 1, mobilize against “The Devil’s Holiday” of Halloween; November 1, mobilize for the War on Christmas.

  46. Before I post, I just want to say….I am not a fan of criminalizing the religiosity of Christmas. I get kind of annoyed when people are worried that my saying “Merry Christmas” might offend someone. I mean, c’mon, I’m not going to tell a Jewish person that they can’t tell me Happy Hanukkah just because I don’t celebrate that! So I do understand, it’s not cool when people get worked up about religious views on Christmas.

    At the same time, though, I’d be very cautious of this film. In my experience, the Christmas Wars is one of the things that is being used to scare Christians into believing that religious persecution is around every corner, and that it’s absolutely VITAL to Jesus that we keep every aspect of American Christian culture from ever changing in any way, ever!! I find that view irresponsible and frankly insulting to Christians all over the world who ARE experiencing actual persecution.

    I do agree with those who say that TWW should be allowed to be enthusiastic and investigate anything they want. That’s what this blog is about. But I’m just saying, be cautious. I have a feeling this film will turn out to be just another propoganda piece that distracts Christians from loving their neighbor by convincing them that their neighbor is actually the enemy. (Oh wait…but aren’t we supposed to love those?)

    Peace out

  47. Deb – I think you and Dee do a terrific job re. spiritual abuse.

    You’ve created an oasis.

    Please…*don’t* interject politics. We can all get more than enough of that at other sites.

    You know this isn’t personal, however – I do think you’ve veered pretty far from your own mission statement.

  48. The only difference between offending Patriarchal Christians and Muslims is that Muslims will chop off your head or murder your Ambassador and those that don’t do that, look the other way. Both have the same foundational thinking. The trick is knowing what will offend, when and where as they seem to be the arbiters of what is offensive and we must be the ones who constantly change our way of communicating to accommodate them. And the more we cow tow to either group the worse it will get. Bullies love weakness and take advantage of it. That is simply how they think. And that is all both groups are–bullies. At some point there has to be boundaries. While I have taken the truth of Christ to Muslims in my lifetime, I am not willing to offer up my daughter’s freedom as a free independent female as a sacrifice to do so.

    Free speech means that even jerks get free speech.

    This is the first I have heard of the movie. And the reactions here are one reason small government conservatives have not felt comfortable here for a long while. There seems to be a theme, that if Christians are being bashed all is ok but dare disagree on politics/Islam/homosexuality then the knives come out worthy of how the patriarchs/comps/reformed authoritarians communicate. It is censorship by guilt, shame and insulting? Has the liberal side really taken inventory that they might have some of the same tendencies of those they cannot stand?

    Dee and Deb have worked hard to make a place where more moderate and liberal believers have free speech and are heard instead of deleted and insulted even to the point several conservatives left a while back. I am a bit shocked at the immediate response to this post. I do hope it will not make them less likely to share information or their opinions on matters they are not sure how will be received by their majority of readership.

  49. Diane –

    Unfortunately, as we see, that war DOES exist for some. They are convinced that Christians should rule the world. That is part of their doctrine. And if Christ is taken out of mas, then they (not Christ) have lost some invisible battle. The whole thing is bizarre to me because if you open Scripture (which they say has all authority) you find no Christ + mas. So, why do these same people make such a big fuss about it?

    At the same time . . . I’m not a thinking Christian if I support this movie?!

    If I want to see this movie am I then supporting it? Is going to it the same as supporting it?

    If I do go to see the movie, I should certainly be “thinking and discerning” and not just set my brain aside and accept everthing because it is “Christian” approved.

  50. Numo, et al

    I do not want this blog to be a place of political debate. I strongly believe that there are Christians on all sides of politics. In fact, I do not like equating Christianity with any type of politics. Jesus himself said to “Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s.” He did not say “Make Caesar do what we want him to do.”

    Jesus did not get involved in the political debates of His day, saying that His kingdom is not of this world. I agree- our sights are to be set upon the kingdom to come. About the only political thing that Paul did, and it was unsuccessful, was to go to Rome to plead his case.

    However, there is a small contingent of Christians who are intent on establishing a Christian country and will do anything to fan the flames.Some do it overtly, like Doug Wilson and Doug Phillips. Others are more subtle-like the guys over at C Street.

    Years ago, I used to be frustrated when friends would argue for putting prayers back in school. I would ask them, “What would you do if it was a pagan prayer to some earth goddess or a Hindu prayer, etc.?” They would say it needed to be a Christian prayer which would stun me. Is America supposed to establish a religion? I thought that was not the intent of the founders.

    Around that same time, I stopped my involvement in the political process. I was the president of a conservative women’s political group. One day it hit me. Several ladies were talking about “so and so” who was not a Christian. It hit me between the eyes and I said something to the effect that this was not a Bible study, it was a political action group and that meant people of all stripes. I realized then that it was not for me and that was one of my last meetings.

    I hate, hate, hate the Christmas wars. Christians come off looking like babies stomping their feet when someone does not say “Merry Christmas” at a store. This is coercion and they are doing a great job of alienating people. Its like making a kids says he is sorry for eating the cookie when you know darn well he is not.

    I plan to snap at Robert Jefress one more time when he does his “Naughty/Nice” list. And instead of writing letters to stores which do not say “Merry Christmas, I will go out of my way to be kind to a poor clerk in a Target store who is killing herself to make ends meet.

    Deb has written an apology at the top of the post. She was tired and did not research things carefully. We are human and make mistakes.

    You do not need to worry about the focus of this blog. Deb will be writing on membership covenants today and I will take on my favorite whipping boy tomorrow-Mark Driscoll.

  51. The ideological nature of this film makes it family un-friendly in my opinion. Setting up the ACLU as the clear enemy in a family film? Where is the discussion on values in that? It seems more like a one-sided sledgehammer of a movie. Cinema (and this is not cinema) should aim for more grace and truth than this.

    When children are raised on films like this, the experience is either part of a partisan political upbringing (with, say, certain kinds of books, music, curriculum, etc.) that raises Red-in-the-face Republicans OR it chases those same children away from the faith (and perhaps their parents)when they get older and look back on what they were taught and feel cheated. We owe our children and families much more than this.

  52. Btw, not sure if you guys relize that many of the NC/Reformed/YRR guys are agaisnt patriotism, too. McARthur thinks our founding fathers violated scripture. Piper teaches something similar that any celebration of being an American is a sin. Many believe the Enlightement was evil.

    If we are going to be a melting pot, we cannot seek to shut up the Christians we disagree with. We must call out abuse. But ideas, positions, concepts, beliefs MUST be discussed in the public square. That is the part of America that is really dying.

  53. Thanks for the note, Dee. Even if it was a tired mistake, I’m glad that Dee brought this movie to our attention. I likely wouldn’t have heard of it otherwise 🙂 It’s also good to challenge the WWW readership every once in a while, even if you didn’t mean to.

  54. Deb,
    This transplanted northerner chuckled through the list of southern sayings. Thanks for sharing it.
    On the subject of the main post about the movie trailer, I personally felt uneasy about the “agenda” of the trailer, but I also felt uncomfortable for you, Deb, when you seemed to be attacked by the first few comments. I know I have thin skin. That’s why I am not a blogger. But I think the intensity of the comments on this subject could be turned down a notch.

  55. Anon 1

    The post was a mistake, done in a hurry.  Deb has written an apology at the top of the post.  Patriachal Christians focus their efforts on shutting down speech.

  56. P.S. – If we Christians want to “celebrate Christ” we can whenever we want to. We could even pick any day of the year, come together and worship, and not “support” the commercialized aspect of Christmas as we now see it in the US. Like other countries, though, we do love our traditions. Pharisees liked theirs as well.

  57. After I was sued, I spent practically every minute awake trying to find an attorney and contacted ACLU for assistance. You better believe it. If you are being sued, it is a civil issue at that point regardless of who is suing you.

    Switching subjects, someone quoted: “The film which features many home educators is called “The Last Ounce of Courage” will be opening on more than a thousand screens this weekend.”

    From here on out, I will publicly say that anything endorsed by home educators, especially “celebrity home educators”, I will hold suspect.

    a 20-yr home educator who would like to lose that affiliation, but still wants to teach her kids at home

  58. I sure appreciate the response from Dee and Deb. I think some could have reworked the whole post, taken it down, been defensive, but these ladies have shown grace and humility.

    Thanks, ladies!

  59. “I sure appreciate the response from Dee and Deb. I think some could have reworked the whole post, taken it down, been defensive, but these ladies have shown grace and humility.”


  60. Wow. A mistake followed by an apology. That is how it’s done. Thank you Deb. Seeing it done right makes it easier for the rest of us to follow suite.

  61. Agree with your comment Bridget~~

    At the same time . . . I’m not a thinking Christian if I support this movie?!

    I am not sure what you mean.

    If I want to see this movie am I then supporting it? Is going to it the same as supporting it?

    Surely not. 🙂

    “If I do go to see the movie, I should certainly be “thinking and discerning” and not just set my brain aside and accept everthing because it is “Christian” approved.”

    Right. Like I spent 10 minutes this am trying to find our who the Headricks were and found some interesting stuff.

  62. “Deb will be writing on membership covenants today…”

    Good, Deb.

    I have a great quote to post on the “divinity” of the local church.

  63. Diane –

    I should have put that section on down in a separate comment (I was lazy-sorry). That was not addressed to you specifically. Someone made that comment earlier.

    and I googled Baehr last night to see who he was . . . I wasn’t impressed 🙂

  64. I am very disappointed and quite frankly offended at the way so many have attacked Deb for bringing a movie to our attention. We all know how Deb & Dee feel about getting political on this blog. They have said several times that they don’t want to go there. It’s great that we can agree or disagree with these women who have helped me and countless others find freedom from abuse but some of these posts seemed to be too rude.

  65. A southern complement.

    “Most people wouldn’t be able to wear that outfit as well as you do.”

  66. Dee~Deb

    “Deb has written an apology at the top of the post. She was tired and did not research things carefully. We are human and make mistakes.”

    I did not think the article was an endorsement for the movie. Deb posted info-not commentary until the last sentence where she wrote she was grateful (IIRC) for the movie and planned to see it. That might have been what started off such strong reaction.

    But that was only one sentence. I see that has been changed. I wanted to find out why she would be grateful for the movie and that prompted my researching a bit about it this am. Always looking for something good for my hub to take our son to see. But overall, it was not an endorsement-save for that last sentence. Deb-you did not offend me.

  67. Caleb W –

    It might not be family friendly if we are trying to brainwash our children into Christianity, but we also don’t need to view it as something to be avoided. I would take my older children to see it and then “discuss” the perspectives that were put forth. We could also see if these perspectives “sit well” with us and what (if anything) Jesus had to say about them and us 🙂

  68. GBTC –

    That complement could be taken as an insult even with a smile and peck on the cheek!

  69. Thanks all!

    I love this forum where we can share our thoughts and opinions freely. Perhaps this was providential. I look forward to writing a thorough review next week. If some of you go see it and want to editorialize about it, just send me your remarks in am email. I will try to incorporate them into my post.

    Love all of you!

  70. As Wade said we are citizens of Heaven and not of this world or this place/country is not our home. We are all individuals and will differ in our thinking and how we perceive things. Unfortunately politics is a part of life and there will be intense differences.

  71. THIS: “Now with the help of children, a group of people all band together to inspire hope, take back the freedoms that are being lost and take a stand for truth.” And this: “We are committed to making films for God and Country and believe there is a void in the marketplace for this genre”, said Kevin McAfee, filmmaker…”

    Those were two things I found alarming about the movie itself. I have not seen it, but probably wouldn’t go see it unless in an investigative sense.

    I think it is good that we are here to challenge one another. I think it is good that our blog queens are not exempt from that challenge. There were many strong statements about the appearance that TWW was promoting this movie and I think that is good as it shows that this blog allows challenge to be present.

    I, personally, would have asked Deb why she was promoting it? If she saw the red flags that I saw, and then maybe stated my thoughts on the movie, some concerns I have about it, and have that discussion. I believe we do have an expectation that this site is A-political and that is a good one. But I know that personally, these women have their own personal views about particular issues that they may view as open for challenge and discussion.

    From a cultural perspective, movies like this and statements like “for God and Country” always come across real All-White-American to me and I just keep it moving. It’s a super turnoff. For many evangelicals, to “fight” for “freedoms we are losing” really means to push our own agendas and take away the rights of others to practice freely as they wish, or believe freely as they wish… I think the better argument for Christians is to fight for human dignity and freedom, vs our own specific beliefs. If EVERYONE can believe or practice freely, then what freedoms of ours are being infringed upon? And we need to get over the requirement that state, government and society please us all the time by saying things like Merry Christmas, or praying in public. It’s so done.

  72. Honestly, I was not offended that this was being presented on the blog. If anything, we NEED to dialogue about what our Christian subculture is saying, and what kind of messages it’s producing. I didn’t immediately assume that Dee or Deb were going to give an uncritical endorsement of it…I figured they just hadn’t seen it yet, but I wanted to point out some flags I was already seeing.

  73. Bridget,

    That’s a good point and I think that responsible and fair-minded parents like yourself would take that approach. But I wasn’t intending to say this is something to avoid – except that it looks awful even as a entertainment. I think I was being sarcastic – trying to say that what passes as ‘family entertainment’ in some circles can be just as insidious as what those same circles revile as secular and godless.

  74. RE: Thy Peace on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 08:35 AM,

    My country is not, nor has it ever been a banana republic. I resent the caricature sir. And just so you know, I am a military veteran (Vietnam Era) who is NOT a conservative.

  75. GBTC, Bridget –

    I was raised by deep south parents but in NE Ohio. Got in trouble in school at different ages in the late 50s and early 60s for always saying Sir or Maam to adults. As in “Stop calling me Sir, go that.” “Yes, Sir!” totally habit ingrained by my southern Mom and Dad. The thing about southern compliments is that the usually are insults in some degree. And a good southern insult sounds almost like one misheard a compliment. As in, “You sure have done well for someone of your background.” or “You must have really worked hard to overcome the obstacles in your life.”

  76. sad observer,

    I could have mentioned in the post that Last Ounce of Courage has been given the Chuck Norris “Seal of Approval”, but I did not.

    I agree that we need to discuss these things.  I remember hearing a lady in church exclaim that she would NEVER read The DaVinci Code.  How in the world could someone discuss the ideas presented by Dan Brown if (s)he hadn’t read it?

  77. Muff,

    I am grateful for your service to our country.  Thank you for your bravery in protecting the freedoms we so often take for granted.

  78. “My country is not, nor has it ever been a banana republic. I resent the caricature sir. And just so you know, I am a military veteran (Vietnam Era) who is NOT a conservative.”

    Amen, Muff. Thank you for your service in Vietnam. this small gov conservative has been blessed to meet all kinds in the military from liberals, conservatives to liberatarians as I did some consulting on a miltary base years ago. It never ceased to amaze me to find privates reading Philosophy or studying Chinese. I had a totally wrong paradigm of the military before that time.

    And I know you are a smart liberal since you love Bushnell as much as I do! :o)

  79. I liked Norris as an actor in his TV roles. And, quite frankly, when he strays into politics, I tend to think he is out of his league and does harm to the candidates he backs. I usually choose to vote the opposite way from Norris if I have no other, better reason.

  80. Arce

    One of my daughters went to school in Plano with the son of Chuck Norris’s double. Am I cool or what!

  81. Muff

    Thank you for your service. That was a diffcult war and those who fought in it were not sufficiently thanked. This is one lady who is deeply grateful for you.

  82. Arce, GBTC, Deb

    Then there is the addition of “bless your heart” which is supposed to soften the blow. Ex: She looks like a whale in that dress, bless her heart.

  83. Then there is the addition of “bless your heart” which is supposed to soften the blow. Ex: “She looks like a whale in that dress, bless her heart.” — Dee

    I don’t know about the Former Confederate States, but if you want to REALLY see putdowns disguised as complements, check out Pennsylvania Dutch culture in the Harrisburg area. Both my father’s family and my stepmother came out of that culture (which my writing partner — also from that area — describes as having “honed passive-aggressive to a fine art”).

    With a grandmother and stepmother who were masters of passive-aggressiveness (and a brother with undiagnosed NPD who outclassed them both), my writing partner told me “You never had a chance.”

  84. Deb,

    I am dismayed that you felt it was necessary to apologize for announcing a new Christian related movie. You did not endorse the movie, you did not urge others to see it, you did not imply that the themes and ideas in the movie were “THE”truth. You simply said you had seen a movie trailer and would write a full review after you had a chance to see the movie in its entirety.
    Why do people feel the need to shut others down if they disagree??? I frequently read here and at IM but seldom comment. I have read countless posts disparaging conservative Christians as close-minded bigots and worthless members of the evangelical circus, etc. Yet, is the other side any better? I think not. I think adults should be capable of watching a movie , analyzing the information, and reaching an independent conclusion.

    However, some folks feel the need to censor a movie announcement for crying out loud.
    Quoting Eagle from above-
    I’m personally disappointed that you wrote this Deb. I never foresaw a post like this at Wartburg. In my mind this is close to any of those movies that Shorewood Pictures puts out, “Courage,” “Fireproof” etc…

    If others hate Doug Phillips, or Mark Driscoll, or John Piper then fine and well. However, I think it is wrong to try to shame Deb and shut down dialogue because you do not like that she saw a movie trailer and reported on it!

  85. “Is The Watchman Asleep, On The Wall, While America Falters?”

    Deb, Youzse touch’in upon an interesting topic, Amerika: what is to become of her?

    …hum, hum,hum… ♫♫♫  “Ride Captain  ride,”
    Upon your mystery ship,
    On your way to a plaze…
    That others might have missed?


    When a proverbial high federal official recently calls a close relative (so da story goes), and urges them to keep and maintain a two months supply of both food and water in their house, one might sit up and take notice?



    Reality check,    check!, check!

    123, 123…

    Is somebody trying to tell us somethin?


    While America may financially falter, in the coming months…

    “I see the Son Of Man standing at the right hand of God”?
    “My life is hid in Jesus?, ““& my heart will go on?”

    to he’ll wit da neighborhood?

    (speed on TweedyBurg sisters…NADM)

    hum, hum,   hum-hum!

    and ta think…not a cloud in sight!?!


    S㋡py “石鹸”
    “Bonus: “…diejenigen, die Geschichte nicht kennen sind dazu verdammt, es oder einigen solchen Unsinn zu wiederholen.

  86. My deepest respect to Muff and indeed all ex-servicemen of every nation who’ve ever borne arms for their country. I think people unfairly blame ordinary men under arms for mistakes and crimes of their leaders. The only people in uniform I have problems with are those who volunteer to guard concentration camps or to carry out genocide. But then I don’t consider that soldiering.

  87. trafal
    Deb was apologizing for not looking at more than the PR. This blog attempts to get behind the talking points and present the unvarnished reality.

    For example, we have presented what we believe to be the arrogance behind Robert Jeffress’ Naughty or Nice Christmas List.

    The two of us, unlike many who we write about, can handle criticism. Not only that, we can admit when we think we have done less than a stellar job in presenting something. I frankly admire Deb’s humility in dealing with this and hope that, when my time comes, and it will, I can do the same.

  88. I am apologizing to Deb and this blog readers. I jumped the gun. Clearly Deb was posting excerpts from different media blurbs and I should never have associated that with her and this blog readers. I sincerely apologize.

  89. Thy Peace,

    We could exchange salvo after salvo of spun facts and still arrive at no agreement or consensus. Vietnam was a National tragedy as is Iraq & Afghanistan. One of the finest warriors this country has ever produced (Dwight Eisenhower) warned of what would happen in his farewell speech to the Nation if we didn’t change course. My country has lost her way it’s true, and I am in sharp disagreement with my conservative countrymen over the reasons why. But on the other hand I cannot and will not abide her detractors either. I will stand down now.

  90. Muff Potter:

    Most of the loss of civil liberties have happened under Obama’s watch. (Jonathan Turley > 10 Reasons The U.S. Is No Longer The Land Of The Free) (Jonathan Turley > Obama and the Decline of the American Civil Liberties Movement)

    Please forgive me for hurting your sentiments for USA.

  91. Disclaimer: I stopped reading all the comments because I’m short on time…

    But I’m really sad at the response here. I thought TWW was an open group that was willing to respectfully discuss anything and everything as evidenced by some of the topics in recent weeks. Apparently not.

    What’s the old saying? If you can’t say anything nice, don’t say anything at all?

    I often stay out of discussions here because I don’t believe I have anything valuable to add or I simply feel very strongly in another direction that I feel would not add to the conversation in a positive way.

    Really, really shocked and disappointed.


  92. When we had a bible study in our home, one young man, a seminary student, had been in several episodes of Walker, Texas Ranger.

  93. Deb, I want to clearly state that you did not offend me. What my comment was directed at was the movie blurbs. I still hear propaganda in them. I spent some time immersed in the Christian Culture Wars(TM) koolaid and this smells of that. I will definitely be interested in your take on it. Honestly, my thoughts were that maybe you hadn’t really looked that much into it yet….. 😉

    To Muff, just this. Thank You! My uncles served in Viet Nam, one as a front line medic in the Army. Again, thank you. You have my gratitude.

  94. “If others hate Doug Phillips, or Mark Driscoll, or John Piper then fine and well. However, I think it is wrong to try to shame Deb and shut down dialogue because you do not like that she saw a movie trailer and reported on it!”

    “But I’m really sad at the response here. I thought TWW was an open group that was willing to respectfully discuss anything and everything as evidenced by some of the topics in recent weeks. Apparently not.”

    I’m really surprised at the number of comments in this vein. I am fairly conservative politically and I did not feel attacked/censored by any of the stronger comments upthread. In fact, I LOVE that TWW allows such strong opinions to be stated and that the readership (and blog owners) can handle a heated discussion without flipping out. I guess the line I would draw between a strong opinion and shaming/insulting/lack of discussion would go something like this:

    Strong opinion: “Deb, there is no war on Christmas and I’m disappointed that you posted this because I thought TWW was supposed to be apolitical.”
    Shaming/insulting/LOD: “Deb, you’re a MORON and how dare you insult our intelligence by speaking positively about such an OBVIOUSLY RETARDED movie!”

    Also, if I may say so myself, I think it would be pretty difficult to shame the TWW blog queens into silence. On any topic. ; )

  95. @ Diane:

    I knew it. I could smell Doug all over this the minute I saw the trailer. I pretty much assume he’s got at least one tentacle in anything that involves overtly Christian filmmaking. How much do you wanna bet LOOC ends up at/wins something at his San Antonio Christian Film Festival this year?

  96. I have never really cared for movies like this along with other productions (Fireproof, the one with cops, the football movie, etc)…..

    Personally, I don’t care to watch a movie that has such a low production value, or in general, a movie that has poor acting skills. I go to the movies to be entertained, and this is not my “cup of tea” I suppose…

    With that said, I am a bit surprised at the reaction to all of this. Is it really such an issue for Deb to write about an upcoming movie that has connections to the Christian faith?

    I am not a big fan of the so-called “Christmas Wars” myself, but I can think of worse things that a movie could promote.


    It is interesting to me that you posted an article from WDAM. I literally live 30 minutes away from Laurel, MS…and I have never heard of this couple before…Small Small World….

    I appreciate the couple’s efforts to raise awareness and serve the homeless, drug addicts, lepers, etc–

    I just wish where they said “The message of the movie is to get Christians to get up off the pew, and get out there and do something for god and country. To make a stand to be bold” would have more to do with helping the least of these rather than standing up against the ACLU……

    Anyhow, the Headrick’s certainly seem like an interesting couple…extremely interesting for the Deep South in MS…

  97. @ Hester~

    “How much do you wanna bet LOOC ends up at/wins something at his San Antonio Christian Film Festival this year?”

    First prize. Unless we see something better by next March.

  98. HowDee YaAll, 

    …bedder polish dat hallo Deb, weze’a thought youze a perrrrfect! (like Dee)

    D.E.B. (Dang Excellent Blogger), sometimes when da geese fly over da house, daze a miss’in a few of dar buddies, so da “V” looks kinda funny… (I think nuff’in of it…)

    Same-to -same, ATB.

    think nuff’in of it…

    All things work’in to da good…

    hum, hum,  hum, hum hum!


    Toot, toot, toot, What a friend we have in Jesus, all our enemy’s rocks we faithfully bare…What a privilege MarkD must carry, whew! to sock dem, every one in da nose!


    Put um up!


    S㋡py “石鹸”

  99. @seeker~~

    “Anyhow, the Headrick’s certainly seem like an interesting couple”

    Yes…note–Richard Headrick’s claim that “The Lord spoke, ‘I will give you a story for a movie,'” Richard Headrick said.”

    What if we don’t like the story? Are we against the Lord then?

  100. @Diane,

    Yep…It is not too surprising to me though…There are many many people in MS, especially in the Pine Belt Region, that are BIG on “The Lord Spoke” business.

    I tend to always approach people who say this in a cautious manner…Especially because there are many things that usually follow the “Lord spoke” that never seem to line up with Jesus…

  101. Just to be clear, I have not been offended by anyone's remarks. I would much rather have your candid commentary than the sappy sweet stuff that shows up on other blogs. 🙂

    Get ready everyone. I've been watching NCIS tonight, and I have seen the Last Ounce of Courage promo TWICE in the last 15 minutes. This is a topic we must discuss "winsomely". Egads, did I just say that???

    So Dee, when are we going to see this  M-O-O-V-I-E?

  102. Yes…note–Richard Headrick’s claim that “The Lord spoke, ‘I will give you a story for a movie,’” Richard Headrick said.”

    What if we don’t like the story? Are we against the Lord then? — Diane

    Which is why the original Internet Monk used to say “If you begin with ‘The LORD Spoke to me…’ at least follow it with ‘…so you sit down and Shut Up!” Because that’s what it usually means.

  103. Well, I’m finding this whole discussion interesting because Christian films don’t get shown over here at all, much less advertised on TV! My main exposure to them is a friend from church who is a big movie buff and has what he calls his ‘dodgy Christian shelf’ with copies of all those ones like Fireproof (and the occasional good one, like Luther, which I have seen). He doesn’t even most of watch them, he just buys them for kitsch value. The most I’ve done is read the blurbs on the back! I have wondered how the Christian film industry is seen in the US and how big it is, how accepted it is.

  104. Deb, I’ve seen the promo at least 2-3 times on different cable tv stations today as well.

  105. Sallie (and all) – My reaction was to what Deb posted, not to Deb herself.

    But she knows that, and so does Dee.

  106. @ Seeker~~

    “I tend to always approach people who say this in a cautious manner…Especially because there are many things that usually follow the “Lord spoke” that never seem to line up with Jesus…”

    Quite. Instant red flag.

  107. HUG – maybe you already know some PA Dutch people who don’t think or act in the way you describe…

    [in other words, I’m one of ’em, though from the mountains, not H’burg]

  108. Wanda,

    "Get ready everyone. I've been watching NCIS tonight, and I have seen the Last Ounce of Courage promo TWICE in the last 15 minutes. This is a topic we must discuss "winsomely". Egads, did I just say that??? So Dee, when are we going to see this M-O-O-V-I-E?"

    You are funny. 🙂 I like it.

  109. Maybe what would have been best is if this had been approached slightly differently. If, rather than just a post on this film coming out with a trailer and some excerpts about it, the post had started with the general framework of ‘Christian popular culture’, with this movie being a just-about-to-be-released example. So this film would be a starting-off point for a broader discussion. I think that would have tempered some of the responses but still allow for honest sharing of views. Rather than just becoming a discussion about this particular film – it would obviously still get a lot of discussion – we could have talked more about the whole idea of Christian media, what’s good about it, the pitfalls it can fall into, etc. What do people think?

  110. Also apologies for the pseudo-academic language – I’ve just come out of a meeting with my supervisor about the structure of my thesis so my brains is in nerd-speak mode!

  111. Deb:

    I think it’s sweet Wade jumped to your defence, no apology needed, decent of you to offer it.

    Can’t wait for your review, it’s too bad you have to funnel money to this company to see it.:^(

    I know this movie isn’t directed at folk such as Pam or I, thanks for letting me weigh in.

    And Wade, I wouldn’t slide off my chair if I was in your service – every time I cross the border, I am acutely aware I am a guest in your country – I’d leave quietly and I know better than to discuss religion or politics with my US friends face to face, or roll the ol’ eyeballs.

    I liked this discussion, I like the honest opinions and mutual respect of differences. I like hanging out online with people who think deeply, who challenge, question and speak up, and who at the end of the day are a vibrant and genuine community of care. We have the TWW blog queens to thank for such a great space.

    Blog on!

  112. Due Diligence?

    “Last Sunday I watched Emmanuel Baptist Church’s worship service live.  After Wade Burleson delivered his sermon, another Emmanuel Enid pastor introduced a movie that opens in theaters this Friday.  It’s called Last Ounce of Courage.  Then they showed the trailer…”  -Deb.


        Apparently Deb following “another Emmanuel Enid pastor introduce(-ing) a movie” example, simply fell off an uninformed void.  Apology accepted. (Anyone can be off their game, yes?) We wait in earnest for the TWW “Last Ounce of Courage” movie review, and the typically lively topical discussion that is sure to follow.

    In the same regards, apparently, a TWW commenter who enjoys a type of favorite status here, has there own movie going called: “The Last Ounce of Tylenol”.  May the commenter get well soon, is our earnest prayer. 

    However, doing “due diligence” along with tenacity, and vigilance, carry high marks in any professionals playbook. Bravo Eagle!

    As the illustrious John Immel is so apt to point out, the Internet is an arena of ideas, and can be quite brutal at times, and certainly not for the faint of heart.

    Ideas don’t care who have them. 

    Ideas don’t care who don’t.

    But people do.

    Tread lightly, “light bulbs” are getting cheaper all the time.

    With kindness,


  113. Where did this idea come from in Christian circles that in order to have a healthy relationship, or dialogue, you have to agree on everything?

    It is UNHEALTHY to remain silent simply because you disagree with someone else. I have not seen any shaming or shutting down dialogue here, just honest, respectful concern and disagreement. This is what healthy dialogue looks like.

  114. JJ,

    Yours is one of the greatest compliments we could ever receive.  Thanks.


    Everything is cool.  No need for an apology.  I can tell that you are recuperating nicely and getting back to your spunky self for which I am grateful!  🙂

  115. “I’m Not Going To Live By Their Rules Anymore” ?!?

    HowDee YaAll,

    J.J.: “Where did this idea come from in Christian circles that in order to have a healthy relationship, or dialogue, you have to agree on everything?”

    From proverbial calvinesta folk like Rev. Charles Joseph M. ?

    Try disagreeing wit um. See wherze dat’ll getz ya…

    …disfellowshipped, de-gifted, “neutered?” -snicker-, and discarted?


    Is they stuck in “AGround Hog Day?”(R)oasting Christians, and saying a prayer for world peace, at Christ’s expense?



    S㋡py “石鹸”

  116. Hester

    If we cannot demonstrate humility while blogging, then who can? Both of us felt that this was good for us. We are not perfect and we fail. If we can't take the heat, how do we model strength for people like Jared?

  117. HUG

    “The Lord Spoke” attempts to acheive the same result as prefacing anything with “gospel” or “biblical.” Driscoll, in his nonsense on Esther also uses the “I’ve been studying and praying” to preface the series. They talk to God and we are to sit and absorb.

  118. Eagle

    We decided to highlight Emmanuel and Wade Burleson for an important reason. This is a church in which you will not be abused for thinking differently. This is a pastor who will listen to all sides on an argument and not retaliate. This is a community that is heavy on grace and light on legalism. We hope that seeing such a pastor and church will give others hope that it is possible to find such a church. Better yet, if you can’t, you can listen to the service and gain strength from it.

  119. David

    I talked with Deb all the way through this thing. She is not upset in the least. As i was pulling into Bojangles last night (my husband is away and I sneaked some wings), she told that that she felt God’s hand was all over this and that He wanted this to happen for a purpose. She is a tough old broad, just like me. And since we just celebrated her birthday, she is even older.  🙂

    Here is the saying on the card I gave her.  “Birthdays are good for you. Studies prove that those who celebrate the most birthdays are the ones who live the longest.”

  120. I’m all for critical thinking and critiquing what we read. Obviously or I wouldn’t hang around here. But when I see immediate comments that use terms like “seeing red” and this post is “crap” or “outrageous” or “what the hell” I don’t think that we’re having a constructive conversation.

    In my mind, Deb and Dee deserve the benefit of the doubt if we see something here that seems a bit out of the ordinary. Not because I think they are perfect, but because they have a track record of trying to do it right.

    And I agree with some of the other comments that I think it is unfortunate that people infer that if you are patriotic and/or conservative that you are unthinking or stupid. I was calling out Vision Forum and Doug Phillips on my blog years before TWW even started or before anyone else had the guts to do it. I’m certainly willing to critique the various messages, but I can still love and appreciate my country. Would I like this movie? Who knows. I tend to avoid stuff like this as I don’t like my feelings being manipulated and that’s how it often comes across to me. But I still thank God I live in America.

    My two cents. Your mileage may vary. 🙂

  121. Ironclad

    We will eat popcorn and assess while sipping Diet Coke which conteracts any calories in the popcorn.

  122. Either works for me.  How about a matinee? I’ll track down a theater that is showing it. 

    The last movie we went to see together was Alice in Wonderland in 3D! It was a memorable event…

  123. Old Crow?

    “….you just find out, to oblige me, what brand of whiskey Grant drinks, because I want to send a barrel of it to all my generals.” 

    A. Lincoln

  124. One of the blogs that talked about that broken engagement y’all featured a few weeks ago (?) had a comment whose writer said that God had shared with her that the girl who’d broken her engagement was very young, and it would be better for her to wait till she’s at least twenty before getting married.

    The girl’s mother responded that she looks very young in pictures, but that she is in fact twenty.

    So either (1) God has no clue how old this person is but he’s willing to engage in speculatory gossip with somebody who is a stranger to her about her personal business, or (2) God shared no such thing, and the commenter for whatever reason couldn’t simply voice her own thoughts and concerns. I’m betting on (2). So is it that she thinks she’s not entitled to them? Or is she trying to put more weight on them by attributing them to God? Or maybe she perceives her thoughts as coming from an external source?

  125. Deb,

    Just wanted to say I appreciate the grace you’ve demonstrated here. I am also glad this movie is being discussed (I definitely took note of the question mark at the end of the title of this post). I saw the trailer the other day and was surprised by my strong negative internal reaction to it (which I hid because my sister was terribly excited about the movie and I didn’t understand my own reaction). I am continuously being surprised by my own reactions to things I would have been excited about just a year ago. My prediction about this movie is that it will be full of trivializations of the Christian faith. Also, the “hero” in this movie appears to be starting his own personal war against the very nation his son died to protect. He is undermining his son’s heroism in his rage. That is all it looks like to me. I look forward to your review!

  126. @ Laura:

    Per “the Lord spoke to me” stuff, I just had another conversation with Numo, HUG and a few others on another thread about the mom a friend of mine who is into some wacky extreme charismatic stuff (intercessory dance, etc.). I remember once when I was younger hearing her talk about a friend who used to be able to “hear God,” but now that this friend had started some new medication, she “couldn’t hear God anymore.” (Apparently God’s omnipotence was all an illusion, because he can be stopped by pharmaceuticals?) I don’t think it ever occurred to her that the voice might not be God at all…

  127. Thy Peace: This is America, and you are entitled to your opinion.

    Unfortunately, there are lots of people who just did, who are spending time in infinite detention, without any due process. I would encourage you to discover what is actually going on here. One might think only Muslims are being targeted. All the security apparatus this country has goosed up on will be turned inwards against it’s own people.

  128. Hester, I was thinking there is a name for that external-thought thing, unless people are just using it as a figure of speech. (Then taking the Lord’s name in vain comes to mind.)

    OTOH, we were living in Memphis when Katrina happened, and the city got a bunch of refugees. The newspaper covered the stories of several of them. One of them was a man whose out-of-town family kept calling to ask if he wasn’t going to leave New Orleans before the hurricane. He kept telling them, no, he always stayed put for storms and wasn’t going to make an exception for this one. Then a member of his church called and asked if he couldn’t, like, hijack the church van and get a bunch of them out of there. It was then, he said, that he heard God’s voice. It said to him, “Fool, get up!”. He secured the church van and got that person and his own family and a bunch of other folks all the way to Memphis, comfortably ensconced in a hotel, before the levee broke.

    I’m not going to say that he didn’t hear exactly what he thought he heard.

  129. I find this entire discussion morbidly ironic in light of what is happening in the islamic world right now. I am not sure how to explain it, but I really, really tire of people expecting Christians to give up every element of culture and faith so that others will not be ‘offended’. What I would like to tell all these poor ‘offended’ folks is to buck it up. The only problem is, some people think its ok to kill people because they don’t like what they said. And a whole bunch of others think that the guys that said the thing that offended the idiots doing the killing are the ones wrong.

    See, we ban or become offended at public presentations from religions that at their core teachings encourage others to turn the other cheek and love their enemies, yet we tell people to shut up that criticize religions that demand their members kill people for even the slightest offense.

    It’s really, really stupid.


  130. I don’t think Christians in this country have had to give up much of anything. They don’t pray in my children’s public schools, but they DO have numerous teachers who are Christian. It is well-known where they go to church and that they’re committed and active in ministry, and I suspect they pray for their students and schools. In both public schools where my children attend, they still pledge allegiance to the flag every, single morning and say “one nation under God”.

    In my part of the world, there is a church on every corner, Christian schools, Christian homeschool organizations, and Christian bookstores. In plenty of regular stores, there is Christian merchandise – cards, keychains, jewelry. There was nothing like this when I was growing up here. There weren’t as many churches (much less megachurches), numerous Christian bookstores, Christian schools, Christian homeschool organizations. My children have far more exposure to Christian teachings, as well as right-wing conservative Christian thinking, than when I was growing up here. In fact, the refusal to research things objectively, and especially the hatred of some of my right-wing friends and acquaintances concerns me for my children.

    I remember my parents, grandparents, and other adults discussing politics, reading newspapers, watching news. I had both Democrats and Republicans in my family, and they were passionate about their beliefs. But no one ever suggested that those with certain political leanings weren’t Christians or didn’t love our country. They weren’t accused of being Socialists or Marxists. As a matter of fact, I had SBC pastors and church leaders who weren’t right-wing. The best I recall, I never had a pastor endorse, directly or indirectly, certain political candidates or preach sermons and hand out literature on how to vote. My first experience with anything like that was in graduate school at Liberty University. When Jerry Falwell would preach against the evils of the purple Teletubby, I just blew it off. That’s where I was with things at the time.

    But I believe things have escalated. Now the pastors, pastors’ wives, church leaders, and church staff (many of them in large churches or megachurches) on my facebook blantantly endorse candidates, because they believe the candidates epitomize Christianity and Christian nationalism. I have many questions about this, and it makes my head spin, but I won’t go there…. They hand out literature on how to vote, preach sermons on how to vote, and whenever they get a chance to slam a particular political party or someone in authority, they go for it. I’ve had some of this literature in my hands and sat under numerous sermons like this.

    What have we had to give up? How are we being oppressed or persecuted? People don’t seem to be offended when I say Merry Christmas, and I don’t get offended when people say Happy Holidays. We had to give up prayer in schools. I’ve said this here before – a lot of people who heard bible stories in public schools are some of the most evil people I know. I just don’t believe that my children are going to be lesser people or Christians because they don’t read the bible in school.

  131. Wendy, others, I am not so much responding to specific posts as I am to the ideas this movie represents and what we see going on in the world today as an Islamic led backlash against the entire US over two of our most highly regarded basic principles: freedom of religion and freedom of speech. The Islamic command to kill those that blaspheme by their religion’s definition of blasphemy is completely and totally incompatible with all that we are and all that this country (USA) is. But if we lose touch with who we are and why we are who we are, who will have the strength to stand against such idiocy!

    In this country, thankfully, we ostensibly have the freedom not to have to give up a great deal to be Christian. And the reason we have that freedom is because of so many who died, who gave up everything, so that we could have it. It is good that we have these freedoms, and that others have the freedoms to celebrate and practice their religions as well in this land. What is not good is when we begin to adopt that attitude that if I don’t like the religion you practice, you for some reason are obligated to me not to practice that religion in front of me, or do anything in keeping with your religion that might be unacceptable in mine (or my lack or religion).

    This is complicated by two elements:

    A) When for you to practice your religion, you impose your will upon me, you take away my rights or freedoms to practice m religion.

    B) When for you to practice your religion, you violate the law of the land.

    C) A and B above come in varying degrees. And without some common standard of tolerance and grey area, we all end up either like so many Muslims in the middle east, blowing up everything that they don’t like, or we end up were any religious symbol of any kind is effectively banned from public display – or both!

    There is another aspect here that is yet even more of a problem. This country has been set up to allow a great deal of freedom, but the source of a great many of its ideas is a fundamentally Judeo Christian culture. Even the ideas which stream from elements such as the Enlightenment, come from such expressions which themselves found footing as an outgrowth of a culture birthed in Judeo Christian underpinnings.

    As such, it is good to recognize that Christianity is at the heart of OUR predominant culture. That IS who we are in this country. If we hate ourselves for it and purge it from our public life, what bedrock philosophy or world view will fill its place? Islam? Humanism? I don’t think those are very good alternatives.

    It is possible to be tolerant of those that differ from what we are without either demanding they change or without hiding who we really are. It requires having enough respect for who we are to not be ashamed of it, yet having enough compassion and respect for others to allow them to be who they are. A concerted public campaign to be this way is found in this country. Although it is not a common public policy in the world outside the US, and I know of nowhere it is public policy where Islam or Hindu or Buddhism or name your religion is practiced.

    And these are principles and attitudes (compassion, mercy, respect for others) that are also taught and instilled in what is predominantly Christian culture. Love your enemies, pray for those that spitefully use you is not found in the Qur’an or the humanist manifesto.

    We should not be so quick to throw out what to a great extent is that which has made us, all of us, whether you believe in Jesus or not, who we are as a people. Even as a Country. We in the US who honor and believe in the fundamental good of the documents and principles that have made this nation a force for good and freedom in the word should be able to admit this is an outgrowth of what was/is a Christian culture from Europe. And our unique cultural celebrations that honor that source, from halloween (odd that one) to Thanksgiving to Christmas are something we should as a nation be proud of and encourage. It’s historically part of who we are as a nation, whether we are Christians by belief or not.

    If I move to India, I do not demand they take down their idols for me. If I go to Saudi Arabia, I do not demand they stop praying in Mosques. If you come to America, you should not demand we stop putting up nativity scenes at Christmas. But, UNLIKE so many other places in the world, YOU can build your mosque, or put up your idol, or whatever floats your boat! And this government and many of our people will support your right to do so.


  132. Separation of Church and State was articulated and advanced by baptists forebears. If a government promotes one form of Christians and oppresses another (as they were doing in the past), this led to the separation of Church and State.

  133. Read the published works of the founders – there is no such thing as separation of church and state in the constitution !!!! The constitution prohibits the government from establishing a “state church”. THAT is our founding fathers’ position – NOT removing God from the public square.

  134. Sallie, I appreciate your sensible comments.

    I dislike extremes of any kind. I have no problem with Deb’s post and look forward to her review of the movie. Deb is doing good works for all readers. We live in a free country and everyone is entitled to his/her opinion. I practice “take what you like and leave the rest” and do not jump the gun to criticize anyone. Those who have very strong opinions about any issues tend to quickly react before the facts are in; they even want to shut down dialogue sometimes and that just reveals their biases.

    I do not visit this site very often, last time 2 weeks ago and do not have time to read all comments nor do I want to. But that’s the nature of a blog, even a Christian blog…

  135. Hi Zeta,

    I agree with you up to a point. However in fairness I should point out that Turkey is a secular state (vigorously enforced until recently by generals loyal to Atatürk’s memory) but the majority of people there are culturally if not religiously Muslim.

    Also India is officially a secular democracy as apart from the Hindu majority it has large Christian and Muslim minorities. Syria is/was, and Iraq was, under Baathist rule, Baathism being Arab secular rule (one-party). Far from promoting Islam, Assad Senior was an opponent of the Muslim Brotherhood. Pakistan’s increasing Islamisation was due (as I understand it) largely to its formerly military leader Zia ul-Haq getting into bed with religious conservatives and giving them increasing influence from the 1980s onwards.

    Actual theocratic states are few and far between – Saudi Arabia (which is very conservative and which was embarrassed by bin Laden), pre-9/11 Afghanistan, and Iran, where ironically support for the ideals of Khomeini seems to have ebbed.

    The “coming to America” thing about demanding the end to nativity scenes is in my opinion a canard as we have had the same thing in the UK. In most cases it seems to be not militant Islamists or other religionists who demand this, but over-sensitive bureaucrats or militant secularists.

    The Founding Fathers as I understand them were largely deist although men with some religious sense. I doubt whether they wanted the USA to be a completely religion-free zone (perhaps Jefferson notwithstanding) but I would have to agree that after the trials and tribulations of Europe’s wars they did not want a state religion nor civil unrest owing to disagreements over theology.

    It is interesting however that after 72 years of more or less official atheism, Russia as a nation has turned back to granting the Orthodox Church a greater role in public life, at least officially. Whether that is a totally unmixed blessing I leave for further discussion!

  136. Kolya – Great comment.

    Re. Russia, I think you’re right about the “unmixed blessing” thing, as some other religions (even other branches of Christianity – notably Roman Catholicism) have been made illegal.

    If anything, some people who are *very* hard core right-wingers are trying to use the Orthodox Church as a front for their activities (not unlike some groups here in the US, though a lot of the more militant “Christian” organizations – like the Klan – have less overt presence than they sued to).

  137. The Assads are Alawites, and as such, are part of a minority that might suffer if people who are Sunni Muslims take political power in Syria.

  138. Per the separation of church and state thing – it was not “invented” in the 20th century to shut up Christians (as so many of my fellow conservatives seem to want everyone to think). It’s my understanding that the basic idea has been articulated in the writings of (well-respected) constitutional scholars and jurists since the 1830s. And yes, given the widespread and unfortunate persecution of Baptists/Anabaptists over the centuries, it’s understandable that they would have articulated the idea too.

    Most Christians/social conservatives who decry church and state want it to be a one-way street, in which the church (usu. in the guise of “traditional values” if we’re talking politics) can muck around in the state but not vice versa. Problem is, that’s breaking the rules. Either they’re separate or they’re not. So what, pray tell, would be a permissible way for the state to muck around in the church? The answer, of course, in their minds, is none. They want all the benefits of separation of church and state (freedom from state interference/mandates) AND all the benefits of being a state church/official religion (getting to judge the state’s laws by their moral code).

    Another good question is – if church and state are not separate, then what would be an acceptable way for Muslims to muck around in the state with their religion? This MUST BE acceptable, since church are state are allegedly not separate and thus they can muck around in each other. And in a pluralistic society like America, how is the state to decide whose moral code they will write into the law?

    You can see why separation of church and state is absolutely necessary to prevent a country from running itself to a state church/official religion and squashing everybody’s freedom in the process. Don’t even get me started on the “no religious test” thing (per those people who think that Romney shouldn’t be president because he is Mormon).

    BTW, did anyone here know that Wallbuilders (“historian” David Barton’s group) wrote an amicus brief to a court in which they said that the Constitution only protects the religious freedom of monotheists (allegedly because that would have been “religion” to the Founding Fathers)? The case had something to do with a Wiccan who felt his religious freedom was being violated.

  139. Thanks guys. Numo, I agree re the current Russian religious scene – unfortunately some elements of the Orthodox church appear to have learnt nothing from seven decades of persecution nor their own Tsarist history which was slightly less than stellar and are now leaning on minorities. Partly there was also a backlash against the 1990s which saw a lot of bizarre cults enter Russia – unfortunately to the hardline Orthodox, “cult” means “anything non-Orthodox”. Sadly also the Orthodox church seems to be increasingly co-opted as a branch of government, which brings us to a rather sad full circle.

    I take your point re the Alawites. It’s interesting to note that Iraq’s Sunnis were also a minority under Saddam but held the power.

    Heston, thanks for the heads-up re David Barton. This sort of thing is very troubling, but it would appear from the Wikipedia article that most people are aware of the nature of Mr Barton’s work and credibility.

    We had a somewhat analgous setup here with historical revision after some die-hard Leftists created a “Stalin Society”, which to my eyes looks like an effort to whitewash the old boy and make his historical record seem merely malicious slander by Western imperialists. Not that I’m suggesting Mr Barton is that extreme!

  140. I just read where Roger Williams first used the term “wall of separation” in some of his writings, especially his “Bloudy Tenant….” book (written anonymously and published when he was visiting England) which caused huge stir in England and the Colonies. The printer eventually had to flee England.

  141. Actually, the Baptists worked on Monroe and other Virginia political leaders to create the First Amendment religion clauses. One says no state church, which in part was because the Baptists hated paying taxes to support a religion they could not in free conscience support. BTW it is from there that arose the idea of not using government funds or property for explicitly religious purposes, such as manger scenes on the courthouse property and using the loud speaker at the football game for prayer.

    The other clause, the freedom of conscience clause as it relates to religion is that the state cannot act to prevent people from freely practicing their religion. This has been interpreted to be limited such that your free practice cannot prevent my free practice and vice versa, so there are limits. Also general purpose laws, such as those to protect public health and welfare and to prevent people from being killed or maimed, can limit extreme religious practices.

  142. One point. It was in the late 1780s, around the time of the adoption of the Constitution.

  143. @ Attorney:

    “One says no state church, which in part was because the Baptists hated paying taxes to support a religion they could not in free conscience support.”

    There’s a book called In Pursuit of the Almighty’s Dollar: A History of Money and American Protestantism (kinda nerdy but hey, I’m a nerd so…). In the introduction, I seem to recall it documents how, in the 50 or so years following independence, the state taxes to support the state churches died out, i.e. religion lost its government funding and became privatized. (Not surprisingly, I think they lasted longest in Massachusetts.) Which is not exactly what you’d expect if the Constitution really DIDN’T separate church and state. It does, however, fit perfectly with the normal interpretation.

  144. @ Kolya:

    “Thanks for the heads-up re David Barton. This sort of thing is very troubling, but it would appear from the Wikipedia article that most people are aware of the nature of Mr Barton’s work and credibility.”

    Most people, that is, outside of conservative Christian Republican and/or homeschool circles. I seem to recall you live in Europe, so you’re probably not as exposed to this, but Barton is currently being paraded around by some of the more popular conservative talking heads (one of whom is now paying to publish his latest book after his former publisher pulled it) as a legitimate historian. MILLIONS of Americans are being fed his crap and they’re buying it hook, line and sinker.

    References for the amicus brief:

  145. Syria is/was, and Iraq was, under Baathist rule, Baathism being Arab secular rule (one-party). — Kolya

    Baathism is a little more than Arab Secular Rule. The original name of the Baathist Party was “The Baath Arab National Socialist Party”. “National Socialist” as in German Fascism — the Baathists began as the Arab wing of the Nazi Party.

    During WW2 the Germans attempted to cultivate and influence Arabs and Muslims as a counter and ally to the British dominance of the Middle East oilfields, and covert support of Arab Fascists was part of the game. (The Germans even supported with money and air power anti-British rebels in Syria and Iraq, but these never went anywhere.) One of the legacies of this was the Baath Party; another was rabid hatred of Jews.

    With the fall of Saddam’s Iraq, Syria is the last of its kind, a legacy of the 1930s — the last classic Fascist state.

  146. Well… Ba’athism is also about pan-Arab nationalism, and took its original slogan from the French. Instead of “Liberté, egalité, fraternité,” it’s “Unity, Liberty, Socialism.” (but not the Nazi kind of “socialism.”)

    I really don’t know that much about the history of the various Ba’ath movements, but I suspect it’s more complex than what you’re describing. (with respect, as I do know that there were some Arab “fans” of the Nazis, but I question how much influence that ideology has had on the ME as a whole.)

    As for the Ba’ath regimes in Iraq and Syria being dictatorships, well – yes, of course. But that’s equally true of pretty much all Middle Eastern countries since the various colonial powers left the region. (In terms of actual governance and occupation – financial influence and a continuing desire to gain access to/monopolize some countries’ oil and gas fields and products is an ongoing thing…)


    Glenn Greenwald > Unlike Afghan leaders, Obama fights for power of indefinite military detention

    Obama lawyers file a breathless, angry appeal against the court ruling that invalidated the NDAA’s chilling 2011 detention law


  148. I saw “The Last Ounce of Courage” on Wednesday, September 19th at 7:15 pm EST in Louisville, Kentucky at a showcase movie palace with over a dozen screens simultaneously playing movies. Not exactly the busiest time or day of the week to try and judge the turnout for a newly released nation wide movie. This movie is in competition with dozens of multimillion dollar mega movies that are being controlled, produced, advertised, and released through Hollywood’s biggest movie moguls. It could be considered a tall stretch for this little known movie with little to no advertisement dollars being spent on its’ release to over a 1000 movie theaters. It would take lots of courage to go up against those kinds of odds on the weekend of Friday the 14th September 2012 the movie’s release date. So let the games begin.

    It takes time for the word of mouth to spread the good news that finally there is a movie that states the truths that everybody knows deep down inside of himself or herself, but few will ever speak out and express their thoughts. You have now been forewarned before this movie packs the movie houses all over the nation and the lines wrap around the block!

    Word of mouth advertising is the most powerful advertising there is! Kind of like what Albert Einstein said about compound interest. “The most powerful thing in the Universe is compound interest.” Just ask any banker about compound interest or any politician politicizing our National Debt to the power of compound interest. Think about that for a minute! This movie is about what is most important to our national interest.

    What we are talking about here is something called COURAGE. Many have heard about COURAGE but very few show it via their words, actions, or deeds. Most people will listen to movie critics or read reviews by other people who have seen a movie before they will decide which movie to lay down their cold hard-earned cash to see that movie. If the establishment desires to curb the audience they will send out unkind reviews about that movie. If the establishment is really in fear of the word getting out about a movie they will actually pay their shills to write unkind things from the prospective of a non-commercial person viewing that movie. Some people just don’t get it. And then again some people really do get it.

    I am telling you all this so you can fully expect the worst review from movie critics and from unsolicited reviews from those who desire to bury this little known movie before it gets a firm grip on the minds of those of us who have been suppressed of their true feelings about what is really going on with your and my FREEDOMS. We are talking about controlling the minds of the masses here, and make no mistake everybody has a dog in this fight.

    I walked into an empty theater with only a middle age couple sitting high up in the rolls of seats behind me. The lady spoke out to me from a distance “ I was beginning to believe we would have this entire movie house to ourselves.” My reply with a shout out was “I will be very quite.” In my mind I was thinking, am I the only one who knows what this movie is suppose to be about, thanks to Chuck Norris’s viewing of it and his approval of “The Last Ounce of Courage.”

    This movie is so deep on so many emotional levels of truth. It will hold you in a time warp for one hour and forty minutes, which flies by in a blink of an eye. Your heart will be right up in the middle of those larger than life images on the screen. The movie expresses what you know in your inner being as the real truth, but you are not able to fully express it in real life. The reason is because of fear that someone will judge you and scold you just like the little children are told to be quite and do as they are told to do or ELSE!

    It is not a big multimillion dollar Hollywood production, and it is made up of mostly un-known actors just like that good old common salt of the earth folks from any small town in the USA. A few little known and not multimillion dollar actors and actresses are sprinkled into the leading roles to give it that down home polish needed to be believable and to get its’ political un-correct points across. It will play well in every small town in America, which is where America got its’ real principles and basic roots. As for big cities, we are about to find out about that soon enough. America is waking up and not a minute to soon.

    Run don’t walk to see this movie. It will renew your faith in the true meaning of freedom. See for yourself what this movie will do for you on an emotional level to heal you from denying those truths you know in your heart of hearts to be true. It is about our current losing of freedoms for which our forefathers have fought to the death for, and what our current military forces are being exposed to every day of the week. What could be more important than understanding what we could lose or how we are losing it? All of this is happening while our children are fighting in foreign lands and we here at home are losing our precious freedom on a daily basics.

    Do not let anybody discourage you from the opportunity to feel this true emotional healing that this movie will bring up from deep down within your suppressed emotional feelings. When real freedom is express in your presence, it becomes a powerful motivational moving force. Please go see “The Last Ounce of Courage” before all of your liberties are gone not only for you, but also for your children, and for your grandchildren. Our children today are being programmed out of their freedoms from which most of us have felt in our yesterdays of not so long ago by doing nothing.

    How do you feel when somebody like Ron Paul expresses the TRUTH? Feels good doesn’t it! How do you feel when somebody in front of you lies to you and you know it is a bold faced lie! This movie express the truths of yesterday and you will realize that it is not your thinking that is wrong but the undeniable lies in your face being told to you every day of the week. These lies are constantly being spread everywhere from every sources of mass media communications known to man. Wake up America! This is the dissonance that runs rampant in our societies today and causes the pain felt by so many of us.

    It takes COURAGE to realize this movie is a wake up call. Run don’t walk to see this movie. You will not be disappointed. You will sing with joy in knowing your heart is still alive and you heart is still functioning as it should be functioning.

    Grab hold of your courage and get your thinking screwed back on straight before it is too late. The establishment is pushing on all fronts because they know they are losing control and they are as dangerous as a cornered dog. People are waking up on all levels and this movie will push that envelope even farther out. Its’ timing could not come at a better time. You could even say it is in Divine order because it is.

    During these confusing times we all should be looking high and low for a stable network of people built on the principles of FAITH, FAMILY AND FRIENDS. Only a unified community for the good of all will push us all through these dark times into the sunlight shinning bright into the prosperity of the future. After crying throughout this movie and watching it to the very end and even through all of the movie credits, the lady in the back of the auditorium stood up and spoke out to me. “Did you like it as much as we did?” As I was standing up my reply came out, “Wow! I am sure glad I came by myself because it would have been an embarrassment for somebody to see a grown man cry through out an entire movie.”

    I now know why Chuck Norris has been reported to cry while watching this movie. He really is one disciplined well-trained marshal-arts fighter, and it would be a big mistake to challenge his courage or to go up against him in a hand-to-hand combat situation. So if Mr. Norris can cry and have it admitted, I too can cry and I am not embarrassed to admit it. Thank you Mr. Norris for bringing my awareness to “The Last Ounce of Courage.” I understand your approval is not connected to any financial gains from endorsing this project, so therefore it must be a matter of principle to you. A principle as in marshal-arts is always the true winner.

    I declare this movie a blockbuster before it is officially declared a blockbuster. Sad but true America does not really need another blockbuster. America needs to finally muster up its’ LAST OUNCE OF COURAGE” based on principles and get its minds screwed back on straight. Run don’t walk to see this movie with all your strength and your “Last Ounce of Courage” before it is too late.

  149. Clynn

    That was quite an endorsement/review. I am not sure if it is real or a satire. Perhaps I need another cup of coffee.

    I am planning on seeing it if my days would settle down a bit. The thing that bothered me about your review is that it seemed like a “rah hoo rah” without much substance. Chuck Norris cried? That is an endorsement?

    Anyway,  could you describe the plot, the assumptions, the conflicts, etc.? In other words, I would like some substance.

  150. HUG, Numo, found your comments re Baathism interesting. I vaguely remember Khrushchev and the Soviets cultivating the Baathists from the 50s onwards, but whether that was just realpolitik in having client states in the Middle East I am not sure. It’s true that the Nazis did cultivate some Arab and Muslim movements in WWII, as did the Italians to a lesser degree, but overall the returns they got, apart from the serious anti-British revolts in Iraq and Iran, appear to have been disappointingly small (for them!). For example, not many Arabs flocked to either the German or Italian banners to fight. Arguably the Waffen SS was more successful in recruiting other Europeans than it was the peoples of the Middle East.

  151. Hi Hester, thanks for your comment re David Barton. Although I do live in the UK I follow trends in both the US and Russia (and other countries) as inevitably they can have consequences for the rest of the world. Factions in several countries right now seem to have an interest in rereading or rewriting history (including, unfortunately, China and Japan) which can be very alarming.

  152. “The Last Ounce Of Sanity?”

    Magog and Country, ultimately leaving descanting views in deathcamps? 


    First it was just words. 

    Then it was rocks thrown through places of business, 

    Then representation leading, then receiving removed, 

    Then faceless vandalism, segregation, transport, and then faceless death.

    What ever are you talking about, Sopy?


    One would think that a movie of dis here nature, would possibly question us, of what dis here country is really all about?

    Courage: “While America Slept” ?

    What is dis country, this great experiment about anyway? Is it notz religious and political freedom? 

    Isn’t dis here film asking some good questions, (albeit clumsily)  stimulating good topics for some lively discussions? 


    An exasperated cheese ball Christian film about the ‘potential loss’ of American freedoms this country has held dear in excess of 236 years? Is that loss even possible?

    Trick or Treat? -snicker-

    (dark cloud loom?)

    Is Wartburg Watch being clubbed to death? Has the Wartburg Watch become an underwater theatrical comedy about tiny, lost fish taking center stage? or is it still a Christ centered blog designed to help you live out your Christian faith, with discernment and awareness? Is dissecting a slow death of a thousand cuts, the order of the day?

    Was this movie extremely thought provoking and vividly message clear: Civil disobedience in the face of rising tyranny? “Protect or loose” ?!?

    (For some, they may have absolutely no idea what this movie is talking about.  (Juz anodder X-Mas war, Vern!)


    Ahem! Freedom is not given, it is earned. 

    Once it is lost, it is kind hard ta get it back.  Ask Dietrich Bonhoeffer? Heck, ask Mac, or Georgie Patton?

    Couch potatoes and Monday morning quarterbacking not withstanding.

    “How can it come to this, an army of rabble…peasants?” “Everything will change…” “Everything has changed…”




  153. “Courage Non-Existant: Evil is Resident?”

    HowDee YaAll,

    Google or Yahoo this: Last Ounce” argues that the American people are slowly but surely being robbed of our freedoms by Big Government. Though no doubt earnest, that message is hampered by heavy-handedness. It feels like a political attack ad created by a group of passionate but unpolished novices.”

    You get this: (The Party Line) learn it well… :

    ‘Last Ounce’ likely to win few converts!

    ‘Last Ounce of Courage’ preaches to outraged choir!

    ‘Last Ounce of Courage’: Preaching to the aggrieved choir!

     ‘Last Ounce of Courage’ preaches to its choir!

    Movie about keeping ‘Christ’ in Christmas, ‘Last Ounce of Courage,’ plays squarely to folks who feel that Christians today are persecuted!

    Mayor valiantly fights the war on Christmas!

    Amateur feel overtakes story!

    Ham-handed ‘Courage’ fights the war on Christmas!

    ‘Courage’ preaches to aggrieved!

    A small-town mayor fights to put the Christ back in Christmas?

     “Last Ounce” is a workmanlike, if treacly and overblown, piece of propaganda!


    >>—-> Does the also current film, ‘Retribution’, offer a  revelation? huh?

    “Nobudy cares.”


    …friends, “Alice” must fight to survive long enough to escape a hostile world on the brink of oblivion. The countdown has begun.  Evil is Resident?