New World Disorder


President Bush signs S. 3930, the Military Commissions Act of 2006, in the East Room of the White House, October 17, 2006.	Opponents of Military Commissions Act at White House While President Signs Act into Law.

A number of recent actions and decisions by the courts and by our legislators have been perceived by many people on both sides of the issues as an unprecedented departure from the protections afforded to us by our US Constitution. These new decisions appear to be weakening our long standing history of justice and liberty.

The Spirit of Prophecy describes this change in direction as a deviation from the “principles of Protestantism.” And when these principles have been abandoned, a time of cruelty and tyranny will be seen throughout our nation. This terrible state of affairs will inevitably result in the establishment of a National Sunday Law.

“Our land is in jeopardy. The time is drawing on when its legislators shall so abjure the principles of Protestantism as to give countenance to Romish apostasy…and thus arouse the tyranny which only waits for a touch to start again into cruelty and despotism.” Spirit of Prophecy, Vol. 4, p. 410.

What are the “principles of Protestantism” that our legislators will repudiate?

“The Declaration of Independence sets forth the great truth that ‘all men are created equal,’ and endowed with the inalienable right to ‘life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.’ And the Constitution guarantees to the people the right of self-government, providing that representatives elected by the popular vote shall enact and administer the laws. Freedom of religious faith was also granted, every man being permitted to worship God according to the dictates of his conscience. Republicanism and Protestantism became the fundamental principles of the nation. These principles are the secret of its power and prosperity.” The Great Controversy, p. 441.

Ellen White says that the “Declaration of Independence” and the “Constitution” are both principles of Protestantism. Within the US Constitution is found the Bill of Rights, a statement of legal privileges which may not be taken away from an individual by the civil government, by a religious institution, or by any other entity. These include freedom of religion, right to life, and liberty. No wonder God’s great adversary, the devil, and his agents, the Papacy, and all Islamic extremists, have an intense hatred against our US Constitution—because the Constitution has been a safeguard against tyranny and despotism. Sadly, we are seeing a gradual erosion and subtle departure of the noble principles of Protestantism.

The Third Amendment to the Constitution affirms the property rights of American citizens. The right of private property and privacy is the most human right of all. A man’s home is his castle. A man’s family, his wife and children, is his most precious possession in this world.

However, a clause in the Fifth Amendment also states: “nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

The right of civil government to take over a person’s land or other private property for “public use” is called the right of eminent domain. If a local, state, or federal government needs to build a road or a highway across a person’s land, the government must pay the person a fair price for that portion of his land. The Constitution does give room for eminent domain but only for “public use.” It was used to secure land to build railroad systems, the interstate highway systems, airports, and national park systems which benefits everyone.

But in June 24, 2005 the US Supreme Court ruled that eminent domain could be extended to include the economic interest of private parties. In other words, one person’s property can be taken and given to another for the purpose of advancing the economic interest of private individuals, such as a sports stadium or a developer intending to build a shopping center, condominiums, or a large pharmaceutical research center.

Many local city and state governments have been forcing low-income and elderly residents from their homes and giving it to private land developers for the purpose of economic development, which will increase tax revenues for the state.

Now the US Supreme Court has opted to side with state and local government who are in bed with corporate land developers. The government benefits by raising its tax revenues. Large corporate land firms triple their profits after they demolish a neighborhood and build new construction projects. And what about the homeowners who have no influence or power in the political processes? Hardworking Americans nationwide are fighting tooth and nail to save their homes and small businesses from eminent domain abuses.

According to a June 24, 2205 article by Charles Lane that appeared in the Washington Post, more than 10,000 eminent domain abuse cases were being fought in courts throughout 41 states here in America. And the courts overwhelmingly seem to favor the private powerful developers and city councils instead of the hard working citizens.

Eminent domain, when abused, forces lower-income working-class families off their properties to make room for luxury condominiums, hotels, and upscale retail stores. And the government sides where they see the money. When eminent domain is used for “economic development” it benefits private parties and falls short from the “public use” clause found in the US Constitution. And this is a gross violation and disregard for private property rights and is just another example in how our freedoms are eroding.

The language of the Fourth Amendment is unmistakably clear. It protects us against unreasonable and unlawful searches by civil authorities without a warrant. The Amendment clearly states that in order to obtain a search warrant, a law officer, under oath, must give a judge sufficient reasons as to why the search is necessary. Only after “probable cause” can a judge give a written sta

tement which gives the legal right for the search to take place. Our federal government has completely circumvented the Fourth Amendment. Under a secret program which began sometime after September 11, 2001, the National Security Agency [NSA] began collecting telephone call logs from AT&T, Bell South, and Verizon. Even though the NSA did not provide a court order, they began monitoring the records of millions of private citizens and in some cases they were wiretapping people’s homes.

The secret NSA wiretap program was unknown to the American public until Russell Tice, a former senior official of the NSA for over 20 years, blew the whistle in a December 15, 2005 article that appeared in The New York Times.

The New York Times article created a large outcry from so many people that on December 19, 2005 the US General Attorney, Alberto Gonzales, had to admit in a news conference that the NSA had been authorized to listen in on Americans without a court-appointed warrant. He explained that the plan was a critical tool in helping to quickly disrupt terrorist plots and prevent attacks inside the United States.

Not accepting those reasons, the American Civil Liberties Union [ACLU] filed a lawsuit against the NSA on January 17, 2006 [ACLU v. NSA]. District Court Judge Anna Diggs Taylor ruled that the NSA surveillance program was unconstitutional and illegal, and ordered that it be halted immediately, and that warrants must first be obtained in order for the wiretaps to continue.

The federal government has appealed the case, and the legality and constitutionality of this is still being debated. However, the NSA program, though not secret anymore, continues.

On July 20, 2006, President Bush addressed the NAACP annual convention at the Washington Convention Center in Washington, D.C.

In his speech he spoke about the need for government partnership with “institutions of faith” to help solve the problems of America. Then he revealed that he has already provided more than $5 billion to faith-based groups throughout America that are running community services.

The faith-based initiatives was a policy that was created by the President through an executive order. It is currently being challenged by the courts as an entanglement of church and state.

What a travesty! Today we are witnessing the repudiation of our long-standing, Protestant principle of separation of Church and state. All this is being done under the name of “charity.” Who wouldn’t want to support charity? Do you see the subtlety of the serpent, dear reade

r? (Gen. 3:1). But we know from prophecy what the end result will be:

“The leaders of the Sunday movement may advocate reforms which the people need, principles which are in harmony with the Bible: yet while there is with these a requirement which is contrary to God’s law, His servants cannot unite with them. Nothing can justify them in setting aside the commandments of God for the precepts of Men.” The Great Controversy, p. 587, 588.

In this same spirit we can also say that nothing, including charity, can justify the setting aside of one of the great landmarks of true Protestantism, the separation of church and state.

With one stroke of the pen, President Bush has “potentially” ended more than 200 years of our US Constitutional rights. On October 17, 2006, President Bush signed the Military Commissions Act of 2006 into law, a bill that was approved by both houses of Congress. Our government leaders have expressed that this law will help prevent future

terrorist attacks. The defense bill President Bush signed on Oct. 17 gives the federal government the right to arrest and imprison not only “alien enemy combatants,” but also “unlawful enemy combatants” and “lawful enemy combatants” and “ANYONE who is engaged in hostilities against the United States.” Military Commissions Act of 2006, pp. 11-13 [emphasis supplied].

This is something that should be of interest to Seventh-day Adventists. Because according to the Spirit of Prophecy, the true and faithful will been seen as engaging in the worst “hostilities” against the United States and the rest of the world?

“Those who honor the Bible Sabbath will be denounced as enemies of law and order, as breaking down the moral restraints of society, causing anarchy and corruption, and calling down the judgments of God upon the earth. Their conscientious scruples will be pronounced obstinacy, stubbornness, and contempt of authority. They will be accused of disaffection toward the government.” Great Controversy, p. 592.

“There will come a time when, because of our advocacy of Bible truth, we shall be treated as traitors.” Testimonies, Vol. 6, p. 394.

Enemies of law and order? Disaffection towards the government? Traitors? This new legislation, intended to help America win the war on terror, will no doubt be used against God’s people one day. The Spirit of Prophecy has warned us that those who are faithful to God will be accused of committing gross hostilities against their nation.

On pages 65-76 of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, there are listed 27 violations that are punishable under this new law, some of which can definitely apply to US citizens [spying, providing material support for terrorists, wrongfully aiding the enemy, conspiracy, ect.].

These new counter-terrorism strategies could very easily prepare the way for the abandonment of our basic fundamental rights found in the 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th Amendments of the US Constitution. It opens up military tribunals to try the crimes outlined in this new bill. Those arrested will be charged in military courts, and no court-issued arrest warrant is required. Furthermore, all criminal proceeding guaranteed by the US Constitution would be suspended, and you can be kept indefinitely. And if deemed necessary, certain interrogation techniques that civil-liberty groups have labeled as torture, could be used against you to obtain any information that you may be withholding.

Sleep deprivation, sensory deprivation, waterboarding, enforced stress positions, and other methods of extracting information or forcing confession have now become “officially” authorized.

On September 28, 2006, prior the passing of the Military Commission Act of 2006, Senator Ted Kennedy introduced an amendment to be added to this bill. This Amendment would have outlawed certain abuses during interrogations by U.S. personnel such as “beatings, electric shock, burns, or other forms of physical pain; waterboarding; using dogs; inducing hypothermia or heat injury; conducting mock executions.”

Sadly, Amendment No. 5088 was rejected the same day it was introduced by the US Senate by means of a vote of 53 to 46, with 1 not voting.

All the protections and the checks and balances in our US Constitution are not applicable in these military tribunals. It is very possible that these new measures, apparently created to help America win the war on terror, will be used against God’s people one day or against anyone, citizen or otherwise, deemed an enemy of the state. One thing is sure, when the principles of Protestantism are abandoned, and when this nation gives her support to the Roman apostasy, then will come “the tyranny which only waits for a touch to start again into cruelty and despotism” (Spirit of Prophecy, Vol. 4, p. 410).


Prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba being subjected to sensory depravation. Removing sight, smell, hearing, speech, and movement for extended periods of time creates extreme anxiety. These techniques are used to acquire intelligence and to encourage cooperation.	During the Roman Inquisition water torture was used to create the effect of drowning. This was a means to get forced confessions or to acquire information. This technique is known today as waterboarding and is used by military personnel under certain circumstances.

How many of our people realize what is happening today? When are we as Seventh-day Adventists going to wake up? Or are we just too busy? Or are too much at ease?

While the principles of liberty and freedom of conscience are being dangerously desecrated we are to work earnestly. We are in a time of emergency, God’s people must be found working.

“If they do nothing to disabuse the minds of the people, and through ignorance of the truth our legislature should abjure the principles of Protestantism, and give countenance and support to the Roman fallacy, the spurious Sabbath, God will hold His people who have had great light, responsible for their lack of diligence and faithfulness.” Review and Herald, December, 24, 1889.

Praise God for the faithful workers who are doing everything in their power to spread the Three Angels’ Messages. Praise God for Seventh-day Adventists who go against the grain today and who are not just satisfied with the present situation. But who are seeking with all their hearts not only their own salvation but the salvation of others.

Shame on those who are doing nothing today. Who are self-absorbed with their own interests, with the cares of this world, or the peace and safety ecumenical attitude, or with speculation and theories; thereby, disqualifying themselves from participating in the only message that is destined to turn into the “Loud Cry” message, the Three Angels’ Messages.

“Satan is ever ready to fill the mind with theories and calculations that will divert men from the present truth, and disqualify them for the giving of the third angel’s message to the world.” Review and Herald, March 22, 1892.

God help us to be faithful to our high calling, and to lift up high the principles of Protestantism along with the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.

VATICAN CITY—Christians have a responsibility to heal their divisions so that they can be a real sign of hope for the world, Pope Benedict XVI said.

"Those who profess that Jesus Christ is lord are tragically divided and cannot always give a consistent common witness," the pope said during an Oct. 27 meeting with representatives of the world's major Christian communities.

The Conference of Secretaries of Christian World Communions held its annual meeting in Rome. Since 1957, the conference has brought together top officials of the international offices of 18 Christian churches and denominations for informal discussions.

The secretary of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity has represented the Vatican at the meetings, which also include representatives of the Anglican Communion, mainline Protestant federations, the Salvation Army, Orthodox churches, Seventh-Day Adventists, Mennonites and others.

The group does not engage in an official dialogue, but rather serves as a forum for sharing information about the official dialogues and ways to support them.

Pope Benedict told the group, "The theological dialogues in which many Christian world communions have been engaged are characterized by a commitment to move beyond the things that divide, toward the unity in Christ which we seek.

"However daunting the journey, we must not lose sight of the final goal: full visible communion in Christ and in the church," he said.

On November 3, 2006, a report appeared on the Vatican News Service written by Cindy Wooden. Wooden was reporting on an October 27, 2006 meeting between Pope Benedict XVI and representatives of the world’s major Christian communities, which included Seventh-day Adventists. The title of the article posted was “Pope Says Christians Must Heal Divisions to be Sign of Hope.” Wooden quoted the Pope as stating, “Those who profess that Jesus Christ is Lord are tragically divided and cannot always give a consistent common witness.”

“And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.” Revelation 13:3.

Could this be the healing that the pope is calling upon all Christians to partake of, in order to be a sign of hope? What other healing is the papacy interested in if not her own healing?

In this October 27, 2006 meeting, we clearly see another step in how the fulfillment of this healing of the deadly wound has been steadily progressing. Even Seventh-day Adventists are contributing to help bring about this dreadful healing. We should be asking ourselves, “Where is the spirit of true Protestantism today?”

“Protestantism shall give the hand of fellowship with the Roman power.” Bible Commentary, Vol. 7, p. 910.

This is a betrayal of the entire Reformation movement. Many faithful Reformers, men like John Wycliff, John Huss, Martin Luther, began testifying and preaching to their fellow Catholics. During the Protestant Reformation millions of faithful Christians who refused to honor the pope suffered terrible deaths. Did they do so in vain? Was the Reformation a terrible mistake? Are we now, 400 years later, starting to recognize that all of this was just an awful misunderstanding, and too bad for all the martyrs who died for nothing?

The dogmas for which the martyrs were slain—refusing transubstantiation, purgatory, worship of saints, homage to the Pope, and a list of other distorted rituals—have not changed! And if Catholicism hasn’t changed, and if the differences between Roman Catholic theology and the Reformation

theology of the 16th Century are still at odds than why are modern day Protestants and Seventh-day Adventists seeking to heal their divisions with Rome?

“This union will not, however, be effected by a change in Catholicism; for Rome never changes. She claims infallibility. It is Protestantism that will change.” Review and Herald, June 1, 1886.

We are the ones who are changing. Adventism is what is changing. No more emphasis of the historic principles of Protestantism. You see, in Seventh-day Adventism we have the law of God, the faith of Jesus, and the principles of Protestantism. But all that is changing. There is less and less emphasis of the historic, foundational messages.

Wooden continues quoting the Pope: “The theological dialogues in which many Christian world communions have been engaged are characterized by a commitment to move beyond the things that divide toward the unity in Christ which we seek.”

This all sounds very noble and Christian, dear reader, but we must note the bottom-line aim of the Papacy below:

“There is one pointed out in prophecy as the man of sin. He is the representative of Satan. Taking the suggestions of Satan concerning the law of God, which is as unchangeable as His throne, this man of sin comes in and represents to the world that he has changed that law, and that the first day of the week instead of the seventh is now the Sabbath. Professing infallibility, he claims the right to change the law of God to suit his own purposes. By so doing, he exalts himself above God, and leaves the world to infer that God is fallible. If it were indeed true that God had made a rule of government that needed to be changed, it would certainly show fallibility. But Christ declared that not one jot or tittle of the law should fail until heaven and earth should pass away. The very work that He came to do was to exalt that law, and show to the created worlds and to heaven that God is just, and that His law need not be changed. But here is Satan's right-hand man ready to carry on the work that Satan commenced in heaven, that of trying to amend the law of God.” Bible Commentary, Vol. 7, p. 910.

You cannot shake hands with “Satan’s right-hand man” and then say to God that you were only kidding. How can anyone who bears the name Seventh-day Adventist, a name that is a striking rebuke to those churches who presume to have changed the law of God, work towards having a “consistent common witness” with them? The very name “Seventh-day Adventist” is inconsistent with the “consistent common witness” that the Pope speaks of.

“The name Seventh-day Adventist is a standing rebuke to the Protestant world. Here is the line of distinction between the worshipers of God and those who worship the beast and receive his mark. The great conflict [not unity] is between the commandments of God and the requirements of the beast. It is because the saints are keeping all ten of the commandments that the dragon makes war upon them. If they will lower the standard and yield the peculiarities of their faith, the dragon will be at peace [meaning, the wounds would be healed]; but they excite his ire because they have dared to raise the standard and unfurl their banner in opposition to the Protestant world, who are worshiping the institution of papacy.” Testimonies, Vol. 1, p. 223.

Obviously God’s Word leaves us without a middle ground. We are either helping to heal the wound by being at peace with the antichrist system, or we are preaching the messages found in Revelation 14 and will be in open conflict against the beast and its image.

Furthermore, Wooden quoted Pope Benedict XVI as stating the Vatican’s bottom-line purpose and goal for dialogue with the major Protestant denominations, “...we must not lose sight of the final goal: full visible communion in Christ and in the church.”

However, Ellen White wrote about this kind of unity when she said, “If unity could be secured only by the compromise of truth and righteousness, then let there be difference, and even war” (The Great Controversy, p. 45).

Will we wake up to this apparent ecumenical crisis? This meeting with the Pope is a terrible neglect and dereliction of duty on the part of the leadership. This blatant disregard of the counsels of God cannot continue for too long. Something’s got to give; and if ecumenism is pursued to its conclusion — full visible communion with the man of sin — then what will cease to exist is true Adventism. The final end of ecumenism is to defeat the historic Seventh-day Adventist message.

“His watchmen are blind: they are all ignorant, they are all dumb dogs, they cannot bark; sleeping, lying down, loving to slumber.” Isaiah 56:10

Is this not a description of the ecumenical movement and of the peaceful, comfortable environment that it creates? They are all at ease. His watchmen are blind which means that they can’t recognize what they are really doing. Is this not a description of the Laodicean condition?

“Yea, they are greedy dogs which can never have enough, and they are shepherds that cannot understand: they all look to their own way, every one for his gain, from his quarter.” Isaiah 56:11.

When men seek for their own interest it is because they are greedy. They don’t care about the salvation of souls. They don’t care about the Three Angels’ Messages. They don’t care about the needs of the church or the spiritual health of God’s people.

“Come ye, say they, I will fetch wine, and we will fill ourselves with strong drink; and tomorrow shall be as this day, and much more abundant. Isaiah 56:12.

No wonder men cannot discern all the counsels of God because they have been partaking of the wine of ecumenism. And where have they been receiving it from? Who’s giving it to us. For over 40 years the whole world has been joining in the ecumenical festivities, the wine drinking [theological dialogs]. And we are in danger of forever losing our spiritual vision and destiny which God has given to the Seventh-day Adventist people.

“And the daughter of any priest, if she profane herself by playing the whore, she profaneth her father.” Leviticus 21:9.

Who is the spiritual daughter that is profaning not just herself, but also the name of her Father? Friends we are the daughter, the woman, the bride of Christ, that is called to uphold the name of our God in holiness and purity; but clearly, the Word of God is declaring to us that we bring dishonor to our Father’s name when we engage in spiritual promiscuity with the man of sin.

October 27, 2006 was the most recent, “secret” rendezvous that the SDA leadership had with the antichrist. But we can praise God that not everybody is going to be uniting with the antichrist system in the last days.

“All society is ranging into two great classes, the obedient and the disobedient. Among which class shall we be found? Those who keep God's commandments, those who live not by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God, compose the church of the living God. Those who choose to follow antichrist are subjects of the great apostate. Ranged under the banner of Satan, they break God's law and lead others to break it.” Bible Commentary, Vol. 7, page 949.

“Warn every soul that is in danger. Leave none to deceive themselves. Call sin by its right name. Declare what God has said in regard to lying, Sabbathbreaking, stealing, idolatry, and every other evil. ‘They which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.’ Gal. 5:21. If they persist in sin, the judgment you have declared from God’s word is pronounced upon them in heaven. In choosing to sin, they disown Christ; the church must show that she does not sanction their deeds, or she herself dishonors her Lord. She must say about sin what God says about it. She must deal with it as God directs…” Desire of Ages, p. 806.

“If there is one thing upon this earth that mankind love and admire better than another, it is a brave man; it is the man who dares to look the devil in the face and tell him he is a devil.” James A. Garfield, 20th President of the United States.

Special thanks to Neil Livingston of Spokane, WA for helping to contribute to this article.

Representatives of the worldwide Seventh-day Adventist Church and the World Evangelical Alliance (WEA) met in dialogue August 8-11, 2006 on the campus of the International Baptist Theological Seminary, located in Prague, Czech Republic. Although informal contacts had occurred during the past 50 years, this was the first official meeting of the two groups.

The purposes of the dialogue were: to gain a clearer understanding of the theological positions of each body; to clarify matters of misunderstanding; to discuss frankly areas of agreement and disagreement on a Biblical basis; and to explore possible areas of cooperation.

Representing the Evangelical Alliance were: Dr. Rolf Hille (Tuebingen /Germany), chairman of the Theological Commission, WEA; Dr. Juerg Buchegger; Pastor James Kautt; Dr. Herbert Klement; Dr. Ian Randall, joined by theological expert Dr. Reinhard Hempelmann. The Seventh-day Adventist representatives were: Dr. John Graz (Silver Spring, MD/USA), Secretary of the Council on Interchurch / Interfaith Relations; Dr. Niels-Erik Andreasen; Dr. Bert B. Beach; Dr. Kwabena Donkor; Dr. Eugene Hsu; Dr. William Johnsson; Dr. Teresa Reeve; and Dr. Angel Rodriguez. Drs. Hille and Graz co-chaired the discussions.

The dialogue proceeded via several papers and presentations that described the respective profiles of Adventists and the Alliance. Representatives discussed the platform of beliefs held in common by Evangelicals: the Holy Scriptures, the Trinity, the Lord Jesus Christ, justification by faith, the new birth, the unity of the Spirit, and the Resurrection. They also considered Adventist presentations on the interpretation of Scripture; Gospel, Law, and the Sabbath; and relations with other churches.

Representatives participated together in daily worship and fellowship. The dialogue revealed a large measure of common ground as agreement was found between the beliefs of the Evangelical Alliance Statement of Faith and the Adventist Statement of Fundamental Beliefs; further, the two groups shared a spirit of devotion and piety, a strong belief in the inspiration and authority of Scripture, and a common concern for united Christian witness in an age of increasing secularism and religious pluralism.

The meeting concluded by planning for a second round of discussions to be held August 6-10, 2007, on the campus of Andrews University, Berrien Springs, Michigan, USA. Topics to be covered include the role and authority of Ellen White; Adventists' approach to Biblical apocalyptic, including the teaching of the pre-Advent judgment and the Remnant; and trends among Evangelicals worldwide.

The Evangelical World Alliance represents some 420 million evangelical Christians in 127 countries drawn from many denominations. The Seventh-day Adventist Church, a Christian World Communion, has more than 30 million members and adepts in 204 countries.

A delegation from the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) were welcomed on November 1 at the Adventist Church Headquarters in Silver Spring, Maryland (U.S.A.) by Halvard Thomsen, assistant to the president of the Seventh-day Adventist Church for North America., for official conversations between the Adventists and Presbyterians. Thomsen expressed "appreciation for the opportunity to sharpen our friendship" as the Adventist-Presbyterian dialogue continued. Responding, Dr Carlos Malave, leader of the Presbyterian delegation, spoke of his delight that his work "was to make friends," and spoke of the spiritual unity described by Jesus in John 17. "To be one church is a spiritual church, and it is not necessary that there should be one visible church. We are one together in Christian love, love that comes from Christian faith, love for one another for the sake of the gospel."

After the meetings, the dialogue partners released the following joint statement:

"Representatives of the Seventh-day Adventist Church and the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) engaged in dialogue on November 1, 2006, at the Adventist world headquarters in Silver Spring, Maryland. The purpose of the dialogue was to gain a clearer understanding of each faith community’s beliefs and practices; to clarify areas of misunderstanding; and to explore possible areas of cooperation.

The Adventist Church engages in conversation with other churches, but is not a member of the ecumenical movement in the United States or internationally. The 2.4 million-member Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) has a strong commitment to improve relations among churches in the United States.

The dialogue centered in two formal presentations, followed by discussion. William G. Johnsson, editor of the Adventist Review, presented a profile of Seventh-day Adventists; and Sheldon Sorge from the Presbyterian Church’s Office of Theology and Worship (U.S.A.) shared the history, teachings, and ethos of his church.

Other participants in the dialogue were Adventists John Graz, director of Public Affairs and Religious Liberty at the General Conference; Angel Rodriguez, director of the Biblical Research Institute; Kwabena Donkor, associate director of the Biblical Research Institute; Bert B. Beach, retired Adventist statesman; and Halvard Thomsen, assistant to the president for the North American Division.

The Presbyterian representatives were Carlos L. Malavé, associate for Ecumenical Relations and assistant stated clerk at the Office of the General Assembly; Eunice McGarrahan, a pastor at the National Presbyterian Church in Washington, D.C.; Aurelio Garcia, associate professor of Humanities at the University of Puerto Rico; and David Jensen, associate professor of Constructive Theology at Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary.

The dialogue was co-chaired by Graz and Malavé, and was described by participants as being marked by a spirit of friendliness, openness, and desire to understand.

A second round of conversations, hosted by the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), will be held August 22-24, 2007, at the Presbyterian Center in Louisville, Kentucky."

CLEVELAND - City schools will expand sex education curriculum to include age-appropriate lessons that begin as early as kindergarten, officials said. The initiative comes as Cleveland's teen birth rates are high but dropping - about 40 of every 1,000 girls ages 15-19 become pregnant every year, according to state data - and rates of some sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV, are rising.

Cases of chlamydia, the most common STD, rose 30 percent over the past five years while HIV, rarely diagnosed in adolescents, turned up in 19 Cuyahoga County teens. "One-third of all the HIV/AIDS cases in Ohio are in Cleveland," said Lita Townsend, responsible sexual behavior coordinator for the district. "Really, the best weapon we have right now is education."

Cleveland schools already offer sex education to many of their middle- and high-school students. The schools also are required to teach HIV prevention.

The new classes, which begin soon, will address self-esteem and peer pressure as well as biology. Children in grades K-3 will learn about how viruses work and appropriate and inappropriate touching. Grades 4-6 will start learning about menstruation and other aspects of reproductive health.

In grades 7-12, the discussion shifts to interpersonal relationships, HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases, teen pregnancy and respect for sexual orientation. Abortion will be explained and defined but not promoted, said Townsend, adding that she's unaware of other programs in the state that target every grade level.

WASHINGTON -- A leader of the new Democratic Congress, business travelers and privacy advocates expressed outrage Friday over the unannounced assignment of terrorism risk assessments to American international travelers by a computerized system managed from an unmarked, two-story brick building in Northern Virginia.

Incoming Senate Judiciary Chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont pledged greater scrutiny of such government database-mining projects after reading that during the past four years millions of Americans have been evaluated without their knowledge to assess the risks that they are terrorists or criminals.

"Data banks like this are overdue for oversight," said Leahy, who will take over Judiciary in January. "That is going to change in the new Congress."

The Associated Press reported Thursday that Americans and foreigners crossing U.S. borders since 2002 have been assessed by the Homeland Security Department's computerized Automated Targeting System, or ATS.

The travelers are not allowed to see or directly challenge these risk assessments, which the government intends to keep on file for 40 years. Some or all data in the system can be shared with state, local and foreign governments for use in hiring, contracting and licensing decisions. Courts and even some private contractors can obtain some of the data under certain circumstances.

"It is simply incredible that the US administration is willing to share this sensitive information with foreign governments and even private employers, while refusing to allow U.S. citizens to see or challenge their own terror scores," Leahy said. This system "highlights the danger of government use of technology to conduct widespread surveillance of our daily lives without proper safeguards for privacy."

The concerns spread beyond Congress. "I have never seen anything as egregious as this," said Kevin Mitchell, president of the Business Travel Coalition, which advocates for business travelers. It's "evidence of what can happen when there isn't proper oversight and accountability."

By late Friday, the government had received 22 written public comments about its after-the-fact disclosure of the program last month in the Federal Register, a fine-print compendium of federal rules. All either opposed it outright or objected to the lack of a direct means for people to correct any errors in the database about themselves.

"As a U.S. citizen who spends much time outside the U.S., I can understand the need for good security," wrote one who identified himself as Colin Edmunds. "However, just as I would not participate in a banking/credit card system where I have no recourse to correct or even view my personal data, I cannot accept the same of my government."

Privacy advocates also were alarmed. "Never before in American history has our government gotten into the business of creating mass `risk assessment' ratings of its own citizens," said Barry Steinhardt, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union. "We are stunned" the program has been undertaken "with virtually no opportunity for the public to evaluate or comment on it."

*The following article shows a dangerous pattern that is coming to America. Very soon there will be laws against making historical or factual statements such as “the Pope is the Antichrist” or “Sunday will become the mark of the Beast.”

Careful -- in some places you can be arrested if you give the wrong answer to that question. Under Article 305 of the Turkish Penal Code, for example, those who promote ``recognition of the Armenian genocide" are subject to prosecution, while Article 301 makes the denigration of ``Turkishness" a crime punishable by up to three years in prison. The Turkish novelist Orhan Pamuk , winner of the 2006 Nobel Prize for Literature, is among those who have been charged under Article 301. His offense was to tell a Swiss interviewer that ``30,000 Kurds and a million Armenians were killed in these lands, and nobody but me dares to talk about it."

Yet if acknowledging the Armenian genocide is a crime in Turkey, denying it could soon be a crime in France. Last week the French National Assembly voted to approve a bill under which anyone denying the 1915 genocide could be sentenced to a year's imprisonment and a 45,000-euro ($56,000) fine. That matches the penalty under French law for denying the Nazi Holocaust .

The French legislation is meant to uphold the truth -- the Armenian genocide, like the Holocaust, is a fact of history -- while the point of the Turkish law is to debase it. Both, however, are intolerable assaults on liberty. Beliefs should not be criminalized, no matter how repugnant or absurd. As I wrote when David Irving was convicted of Holocaust denial in Austria earlier this year, free societies do not throw people in prison for giving offensive speeches or spouting historical lies.

We Americans should know this better than anyone. The right to speak one's mind is supposed to be a core article of our civic faith. Yet the would-be censors are busy here, too.

At Columbia University two weeks ago, a forum on immigration was to feature a speech by Jim Gilchrist of the Minutemen, a group that monitors the US-Mexico border for illegal immigrants. But moments after Gilchrist began speaking, protesters led by members of the International Socialist Organization stormed the stage, overturning tables, unfurling banners, and yelling insults. After 15 minutes of pandemonium, campus police shut down the program .

In Seattle, two teachers are suing the affluent Lakeside prep school for illegal racial discrimination and the creation of a hostile work environment. ``Among the plaintiffs' complaints," reports the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, ``was Lakeside's invitation to conservative commentator Dinesh D'Souza to speak as part of a distinguished lecture series." But D'Souza, a fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution and a veteran of the Reagan White House, never gave the lecture: Faculty members opposed to his views howled when he was invited, and the school's headmaster, bowing to the censors, rescinded the invitation.

Asked about the campaign against him, D'Souza had said: ``I am coming to speak on one day. If they think what I am saying is so awful, they have the rest of the year to refute it." But that isn't enough for the enemies of free speech. They insist not only that speakers with politically incorrect opinions be shunned, but that anyone offering them a platform be punished as well.

Environmental writer Mark Lynas, for example, puts dissent on climate change ``in a similar moral category to Holocaust denial -- except that this time the Holocaust is yet to come, and we still have time to avoid it. Those who try to ensure we don't will one day have to answer for their crimes." This totalitarian view is taking root everywhere, making skepticism on climate change taboo and subjecting anyone reckless enough to question the global-warming dogma to mockery and demonization.

Former vice president Al Gore lumps ``global warming deniers," some of whom are eminent scientists, with the ``15 percent of the population (who) believe the moon landing was actually staged in a movie lot in Arizona" and those who ``still believe the earth is flat."

The silencers are at work in the marketplace of ideas, using hook or crook to smother opinions they dislike. The lust to censor is as powerful as ever. If only liberty's defenders were equally vigilant.