U.S. Elections and the Evangelicals.

For the first time in its history, the United States no longer have a Protestant majority, according to a recent study. This was a major American media headlines this week.
Since the Pilgrims arrived, America was a nation predominantly Protestant. But the century brought drastic changes. The percentage of adults in the U.S. Protestants reached 48 percent in its steady decline since decades ago. Meanwhile, the number of Americans who have no religion is growing, especially among brancos.Essa is the first time that the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life reported with certainty that the number of Protestants fell down 50 percent.
This decrease was already long overdue and comes at a time when the U.S. Supreme Court has no judge Protestant, and when the Republican Party, whose leaders are historically Protestant, has a candidate for president and vice president who are not Protestants . Among the reasons for the change is that large traditional Protestant denominations, embraced an aggressive liberalism that has produced pastors Presbyterians, Lutherans and Anglicans gay, has removed more conservative members, who seek alternatives, including the non-denominational churches, which are mostly charismatic and neo-Pentecostal. The most charismatic churches are more conservative, more closed to the ordination of gay pastors and more open to the Holy Spirit and his gifts, while large U.S. traditional Protestant denominations are usually the exact opposite: they are more progressive, more open to the ordination of gay pastors and more closed to the Holy Spirit and his gifts. But not everyone is opting for non-denominational churches. A large number of members simply abandons the traditional Protestant churches and is without religion. The number of those Americans who want no religion now stands at 20 percent.
According to recent report, "43% of evangelicals in their late teens and young adults have left the traditional church [Presbyterian, Lutheran, Baptist, etc..] To follow more liberal beliefs."
The major concern is that with the explosive growth of liberalism in Protestant churches and steady loss of members, Protestantism in the U.S. is following the path of Europe where the Reformation churches are struggling not to die. This trend has political implications, including for America's future.
American voters who describe themselves as having no religion voted overwhelmingly in political leftists, who already had considerable support from voters Protestant progressives.
Pew found that Americans who have no religion supports abortion and gay "marriage" in a much higher rate than the Protestant progressives.
Evangelicals progressives have always been an important constituency of the Democratic Party aggressively leftist line. But now Americans without religion show voters be stronger for that party.
President Barack Obama, who is the Democratic Party, is a progressive evangelical and great promoter of Islam.
Conservative evangelicals, composed largely of charismatic, Pentecostal and neo-Pentecostal, prefer the Republican Party, which has relatively less progressive political goals, but is becoming less conservative and evangelical is under less influence.
For the first time in the history of the Republican Party, the candidate for president, Mitt Romney is a man belonging to Mormonism, a non-Christian cult.
The conservative Christian voter is faced with a cruel dilemma in choosing candidates in the presidential race of 2012: a Mormon or a dubious intentions of progressive evangelical who leaves no doubt regarding its intention already well known to impose the gay agenda in the world whole, with the powerful machine of the U.S. government.
Romney may be less aggressive, but its political history is also progressive. The first U.S. state to legalize gay "marriage" was Massachusetts, under the government of Romney.

Thus, the competition of 2012 is between a Mormon with a progressive evangelical progressive madly.

The conservative moral decisive breakthrough today in American politics and society has been done mostly by neo-Pentecostal and charismatic, but they do not yet have the numbers and social and political power that the traditional Protestant churches had until recently. Rather, conservatism charismatic faces resistance from the American left, is of historic churches that have embraced liberalism or the media itself pro-abortion and pro-gay "marriage".
What could save U.S. evangelicals a catastrophic fate is back among the major Protestant denominations, the example of Anthony Comstock, a nineteenth-century American evangelical considered champion in the fight against pornography, contraception and abortion.


Union European,  of The wars Nobel Peace

The Nobel Peace Prize awards a Europe that is promoting a brutal offensive against workers' rights, making cuts in basic rights such as education and health. Government policies of member countries, all formulated and imposed from Brussels, the EU's headquarters, generate the growth of poverty and social inequality, as well as the bottleneck and the loss of sovereignty of weaker countries, on behalf of the interests of creditor banks and hegemonic European powers - Germany and France.
The European Union is awarded the Nobel Peace Prize is the same as chasing immigrants and militarizing increasingly supports the reactionary regimes in the Middle East and gives a strong hand to the Zionist Israeli policy of massacres of the Palestinian people.
The European Union is complicit in the "war on terror", so it supported the aggressions against Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya, silent on the attacks with unmanned drones on the border between Pakistan and Afghanistan and advocates military intervention in Syria, besides acting in conjunction with the U.S. policy of sanctions against Iran and Korea Popular. Likewise, the European Union is complicit blockade against Cuba and is involved in the blink provocations Bolivarian Venezuela.
On the same day the award was announced, the Portuguese Council for Peace and Cooperation (CPPC), an entity that integrates the World Peace Council, a member of the Executive Committee and European regional coordinator, issued a statement placing itself on the decision, considering it "at least questionable."
The memo notes that the pacifists Portuguese is necessary to recall "that over the last decades the European Union has played a militarization process, accelerated since 1999, after having played a crucial role in the violent breakup of Yugoslavia and later the brutal military aggression to this country, culminating in the process of secession from Serbia's Kosovo province in absentia of international law. "
The document of the Portuguese Council for Peace and Cooperation also noted that since the NATO Summit held in Washington in 1999, the European Union received the assignment to establish itself as the European pillar of the military-political bloc led by the USA. According to the SCLC, "this then this paper has been affirmed and strengthened, notably since 2002 and with the approval of the Lisbon Treaty."
In a clear rebuttal of character "pacifist" of the EU, the SCLC indicates that this block over the past decades, "has starred and supported all military aggression and NATO or its members against the sovereignty and independence of individual states, as Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and now in Syria, as well as violent regimes of sanctions that hit hard the people of various countries. "
The Portuguese entity considers that the positions and actions by the EU protagonized contradict "the principles enshrined in the UN Charter - respect of state sovereignty and non-interference in their internal affairs, on the contrary, promoting a growing and unceasing militarization of relations international, being compliant with human rights violations, as occurred, for example, with the so-called 'CIA flights' - their criminal kidnappings and torture. "
The note also states that the SCLC "the European Union is far from meeting the so-called 'mission of spreading peace, democracy, human rights elsewhere in the world' that you want to assign some, quite the contrary."
The coordinator of the World Peace Council in Europe highlights that peace in the continent "was a victory of the people after the Second World War, which was decisive for the aspiration of peace for millions of citizens, many of whom activists strong and broad peace movement and said that developed after 1945. "
It ends showing the paradox of award of the Nobel Peace Prize to the European Union: "The reality of the action and of the purposes set out by the European Union are very distant from the values ​​and principles proclaimed and established the historic Helsinki Conference, held in 1975, as: respect for sovereignty, non-recourse to the threat or use of force, respect for the territorial integrity of states, peaceful resolution of conflicts, non-interference in internal affairs of States, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, the right to self-determination of peoples, and cooperation among states - values ​​and principles enshrined in the UN Charter. "


Union of Atheism against a  Christianity disunited.

Christianity has always dealt with internal conflicts. Since the Council of Jerusalem, by zeal and love for the Gospel, had to resolve their disagreements. It is true that conflicts were not always so peaceful like that. There was sometimes real battle. It is also true that the reasons were not always the most righteous or holy, but, anyway, Christianity stood firm, though divided.

Since the Great Schism, and even more so after the Reformation, Christianity split once. Romans on one side, Protestants and Orthodox another in yet another. Besides these major divisions, the hundreds or thousands of internal divisions, especially within the Protestant side, made the difficult dialogue and reconciliation, obviously, impossible.

However, such a split, though serious, never exceeded the strict limits of matters of faith. It was certainly caused by doctrinal disagreements (without discarding, of course, political influence and personal interests). Anyway, all revolving around Scripture and its interpretation.

After the French Revolution, mainly entered into society, a foreign element: a worldview utterly disconnected from Scripture and the Christian tradition. It is true that its foundations had emerged well before, but it only truly became a political element reasonably systematized.

From there, what happened was just growing a vision of life increasingly disconnected from God, which culminated in the movements linked to a strictly materialistic view of society, such as Marxism, anarchism etc., All of them openly anti-Christian.

Today, there is the cultural and media, in almost all of the West, groups and persons connected directly or by affinity to these movements that work tirelessly to destroy the foundations left by Christianity in this part of the world.

Not to mention also the infiltrations within the Christian churches, for these same groups and people who just do bring to the pulpits and altars, albeit surreptitiously, the same ideas that drench the ideological sludge to which they belong.

Although these moves have not always an interaction programmatic objective is amazing its ideological identity, the unanimous defense of the same points, for sure who are the enemies of society. Despite the diversity absurd principles, in the end they all end up advocating the same things, believing in the same things, fighting the same things.

By the side of the Christians the opposite happens: the same grounds connected, grounded on the same principles, divided into so many doctrines, many systems and so many beliefs that no longer see themselves as children of the same mother: the Church. If you consider, if not enemies, opposites and far.

So, the picture that arises is this: unChristian united by the same goals and same ideas; Christians disunited, although based on the same basis. Now who is stronger to win this battle? And can a divided kingdom stand?

The advance atheistic and anti-Christian is a present reality and getting stronger. Without resistance, vai imposing their worldview, invading the foundations of civilization (which is still somehow Christian) and subverting minds that still resist with remnants of religious teachings received over two thousand years.

Moreover, there is, on this side, any reaction to this advance, but manifestations of individualized inconformismos which alone can counter such little invested.

The question is: could any Christian union against all this?

Honestly, looking just as an observer, and knowing fairly parties, do not have much hope. Catholics view Protestants as just unruly rebels. Protestants see Catholics and Orthodox as diverted from the truth. Traditionalists see how they see the charismatic Protestants and between each denomination or church sees the other as heretical.

The only solution, if there is, first, the recognition, by true Christians, that there are real enemies who fight tirelessly in favor of the destruction of the pillars of our civilization, which is obviously the mitigation of any Christian influence. Secondly, awareness of common ground that binds all the Christian spectrum. If there are irreconcilable differences, to say whether there are also convergences indestructible, especially the participation of all noLogos divine.

This communion in Christ should be the banner page. Is she gonna allow that there is some resistance. If you want to fight for Western civilization remains standing, I see only one possibility: definitely understand that the enemy is not in the church next door, but across the front, in the enemy lines of those who despise the values ​​inherited from the two thousand years of Christianity.