Do illegal aliens take American jobs

In any discussion of immigration policy, the claim is made that illegal aliens or immigrants in general take jobs from Americans.  Attorney General Jeff Sessions recently made this claim when addressing the decision of the president to phase out DACA (link). Is that correct?

Obviously there are some illegal aliens or legal immigrants working at low skill jobs that would be filled by Americans if the illegal aliens were not available.  However, there are many jobs that would simply not exist without cheap labor.  Americans are not going to go to Florida and pick tomatoes in the hot sun for minimum wage. If we did not have the labor to  pick those tomatoes, then we would import more tomatoes from Mexico.  In may cases, we would either import the workers or import the products but in any case we are importing the labor.

I have often thought that America would be a lot less pretty place without illegal aliens. What I am talking about is that almost all yard maintenance and landscaping crews are made up of Hispanics. I don't know if they are legal or not, but I assume they are illegal.  I have been noticing this for some years.  Also, I have observed that there has been a dramatic growth in yard maintenance.  This is probably not a documentable fact because a lot of yard maintenance is done under the table.  It is either not reported or underreported as income.

I have worked for many years in a job that including providing financial advice to clients. Part of what I would do in this position is examine a households spending.  I have noticed as time goes by that fewer and fewer people cut their own grass but hire it done. The most often quoted price that people tell me they pay is $40 every two weeks.

When one points out that Americans would not pick Florida tomatoes in the hot sun and that we would have fewer people to do lawn care, critics will say we could get Americans to do those jobs if they paid more.  If we paid what Americans would require to do the lawn care, the price would not be $40 per cut, but $60 or $80.  There is a limit to what homeowners will pay for someone to do a low skilled job they can do themselves. Those jobs would not go to Americans, those jobs would just go away.

If those jobs just go away then the economic impact and the multiplier effect of that economic activity goes away.  Someone who now has a job because they provide goods and services to people who make a living providing lawn care, would then lose their job.

The argument that immigrants take American jobs takes looks at the economy as static.  That assumes that there are only X number of jobs available. While America may be less economically free and dynamic than it used to be, we are still relatively free. New services and innovations can come into existence without central planners allowing it or providing for it. We do not have a planned economy and jobs are not assigned. I think the argument that immigrants are taking American jobs is based on the same static view of the economy that says there is only so much wealth available and it is up to government to ensure everyone gets their fair share.

When you believe the pie is only so big it becomes more important to argue over the size of the slices.  When you believe the pie is only so big, it becomes important to make sure no one gets your slice.

Top Stories

Mayor Barry is wrong. Trump is not "slaming the door" on DACA.

Mayor Barry Statement on End of DACA 

September 5, 2017- Mayor Megan Barry has released the following statement after the Trump administration announced their intention to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program initiated by President Barack Obama:

The decision by President Trump to slam the door on hundreds of thousands of DREAMers across the nation is heartbreaking. Many of these children and young adults who are  DACA recipients have only ever known the United States as their home. They deserve the chance to gain an education, earn a living, and continue contributing to our community without fear or threat of deportation. I would urge Congress to recognize this and immediately pass legislation that restores DACA as the law of the land.

DACA recipients, as well as people wishing to learn more or take action to support DACA, are encouraged to contact Conexión Américas by emailing DACA@conexionamericas.org or calling (615) 320-5152.

Background on DACA provided by Conexión Américas:

The DACA program is an executive order announced by President Obama in 2012. DACA allows certain young people, often referred to as Dreamers, who came to the United States as children to qualify for protection from deportation proceedings and remain in the country. Young people who are approved for DACA receive a Social Security Number to be able to obtain employment and, in some states - including Tennessee - can get a driver’s license. DACA provides protection for two years, and individuals can reapply when close to their expiration date.

Over its five-year history, DACA has allowed over 800,000 young people to pursue higher education, earn better wages, own homes, start businesses, and more. Out of those who have been approved for DACA, over 700,000 are currently working. Repealing DACA would mean that the United States economy would lose an average of 7,234 workers every week. Without DACA, we would lose over $460.3 billion from the national GDP over the next decade.

In Tennessee, over 8,300 young people have received DACA. The Migration Policy Institute estimates that another 6,000 young people would be eligible for DACA in Tennessee when they turn 15 years old. Rescinding DACA would mean Tennessee would lose over $347.3 million annually in our state GDP.

#

My Comment:  President Trump is not "slamming the door" on DACA.  Slamming the door on DACA would be the immediate repeal. He is slowly, gently closing the door and giving Congress time to keep the door open by legally implementing DACA.  DACA was implemented as an unconstitutional executive overreach.  I do not disagree with the DACA policy but the President does not have the authority to rewrite immigration law. The policy should have been implemented legally by Congress.  How would liberals like it if Trump simply repealed Obamacare by executive action?  There is a reason we have three branches of government. The president is not a king who can rule by royal decree.   Congress should now act to extend DACA, either making it permanent or extending it for a period of time until a comprehensive immigration policy can be adopted.

Top Stories

What's on the Council Agenda for 9-5-17: More corporate welfare, Advocating for DACA, Condemning racism, new requirements for a building permit ...

The Metro Council will meet Tuesday, September 5th, 2017 at 6:30 PM in the Council chamber at the Metro Courthouse. To watch the Council meeting, you can go to the courthouse and watch the meeting in person, or you can watch the broadcast live at Metro Nashville Network's Government TV on Nashville's Comcast Channel 3 and AT&T's U-verse 99 and it is streamed live at the Metro Nashville Network's livestream site and you can watch it live on Roku. You can catch the meeting the next day (or the day after the next) on the Metro YouTube channel. If can stand the suspense and just wait, I will post the video on this blog the day after or the day after that and provide commentary.

If you are going to watch the Council meeting, you need a copy of the Council agenda and the Council staff analysis or you really will not know what is going on. You can get the agenda and analysis at the highlighted links.

There are 14 appointment to Boards and Commission on the agenda. To my knowledge, this Council has never turned down a Mayor's appointee.  They will all be approved without discussion.

Public Hearing
There are two resolutions and 25 bills on Public Hearing. A resolution is passed by a single vote and a bill requires three separate votes of the Council. The bills on Public Hearing are also on the second vote consideration of the Council or "second reading." The two resolutions are exempting establishments from the minimum distance requirements for obtaining a beer permit.

The bills on public hearings are all rezoning bills or related to planning and zoning policy.  While some cities, mostly smaller cities, have a kind of an open mic public hearing policy, where anyone may address their council on any topic, Nashville does not have such a policy.  Only zoning and zoning related bills or on public hearing and the operating budget and the capital improvements budgets.

Rezoning hearings bore me and I don't even try to form an opinion on the merits every rezoning bill before the Council.  Rezoning bills usually are of interest only to people who live near the proposed rezoning. People who don't care one way or the other do not show up and with rare exceptions the only people who speak in favor of rezoning bills are those who will benefit from the rezoning such as the property owner or the developer.  Opponents always make the same argument which boils down to one of these: 1) the change will result in stressing the infrastructure such as too much traffic on the roadway or overcrowd the schools, 2) will cause flooding, and 3) will change for the worse the character of the community. If you are interested in knowing what is permitted in different zoning districts, follow this link.

Public Hearing:  Below are the bills that I find of interest that are on public hearing. I find them of interest because they effect a lot of people and I expect them to be controversial or because they are disapproved by the Planning Commission and may be difficult to pass or for some other reason which I explain. Some zoning bills get a recommendation of disapproved as submitted but approved if the sponsor will make changes recommended by the Planning Commission. I am not listing as bills of interest those that fall in that category.  Usually the sponsor makes the recommended changes.

BILL BL2017-784   by Robert Swope would establish a maximum permitted height of ten feet for electric fences within any zoning district where electric fences are permitted. The Planning Commission recommended withdrawal. Usually there is a recommendation of "approved" or "disapproved," but I do not recall a recommendation of withdrawal.  A disapproved bill requires 27 votes to pass on third reading. I assume if the sponsor moves forward with a bill that the Planning Commission has recommended he withdraw, the bill could be passed by a simple majority, but I am unsure.  Maybe it has to go back to the Planning Commission for a recommendation. The staff analysis says it is anticipated that the sponsor will withdraw the ordinance in favor of alternative legislation so the recommendation for withdrawal will apparently not be a problem.

BILL BL2017-824 is another bill where the Planning Commission recommendation is for the bill to be withdrawn.  This is applying a Contextual Overlay District to certain properties in Councilman Murphy's district. A Contextual Overlay applies design standards to new development in a neighborhood to keep it in character with what is already there. The staff analysis does not address this bill so I do not know the consequences of a recommendation to withdraw the bill, if the sponsor does not withdraw it. 

BILL BL2017-852 in Councilman Mary Carolyn Roberts district would expand an Urban Zoning Overlay District by 1591 acres.  This is a huge expansion. An Urban Design Overlay, or UDO, is a zoning tool that requires specific design standards for development in a designated area. A UDO is used to either protect the pre-existing character of the area or to create a character that would not otherwise be ensured by the development standards in the base zoning district. This bill has not yet been considered by the Planning Commission.

Resolutions
There are 26 resolutions all of which are on the consent agenda. A resolution stays on the consent agenda if it passed the committees to which it was assigned unanimously. Since the committees have not met yet, some resolutions which are listed as on the consent agenda may not be on the consent agenda when the council meets. Bills on the consent agenda are usually not controversial and tend to be routine matters, such as accepting grants from the Federal or State Government or appropriating money from the 4% fund. Resolutions on the consent agenda are passed by a single vote of the Council rather than being considered individually. Any member of the body may have a bill pulled off of the consent agenda or have there "no" vote or abstention recorded. Below are the resolutions of interest.

RESOLUTION RS2017-836  is a PILOT (payments in lieu of taxes) deal for an affordable housing project. This is the sixth time PILOT has been used to build affordable housing. Usually it is used as an incentive to lure a business to locate or expand in Nashville. This deal would be for a private developer to develop a 209 unit project restricted to seniors aged 62 or older whose income is below below 60% of the average median income which for a single person is $28,140.  What this does is basically give the developer a break on property taxes for a ten year period which will amount to about $2.9 million.

RESOLUTION RS2017-839  is the settlement of a lawsuit for $17K.  My view on settling lawsuit is that if the legal department says settle, I am not going to second guess them.  This council has not been so bad about it, but there was a time when some members of the Council would grandstand and get an explanation at the Council meeting of what happened and ask what punishment was handed out to the employee that caused the incident. They would make a big deal out of appropriating the money. Now, thankfully this is handled in committee and no one votes against these settlements and it has almost become routine.

RESOLUTION RS2017-860  supports the continuation of DACA, (the federal Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals  program) and encourages Congress to create a permanent path to legal residency for DACA recipients. I support this. I know that some conservatives denounce DACA as amnesty.  My view is that those children who were brought here by their parents illegally and had no say in the matter, who are Americanized,  who may not even speak their native language, who have stayed out of trouble, and are either serving or served in the military or are in school or working, should not be deported to a country they may have never even known.

I generally think the Metro Council should avoid opining on national issues, but I would make an exception for this.  There are thousand of these young people in our community and are our co-workers and classmates and neighbors.  I remain critical of President Obama for implementing this policy.  My problem is not with the policy itself however but that President Obama did it by executive action rather than submitting the policy to Congress to ask it be enacted legislatively.  I am please that this resolution asks Congress to pass legislation rather than simply asking President Trump to extend the policy.  President Trump is being forced to take a stand on this due to a pending lawsuit brought by several states challenging the legality of the policy.  On Tuesday, President Trump is to announce his intentions regarding DACA.

It should be pointed out that a resolution of this kind only expresses the will of the Council.  It has no impact.  It is not even even really "adopted."  It is passed by the Council, but is not an official position of the Metro Government.  The mayor returns memorializing resolutions unsigned which is essentially a veto. To pass a resolution unsigned by the Council, the Council would then have to pass it a second time.  That never happens. If I were in the Council, I would not vote for a bad memorializing resolution, but in reality they are pretty meaningless. I expect there will be some wasted time pontificating on the issue.

RESOLUTION RS2017-861  says "that Nashville is opposed to and stands against racism and bigotry in all its forms and urging all to seek unified solutions to encourage the inclusive society our founders envisioned."  Last Council meeting, the sponsor attempted to get this considered as a late resolution, but two objecting members kept it from being considered. I am pleased that this was stopped last Council meeting.  There was no emergency that required suspension of Council rules. While this is motivated due to President Tump's comments following the violence in Charlottsville, there is nothing in the text of the resolution that calls out the President.  There is nothing objectionable in the wording of the resolution unless you actually happen to be a racist. If the sponsor will pass this without making a useless speech denouncing Trump, then if I were in the Council I would keep quite and vote for it. If, however, the sponsor grandstands, I would offer an amendment condemning all political violence and hatred including that of  Antifa. If no one votes against it in committee then this will be passed on consent and no one will speak on it. I think that is the best outcome.

Bills on First reading: There are 36 bills on first reading. First reading is a formality that gets bills on the agenda and they are not considered by committee until after they pass first reading. I do not read them until they get to second reading. Bills on First Reading are all lumped together and pass by a single vote.

Bills on Second Reading. These are the ones of interest:

BILL NO. BL2017-800 would make a modest change to the juvenile curfew laws. It would make the curfew slightly more restrictive. I do not see the need for this but could be persuaded in committee. This was on Second Reading on July 21st and deferred to this meeting.

BILL BL2017-835   would increase the size of, number of, and required information on a building permit for any building permit for a project of over $2500. The sign would have to be two feet by three feet.  That seem ridiculous.  A very small remodeling project can exceed $2500 dollars and may be done in as little as a day. The sponsor is going to offer an amendment increasing the dollar limit to $5000. I would oppose this even at the higher limit.  I just do not see the need for this. 

Bills on Third Reading:

BILL BL2017-834 would amend the time restriction of when beer could be sold or served for on-premises consumption passes.  Under this bill a small number of restaurants could sell beer anytime except from 3AM to 4AM. For a more detailed explanation given when the bills was on Second Reading  follow this link and go to timestamp 23:54 in the video.

BILL BL2017-836 is a payment-in-lieu-of-taxes (PILOT) deal for the Keystone Automotive Industries to build an administrative office.  This is the kind of corporate welfare that almost all cities engage in.  We will in effect be subsidizing this company about $1.23 million and they promise to create 120 new jobs. That is a little over $10K per job. I would hope the Council would reject this.  For more on this, read the bill and see the staff analysis.

Top Stories

First Tuesday guest speaker, candidate fo Governor Bill Lee.

From Tim Skow

1ST TUESDAY Members and friends:


On MONDAY [ yes, Monday] …
September 11th we will host ''Nashville’s Neighbor'' and candidate for Governor, BILL LEE !

Bill Lee

While rolling on his campaign bus, Bill has not only been to every corner of the TN... but to every county this summer. Bill will tell you he's been ''listening to Tennesseans''. Now you will get to hear what Bill is thinking, why he thinks he ought to be elected the next Governor and what he wants to accomplish when elected. Be ready for a spirited event !

As usual, doors at Waller Law [511 Union St. 27th floor] open at 11am. Event is $20 for Members and $25 for Guests. Secure seats for you and your guests by visiting our 1ST TUESDAY website [www.1sttuesdaynashville.com] and click on Join Us. Lunch begins at 11:30. Program starts and Noon, concluding at 1:00pm sharp !

[ IF the $25 GUEST icon is any trouble, use the $25 DUES icon]

Following Bill’s comments, expect a highly engaging Q & A session!
Topics including but not limited to:

1] Highly debated Sales and Fuel taxes of last session
2] Medical marijuana that will be in play the next few years
3] Judicial reform
4] Education questions including vouchers, funding higher education and more
5] .....and WHAT ever you'd like to ask !!

NO DOUBT… Bill will look forward to your questions as well ! He's planning to stay well after 1pm. So if you have more questions when the meeting concludes, make sure to visit with Bill afterwards given your schedule allows !!!

Plan to join us for a VERY special 9 / 11 version of 1ST TUESDAY.
Thanks,
Tim Skow
Host of 1ST TUESDAY

Top Stories

Chairman Mary Needs A History Lesson

Mark Rogers

by Mark Rogers, reposted from Quotations from Chairman Mark - Comrade Mal de Mary Mancini is out with a new attack on the Tennessee Republican Party.  Because I know you are busy, I am posting it here.

Friend,

Last week, the Republican National Committee held its annual Summer meeting in Nashville. Republicans say states are the laboratories of democracy, and Tennessee has been on the front lines of Republican policy experimentation.

The results have been an economy that leaves millions of Tennesseans behind. Some lowlights of Republican’s record in Tennessee:

• 10th worst poverty rate in the US with over 1 million Tennesseans living in poverty
• Ranked 38th in the nation by Kids Count for child well being 8th worst median household income in the country.
• Highest percentage of minimum wage jobs of any state in country
• Tennessee dropped in Education Week’s Quality Counts rankings from 21st in 2011 to 36th in 2016.
• Over 365,000 uninsured Tennesseans
• 8 rural hospitals closed since 2010

Tennesseans are realizing the damage Republican policies have done to our state and they are standing up. We need you to join the cause. Make a donation today to support our organizers and volunteers who are already knocking doors to win in 2018.

Thank you!

Mary & the Tennessee Democratic Party

Heavens. I guess we Republicans should be ashamed and just shoot ourselves. Unless we look deeper into Comrade Mary's numbers.

For example:
10th worst poverty rate.
I guess this would be a legitimate criticism of Tennessee Republican governance if Chair Mancini could demonstrate that the poverty rate was substantially lower in the years when Governor Bredesen ran the state. Or perhaps we could look at the poverty rate over the last 100 or more years when the Democratic Party ran the state without much opposition.

Serious, inter-generational poverty in Tennessee, like most Southern Red States, dates to the years before the Civil War when most planters opposed efforts to diversify the regional economy and to maintain the dominance of cotton. Blaming the Republicans who have controlled Tennessee for less than a decade is much like blaming the crew who mishandled the loading of lifeboats for the Titanic hitting the iceberg.

What the Democrats want us to see is that we have more work ahead to undo the damage of decades of corrupt protection for a ruling class that feared economic growth because it would attract new people and new ideas that challenge Democratic rule. Is it any surprise that as Tennessee's population has expanded in the last few decades, the state has become more and more prosperous and Republican?

Want to bet on where Tennessee is in a decade? My guess is that we will move up to the middle of the states and keep improving.

Kids Count Rankings.
Again, what are the trends? And it would be worth looking at the county by county ranking. Democratic policies and political considerations kept rural parts of the state poorer than necessary to preserve their political control and to reward local leaders. In parts of Tennessee, Democratic economic development policy consisted of adding a fancy road {also benefiting connected road builders}. Actually recruiting businesses that would bring in jobs that required educating workers would threaten the status quo.

Also, national Democratic Party policy didn't help. The Great Society increased poverty by ignoring education and training and investments in jobs. The problems faced by Memphis, for example, cannot be blamed on Tennessee or national Republicans. If you take the counties with the heaviest Democratic voting out of the Kids Count numbers, how does Tennessee fair?

Now, having said that, it is the responsibility of the Republican Party in the state to work with Memphis and Shelby County and all the other areas with the greatest problems to do everything possible to help them to build greater prosperity. We must do better than the Democrats.

Highest percentage of minimum wage jobs.
Better than no jobs right? And we have been a low wage state for decades under Democrats because they didn't improve Education or recruit better jobs.

What Chairman Mary doesn't say is how many good new jobs are being created by existing employers or brought to the state because of our business climate under Republicans. What about all the new investment Mary? What about the great industries moving here?

I guess Mary doesn't want us to look at all the facts because they are inconvenient truths for Democrats.

Education Week’s Quality Counts rankings. Mary provides no specifics. Why did we fall? Perhaps other states rose? Why matters. Well, maybe not to Democrats like Chairman Mary.
Plenty of other organizations have heaped praise on Tennessee's Education rankings. Where is Mary's reporting of those results?

Over 365,000 uninsured Tennesseans.
Governor McWherter could have solved that in the early 90s with a more thought out plan than TennCare and the willingness to impose a state income tax to fund it. No Governor has has McWherter's power. That he refused to use it to really solve the problem is not a Republican crime.
I supported InsureTN. I still like some form of state support for poor families in health care. But again, you cannot simply blame Republicans without looking at the history of health care in the state. Governor Haslam was right about this.

8 rural hospitals closed since 2010.
Again, Chair Mary provides a data point without context. Would Medicaid expansion have saved these hospitals? Why did each close? Fact matter.

Clearly Chair Mary needs to study some history before she tries to blame 100+ years of failures on less than 10 years of Republican governance.

Top Stories

High-powered campaign now underway for Mayor Megan Barry's transit referendum

Top Stories

Megan Barry is of course an idot.

A Facebook Post from Bill Bernstein:

One could add that the Sharron Statement which was the founding statement of principles of the Young Americans for Freedom did not purport to represent Sharron Connecticut. The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy did not purport to represent Chicago. There are no doubt many other examples.  To see the Washington Post article, follow this link.

Top Stories

On removing the Nathan Bedford Forrest bust from the Capitol

Nathan Bedford Forrest

Yesterday, the state Capitol Commission voted 7 to 5 against removing the bust of Nathan Bedford Forrest from the state Capitol (link). I think the bust of  Forrest probably should be removed from the State Capitol and moved to the State museum but I can't work up a lot of passion around the issue.  I feel those bust in the capitol should be reserved for people worthy of being revered and honored.  Forrest' early leadership roll in the KKK, his roll as a slave trader and his roll in the Battle of Fort Pillow probably make him unworthy of being honored.  Governor Haslam, Senator Lamar Alexander and various other political leaders have called for removing the bust. I can go along with those calling for the removal but it is with reservation.  I am glad there is a process in place that tempers opinions of the moment.


Despite coming down on the side of removing this bust, I think we should be concerned about the growing iconoclastic frenzy of tearing down of statues and monuments.  President Andrew Jackson owned slaves and he is responsible for the removal the Cherokee to Oklahoma.  By the time of their removal in 1838, the Cherokee had adopted the ways of white settlers. The Cherokee were not a threat to anyone. They were farmers, they became Christians, developed an alphabet, and printed a newspaper. The Trail of Tears has been roundly criticized as immoral and inhuman.  Yet, I do not want to remove the statue of Andrew Jackson from the grounds of the Sate capitol.

Andrew Jackson

If we start removing the statues and monuments to  every former slave owner and everyone who does not conform to contemporary values, then President Trump is right when he ask if the Washington monument and Jefferson Memorial are not next. The path of tearing down statures to historical figures is a slippery slope. If we are going to undo any honor bestowed on historical figures who were imperfect, then we have a lot of tearing down to do. If the standard is that only those who conform to our current standard of values are worthy of being honored then a lot of monuments must topple and every town or county or street named Columbus or Washington or Jefferson needs a name change.

Sam Davis, Confederate hero

While I am OK with removing the bust of Nathan Bedford Forrest from the place of honor in the Capitol, I generally oppose the trend of tearing down historical statues across the country.  Some of the statues honoring Confederate generals however, were erected in late 1950's and early 60's as a show of contempt for federal intervention to force the South to desegregate and end Jim Crow.  This is the same time period in which several Southern states incorporated the Confederate battle flag into their state flags in a defiant stand against integration.  Some of the statues erected during that period probably should come down. 

In determining which statues should come down, I think their artistic merit, when they were erected, and who they honor should be considerations. In my view, some, but very, very few, and only after a slow deliberative process should any statures be removed.

Top Stories

Will You Affirm or Deny the Nashville Statement?

By David Fowler,  Family Action Council of Tennessee (FACT) - This week a group of evangelical heavyweights met in Nashville and released a document called the "Nashville Statement." It speaks to the issues of human sexuality rooted in the psalmist's declaration that it is God "who has made us, and not we ourselves." Not just the content but the structure of the statement itself was important. Its structural importance was brought home by Nashville Mayor Megan Barry's response to it.

 ... Mayor Barry tweeted that the Statement “does not represent the inclusive values of the city (and) people of Nashville.” 

Perhaps it does not. But that Mayor Barry responded is significant. The Statement was theological in nature, not political, so by responding, Mayor Barry, consciously or unconsciously, recognized that the theological always has implications for the political. 

 And so, with its inclusion of denials, the Nashville Statement left Mayor Barry with no room to accept its affirmations and still politically embrace homosexual marriage and sexual self-identification. Read more

Top Stories

Bellevue Republican Breakfast Club special guest Joni Bryan, Founder The 917 Society

Joni Bryan

What: The Bellevue Republican Breakfast Club hosted by Betty Hood.
Who:  Special Guest Joni Bryan, Founder The 917 Society.
When: Saturday, Sept. 2, 2016, 8 a.m
Where:  River Art Studio, 8329 Sawyer Brown Rd


The 917 Society, a 501(c)3 non-profit, exists to empower every 8th grader with the knowledge of their individual freedoms and their very own copy of the U.S. Constitution. The Constitution Project's objective is to provide every Tennessee 8th grader with U.S. and Tennessee Constitutions and to complete an exciting educational video narrated by veteran journalist Nick Clooney and an interactive website. The program is free to participants and seeks to fulfill a 2004 federal unfunded mandate that all schools that receive federal funds are to hold a program on the Constitution, on or around Constitution Day. The 917 Society is also opening up the program for private and homeschool students and expects to reach over 100,000 students this year in Tennessee. The 917 Society has plans to expand into all other states offering this free program to celebrate Constitution Day each September 17th. The Constitution is the one thing that binds us all together no matter our differences.

Top Stories

Mayor Barry's attack against a basic statement of Evangelical Christian belief

A mayor’s backlash against a basic statement of Evangelical Christian belief signals an ominous turn in the culture wars.

By David French, National Review, August 30, 2017- Don’t ever forget that, for some folks, “separation of church and state” is a half-measure. It’s just a pit stop on the road to de-Christianizing America. It’s a temporary means to a much bigger end. Over the weekend, I was honored to sign a document called the Nashville Statement. It’s a basic declaration of Christian orthodoxy on sexuality, sexual orientation, and sexual identity. Its 14 articles can be boiled down to a simple statement: We believe the Bible is the word of God, and the word of God declares that sexual intimacy is reserved for the lifelong union of a man and a woman in marriage. It acknowledges the reality of same-sex attraction as well as the reality of transgender self-conceptions, but denies that God sanctions same-sex sexual activity or a transgendered self-conception that is at odds with biological reality. In other words, it’s basic Christianity.

Sometimes, however, one needs to state the obvious. There are powerful peer and cultural pressures that are pushing Christians to compromise on core principles.

....  Barry’s statement, however, is different. It’s not separation of church and state, it’s a declaration of state against church. (link)

 #

Mayor Barry says 'Nashville Statement' does not represent city's values

NASHVILLE, TN (WSMV) -The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood has created the “Nashville Statement,” stating that marriage is between one man and one woman. ... Barry tweeted Tuesday morning that the “so-called ‘Nashville Statement’ is poorly named and does not represent the inclusive values of the city & people of Nashville.” 

#

Below is the text of the Nashville Statement. To see the source material and a complete list of initial signatories, follow this  link.

The Nashville Statement 

“Know that the LORD Himself is God; It is He who has made us, and not we ourselves…”

 -Psalm 100:3

Preamble
Evangelical Christians at the dawn of the twenty-first century find themselves living in a period of historic transition. As Western culture has become increasingly post-Christian, it has embarked upon a massive revision of what it means to be a human being. By and large the spirit of our age no longer discerns or delights in the beauty of God’s design for human life. Many deny that God created human beings for his glory, and that his good purposes for us include our personal and physical design as male and female. It is common to think that human identity as male and female is not part of God’s beautiful plan, but is, rather, an expression of an individual’s autonomous preferences. The pathway to full and lasting joy through God’s good design for his creatures is thus replaced by the path of shortsighted alternatives that, sooner or later, ruin human life and dishonor God. This secular spirit of our age presents a great challenge to the Christian church. Will the church of the Lord Jesus Christ lose her biblical conviction, clarity, and courage, and blend into the spirit of the age? Or will she hold fast to the word of life, draw courage from Jesus, and unashamedly proclaim his way as the way of life? Will she maintain her clear, counter-cultural witness to a world that seems bent on ruin? We are persuaded that faithfulness in our generation means declaring once again the true story of the world and of our place in it—particularly as male and female. Christian Scripture teaches that there is but one God who alone is Creator and Lord of all. To him alone, every person owes gladhearted thanksgiving, heart-felt praise, and total allegiance. This is the path not only of glorifying God, but of knowing ourselves. To forget our Creator is to forget who we are, for he made us for himself. And we cannot know ourselves truly without truly knowing him who made us. We did not make ourselves. We are not our own. Our true identity, as male and female persons, is given by God. It is not only foolish, but hopeless, to try to make ourselves what God did not create us to be. We believe that God’s design for his creation and his way of salvation serve to bring him the greatest glory and bring us the greatest good. God’s good plan provides us with the greatest freedom. Jesus said he came that we might have life and have it in overflowing measure. He is for us and not against us. Therefore, in the hope of serving Christ’s church and witnessing publicly to the good purposes of God for human sexuality revealed in Christian Scripture, we offer the following affirmations and denials.

Article 1
WE AFFIRM that God has designed marriage to be a covenantal, sexual, procreative, lifelong union of one man and one woman, as husband and wife, and is meant to signify the covenant love between Christ and his bride the church. WE DENY that God has designed marriage to be a homosexual, polygamous, or polyamorous relationship. We also deny that marriage is a mere human contract rather than a covenant made before God.

Article 2 
WE AFFIRM that God’s revealed will for all people is chastity outside of marriage and fidelity within marriage. WE DENY that any affections, desires, or commitments ever justify sexual intercourse before or outside marriage; nor do they justify any form of sexual immorality.

Article 3 
WE AFFIRM that God created Adam and Eve, the first human beings, in his own image, equal before God as persons, and distinct as male and female. WE DENY that the divinely ordained differences between male and female render them unequal in dignity or worth.

Article 4 
WE AFFIRM that divinely ordained differences between male and female reflect God’s original creation design and are meant for human good and human flourishing. WE DENY that such differences are a result of the Fall or are a tragedy to be overcome.

Article 5
WE AFFIRM that the differences between male and female reproductive structures are integral to God’s design for self-conception as male or female. WE DENY that physical anomalies or psychological conditions nullify the God-appointed link between biological sex and self-conception as male or female.

Article 6
WE AFFIRM that those born with a physical disorder of sex development are created in the image of God and have dignity and worth equal to all other image-bearers. They are acknowledged by our Lord Jesus in his words about “eunuchs who were born that way from their mother's womb.” With all others they are welcome as faithful followers of Jesus Christ and should embrace their biological sex insofar as it may be known. WE DENY that ambiguities related to a person’s biological sex render one incapable of living a fruitful life in joyful obedience to Christ.

Article 7 
WE AFFIRM that self-conception as male or female should be defined by God’s holy purposes in creation and redemption as revealed in Scripture. WE DENY that adopting a homosexual or transgender self-conception is consistent with God’s holy purposes in creation and redemption.

Article 8 
WE AFFIRM that people who experience sexual attraction for the same sex may live a rich and fruitful life pleasing to God through faith in Jesus Christ, as they, like all Christians, walk in purity of life. WE DENY that sexual attraction for the same sex is part of the natural goodness of God’s original creation, or that it puts a person outside the hope of the gospel.

Article 9 
WE AFFIRM that sin distorts sexual desires by directing them away from the marriage covenant and toward sexual immorality— a distortion that includes both heterosexual and homosexual immorality. WE DENY that an enduring pattern of desire for sexual immorality justifies sexually immoral behavior.

Article 10
WE AFFIRM that it is sinful to approve of homosexual immorality or transgenderism and that such approval constitutes an essential departure from Christian faithfulness and witness. WE DENY that the approval of homosexual immorality or transgenderism is a matter of moral indifference about which otherwise faithful Christians should agree to disagree.

Article 11 
WE AFFIRM our duty to speak the truth in love at all times, including when we speak to or about one another as male or female. WE DENY any obligation to speak in such ways that dishonor God’s design of his imagebearers as male and female.

Article 12
WE AFFIRM that the grace of God in Christ gives both merciful pardon and transforming power, and that this pardon and power enable a follower of Jesus to put to death sinful desires and to walk in a manner worthy of the Lord. WE DENY that the grace of God in Christ is insufficient to forgive all sexual sins and to give power for holiness to every believer who feels drawn into sexual sin.

Article 13 
WE AFFIRM that the grace of God in Christ enables sinners to forsake transgender selfconceptions and by divine forbearance to accept the God-ordained link between one’s biological sex and one’s self-conception as male or female. WE DENY that the grace of God in Christ sanctions self-conceptions that are at odds with God’s revealed will.

Article 14 
WE AFFIRM that Christ Jesus has come into the world to save sinners and that through Christ’s death and resurrection forgiveness of sins and eternal life are available to every person who repents of sin and trusts in Christ alone as Savior, Lord, and supreme treasure. WE DENY that the Lord’s arm is too short to save or that any sinner is beyond his reach.

#

On on Friday June 26, 2015, At-large Metro Councilwoman Megan Barry, a Nashville mayoral candidate,
performed the first same sex wedding in Tennessee. 

Top Stories

Melania Trump’s heels

If I were in an

If I were in an emergency shelter in Houston and First Lady Melania Trumps showed up in a pair of black snakeskin stilettos heels, it would brighten my day and lift my spirits. I love sexy women in stiletto heels. (link to story)

Top Stories