There is a Fountain filled with Living Water that is our Gateway to God!  Serving the Christian Community with Love & Commitment.

A MINISTRY OF ACTION, COMMITMENT AND  DISCIPLESHIP BASED ON THE WHOLE WORD OF GOD.

Home Of The Living Word, Christ Alone Is Our Heart

Below you will find Articles that this Website believes in and will continue to post, sent or forwarded by friends and other Christians. Please read them with open hearts and prayers uplifted to God. Warning: Some might not be appropriate in your estimation for children but are "non the less" here to edify all believers in the Lord Jesus Christ. Mark K. Doty (webmaster) reply1@fountaingateway.com

Daily Featured Articles News and Issues are provided by active link to Covenant News Service. Covenant News is Today's News For Today's Church but more than that it is continuously updated and highly researched to keep the Christian abreast of the developments World Wide Politically and Socially. Other articles and news developments are listed below and updated when necessary.

Organize This! by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.

It’s getting harder for homeschoolers to fly under the radar screen of US political elites. More and more students are being educated at home; at 1.25 million, they outnumber public school enrollments in each of 41 states. No one really knows for sure how many parents have helped their kids defect from approved schools. But this much we do know: they are part of a newly emerging educational cream of the crop, outperforming the rest of the student population in every area.

As the Microsoft case shows, too much success can invite retaliation from the DC forces of destruction. So it was probably inevitable that the Clinton administration would target homeschoolers and put them in their place. During a silly two-day tour of public schools in Kentucky, Iowa, Minnesota, and Ohio, Clinton provided three morsels of information that suggest this is going on.

Clinton noted that the homeschool option wasn’t available when Chelsea was growing up, but even if it had been, "I wouldn’t have done it." Notice that this negative declaration was a statement of principle, not expediency, which is to say that he wouldn’t have done it no matter how bad the other options were. Why? He says he wanted his child to be exposed to a wide range of students and experiences, which is what public school supposedly does. (The story on WND.com was one of the few to report his comments.)

First, this remark proves he knows virtually nothing about homeschool culture, which is not about isolation but good parenting and academic excellence. The claim that these kids are raised in a Skinner Box could only be believed by someone totally isolated from homeschooled kids themselves. Colleges and universities are finding that they have an unusual degree of internal drive, intellectual curiosity, and self-discipline, and are increasingly trying to recruit them for precisely that reason.

Second, every study has shown that homeschoolers perform far above the norm, partly for reasons of demographic selection, but also because the home makes an outstanding learning environment, especially when compared to the child-prisons the government has set up. The newest study of more than 20,000 students has the students scoring higher in every subject (average : 85^th percentile) than both public and private school students. Students in grades one to four perform one grade level higher than their public and private-school counterparts, and by eighth grade, they perform four grade levels above the national average. (It is also interesting that partially homeschooled children perform worse than fully homeschooled children.)

Third, not every parent wants his offspring to be exposed to all "students and experiences" of public schooling; many parents of Columbine High students wish they had rethought such exposure earlier. And what are public-school kids not exposed to? Discipline, truth, intellectual challenge, and faith, for starters. The schools have been used as political footballs for many decades, and political indoctrination is now unavoidable. Academic excellence takes a back seat to civic formation, as students are psychologically manipulated into becoming loyal servants of the political elite and faithful practitioners of the civic religion. In contrast, homeschooled children tend to be independent thinkers, unlike the carbon-copy kids produced by the state.

Good parenting, academic excellence, and independence: just the sort of traits that the political elites find threatening. And yet the government knows it can’t just abolish homeschooling. Clinton has a better idea for reining them in: national regulation. Well, he didn’t put it that way. Here's what he said: "It is done in every state of the country and therefore the best thing to do is to get the homeschoolers organized."

But they are already very politically organized, as the Wall Street Journal pointed out in a recent story. By organized, Clinton actually means regulated. Hence, Clinton’s alarming conclusion: "If you’re going to" homeschool, "your children have to prove that they’re learning on a regular basis, and if they don’t prove that they’re learning then they have to go into a school-either into a parochial or private school or a public school."

What he seems to be advocating is a nationwide effort to subject homeschools to the same style of regulations that currently govern private schools, and the same curriculum that is used in public schools. There’s no question that most homeschooled kids can pass any test you throw at them. If the 85^th percentile isn’t proof of learning, it can’t be proven. Clinton has it reversed: public-school kids who aren’t learning should be homeschooled!

The real threat here is to the special-needs children who are being homeschooled because they would fall too far behind in a cookie-cutter public school. It tells you something about Clinton’s mentality that he believes the answer for children with learning disabilities is to put them in government-sponsored classrooms.

Regardless of the facts, both of Clinton’s remarks are designed to reinforce certain prejudices about homeschooling: parents, not wanting their children exposed to the world, are keeping them at home and stupid. The government may have to come in and rescue kids from this familial oppression.

Already, homeschool parents are regularly harassed and even wrongly arrested for violating compulsory attendance laws. Rather than feel their pain, Clinton is suggesting that the state have even more power to harass parents. But just as the government waited too long to tax the web, and now finds it politically difficult to pull off, the government has probably missed the boat on homeschooling. The parents and organizations involved are tenaciously attached to maintaining their independence, and are willing to go to any lengths to retain that independence.

The right of parents to raise their children is a natural right, and the attempt by the educational elites to take it away constitutes a ghastly intervention in the moral and legal sovereignty of the family. Homeschoolers understand that better than anyone, and they are dedicated to fighting for that right. By threatening to take away their independence, Clinton has thrust his hand into a wasp’s nest. 

Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr., is president of the Ludwig von Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama. He also edits a daily news site, LewRockwell.com.

Anti-knife campaign doesn't cut it  by Lawrence Hall  - The Star-Ledger

Insanity upon insanity is inflicted on us by people who think they know what's best.

It's hard not to feel like Lemuel Gulliver, tied down by the Lilliputians. Foolish rules designed to regulate or change behavior leave vast numbers of people tied up in knots.

People in authority are always coming up with far-fetched schemes to tackle  problems. Often the only result is that they make laughingstocks of themselves.

Dutch authorities are still trying to come to grips with a rash of stabbings in Amsterdam. Last year, they began a turn-in-your knife campaign in several of the city's rough neighborhoods. Not surprisingly, this proved an ineffective way to deal with the street stabbings.

Recently, an editorial in a Dutch newspaper groused about the program, saying that "those who pull a knife at the least provocation are the least impressed by any form of protest against violence."

The editorial lamented, "It's sad that current initiatives such as knife prohibition in several neighborhoods have not had anywhere near the desired effect. There is only one thing to do: Knife prohibition must be extended to the entire city."

''It is now up to the politicians to allocate additional funds for maintaining the safety to which every citizen has a right," the paper said. 

The call for knife prohibition is echoed in the mania over gun control in America. I wouldn't put it past Dutch authorities to implement a nationwide knife buyback program. Just look at the gun buyback programs in cities across the United States. Some of these programs even include toy guns.

It's ludicrous that Dutch police might confiscate knives. And why stop at knives? How about banning beer bottles or ballpoint pens? These instruments can easily be used as weapons.

Government and corporate leaders are always devising harebrained schemes to
outlaw things they perceive as injurious to our peace or security.

A case in point is an attempt by a British member of Parliament to ban Muzak, the canned music piped in to public places. Robert Key, a Conservative, contends it's a health hazard. He believes Muzak raises blood pressure and depresses the immune system. He says it's nothing more than "acoustic wallpaper."

Key wants piped-in music banned in hospitals, doctors' offices, swimming clubs, bus and rail stations and airports.

It's doubtful that Key's measure will ever become law, but it's amazing how much tomfoolery people will tolerate. Consider the case of the Sydney Opera House, which is plagued by giant water rats, protected under Australia's endangered species act. The rats have also taken up residence in some of the finest restaurants in the area.

Music and food lovers now have to put up with rats dashing beneath their seats and tables. According to government health officials, the rats are native and don't pose a health problem.

Even if that is true, and I doubt it, how can anyone enjoy music or a meal with rats running about? One patron at Sydney's Bennelong Restaurant says he "felt like the Pied Piper of the opera house."

Craig Hemmings, the restaurant manager, doesn't take kindly to the rats being in his establishment. "I don't know whether they are water rats or not," he says, "but once I see them I feel like getting out my machete."

It would be interesting to know if any environmentalists or animals right activists frequent the opera house and adjacent restaurants. I bet they're too squeamish to pull up a chair and join the party.

You have to be a lunatic to subscribe to such animal protection nonsense. Regardless of its breed, a rat is still a rat and should always be swiftly dispatched.

That people would put up with this demonstrates how they will meekly accept all sorts of restraints without questioning them. It seems people will tolerate anything if it's decreed from above. And what could be more intolerable than a rat running beneath your feet?

Lawrence Hall is a Star-Ledger columnist. - © 2000 The Star-Ledger. Used with permission.   

Judge Attacks America's Christian History by Chuck Baldwin

On May 5, Federal District Judge Jennifer Coffman ordered historical documents hanging on the walls of public buildings in Eastern Kentucky to be immediately taken down. The ruling directly targets courthouses and public schools in Harlan, McCreary and Pulaski counties. In defending her decision, Coffman said the displays have the effect of "conveying a very specific government endorsement of religion."

Judge Coffman's ruling demonstrates either a profound ignorance of America's history or a profound contempt for America's history. In either case, the judge declared war on America's deep Christian heritage.

The offending documents ordered removed included the Declaration of  Independence, the preamble to the Constitution of Kentucky, and the national motto, "In God we trust." A page from the congressional record of Wednesday, Feb. 2, 1983, Vol. 129, No. 8, which declares 1983 as the "Year of the Bible" and lists the Ten Commandments, was likewise ordered removed. In addition, a proclamation by President Ronald Reagan marking 1983 the "Year of the Bible," a proclamation by President Abraham Lincoln designating April 30, 1863, a "National Day of Prayer and Humiliation," the Mayflower Compact, and more were ordered removed. Any document having any reference to God was ordered taken down.

Using Judge Coffman's reasoning, never again would people be allowed to say the Pledge of Allegiance in a public gathering because the words "under God" are in it. No public meeting could ever be opened in prayer.

The Supreme Court building would need to be remodeled. Directly above the head of the Chief Justice is an engraving of the Ten Commandments, which is protected by a great American eagle. On the east front is a marble sculpture of Moses. That would have to be torn down. No longer could the Court open with the invocation: "God save the United States and the Honorable Court."

In Judge Coffman's Amerika, the "prayer and meditation" room located just off the rotunda in the Capitol would have to be sealed. The room features a stained glass window showing George Washington kneeling in prayer. Behind him are the words from Psalm 16:1, "Preserve me, O God; for in thee do I put my trust." An open Bible is on the altar. Congress would have to fire their respective chaplains and no longer be allowed to open their sessions in prayer.

Great sculptures inside the rotunda would have to be torn down. There you will find the figure of the crucified Christ, as well as a picture of the Pilgrims about to board the ships Mayflower and Speedwell. The ship's chaplain, Brewster, is shown with an open Bible on his lap.

Likewise, the walls of the Capitol dome would have to be remodeled because these words clearly appear: "The New Testament according to our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ." On the sail is the motto of the Pilgrims, "In God We Trust, God With Us."

The Great Seal of the United States would have to be changed. Inscribed in the Seal is the phrase, Annuit Coeptis, which means, "God has smiled on our undertaking." Under the Seal is engraved the phrase, "This nation under God," from Lincoln's Gettysburg Address.

It is impossible to separate this nation from its Christian past. The reminders of our heritage are carved in our buildings and monuments and preserved in our historical documents. Only foolish people like Jennifer Coffman would even attempt such a disdainful act.

That the roots of Christianity run deep in our soil is plain for all to see. What is not so clear is how deep they run in our soul.

NOTE:

My editorials are published Tuesdays & Fridays on Gulf1.com and are sent via email to anyone who requests them. If you have friends whom you would like to receive these editorials please ask them to send their E-maill addresses to me at cblist@gulf1.com with "subscribe yourname@yourdomain.com"   in the body of the E-mail. If you wish to send me an E-mail please use cblive@gulf1.com  To learn more about my radio talk show please visit my web site at http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com  http://www.gulf1.com     

A young activist friend (of the webmaster's) helps take on a poorly written law. submitted by webmaster  for its author Bennie Berkshire Jr. 

I am writing you in regards to " The deer man" Andy Bozek. I'm sure you are a busy man so I'll be brief. There is a book by Phillip K. Howard called "THE DEATH OF COMMON SENSE" with many similar cases in it. This is your chance to help set something right. Please respond.

This is written in reference to the following story as found at: http://www.borg.com/~nlf/deer/deer.html please contact Senator Charles E. Schumer with your emails concerning this injustice. 

Write to Andy, the deer man himself at Deerman82@webtv.net  

Can therapy make gay people straight? By Barry Yeoman  (Warning Sexually Graphic!!) Instead of posting the story here Barry Yeoman has requested that I link to its original content (which I most graciously accept) at the following URL: http://www.salon.com/health/feature/2000/05/22/exgay/index.html  The article is well worth reading for each of us. Thank you and also my Thanks to Barry. 

Most young victims know their molester - By Jordana Hart, Globe Staff

As many see it, protecting children against sexual predators is primarily a matter of tightening the sex offender registry, educating children on ''stranger danger,'' and knowing when a convicted pedophile moves into the neighborhood.

The problem, say law enforcement officials and doctors, is that these efforts fail to address one group that, statistically, poses the greatest threat to children: male relatives and family friends.

According to State Police, county prosecutors, and child advocates, children under age 17 have made up more than half the reported rape victims in Massachusetts since 1997. At least a third of them said they were attacked by their fathers, stepfathers, other male relatives, or mother's boyfriends.

Between 50 percent and 60 percent of the remainder were assaulted by someone familiar to them, such as a neighbor or family friend, according to those statistics.

''It's easier for the public to demonize offenders as another class of humanity and [to think] that all we have to do is figure out who they are,'' said Craig Latham, a psychologist in Natick who treats sex offenders and victims. ''Well, they are us, and that is the problem.''

Warnings about strangers are the most frequent messages given to children, specialists say. They say that children as young as preschool age must instead be better trained to recognize ''good touches and bad touches'' from people they know, must learn not to keep secrets about ''bad touches,'' and be told to keep telling adults until someone listens.

That training ''is not intensive enough and not presented enough,'' said Dr. David Finkelhor, director of the Crimes Against Children Research Center at the University of New Hampshire. ''Kids are not given enough chances in school to practice what they have learned.''

What is also troubling, say those who run school programs, is that no one knows for sure how well those lessons are being reinforced by parents, whom specialists regard as a child's most vital source of information on preventing sexual abuse.

In a 1998 survey of 1,535 Rhode Island middle-schoolers, 50 percent of boys and 37 percent of girls said their parents had not talked with them about sexual abuse and how to avoid it. Those who said that parents had talked to them indicated that the parent mostly mentioned stranger danger, according to the Sexual Assault and Trauma Research Center of Rhode Island.

Experts say sexual abuse of children within the family is the most underreported of all crimes. When abuse does surface, relatives often try to downplay it by making excuses for the abuser, blaming someone else, or simply denying it.

''The gut-level response is, `That would never happen in my family,''' said Linda K. Cutting, a concert pianist in her 40s from Cambridge who has accused her father, a minister, of sexually abusing her until the age of 7. She is now a member of the board of directors of Massachusetts Citizens for Children, an advocacy group.

In her 1997 memoir, ''Memory Slips,'' Cutting also wrote about the suicides of her two older brothers in the 1980s, who she said were both physically abused by their father.

Therapists, prosecutors, and advocates for children say they understand why the public focuses on stranger attacks, instead of looking closer to home.

''A large number of abusers are in families, so you have to be willing to entertain the idea that good and evil can live in the same person,'' Cutting said in an interview. ''As long as people still look at abusers as purely evil, they will miss them right in their midst.''

Despite headline-grabbing cases like that of defrocked Boston priest John Geoghan or the two Cambridge men accused in the 1997 murder and rape of Jeffrey Curley, sexual assaults by teachers, clergymen, and other unrelated adults make up less than 10 percent of the total, according to State Police and county data.

Assaults by strangers make up between 4 percent and 6 percent of the reported assaults. In Suffolk County, for example, about 10 of 150 offenders arrested in attacks on children were not familiar to the victims. In 1999 in Middlesex County, 31 of 686 perpetrators were strangers, according to county prosecutors.

Children must learn about avoiding strangers, Latham and others say, but, more important, they must be taught to reveal secrets about abuse that a relative or family friend might threaten or bribe them to keep and to understand that they don't have to share their bodies with anyone.

Still, some specialists say that even the best programs are taught to children for only a few hours a year, at most.

One well-regarded curriculum, the Child Assault Prevention Program, is taught in 66 Massachusetts elementary schools, but it lasts only one hour.

In Arlington, 750 first- and third-graders spend a total of two hours in three years learning about abuse, and parents have a two-hour workshop on broaching the topic at home.

Janice Pothier-Pac, coordinator of the Child Assault Prevention Program, said about 9,600 elementary pupils and about 700 preschoolers were taught in 1998.

The Great Body Shop, a grade K-6 health curriculum in Arlington and 25 other districts, offers four classes a year on how to stay safe. The lessons ''hopefully empower kids to say no and be self-assertive,'' said Cindy Bouvier, health coordinator for the Arlington public schools.

The Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, which also offers a sexual-abuse prevention program, runs self-esteem classes through grade 12, a component of which is teaching children how to recognize trouble, said Karin Jeffers Ayre, western region clinic director for the society.

In 42 preschool classes in Chicopee, for example, children are working with the ''Red Flag, Green Flag People'' coloring book, which mentions incest. The program, called ''Some Secrets Should Be Told,'' is taught in 90 schools statewide.

''We are touched by many people,'' the coloring book says, showing simple drawings of faces like those of a mother and a grandfather. ''This is a book about the sense of touch. Some touches feel good and loved. Other types of touch confuse, scare, and sometimes hurt us.''

Children need more information like that, Middlesex District Attorney Martha Coakley said.

Coakley said that 17 percent of the 682 victims in sex-abuse cases her office handled last year were newborns to age 5, while 38 percent were ages 6 to 12. Almost 80 percent of the victims up to age 18 were girls, figures she said reflect the problem statewide.

A study by the state Office of the Commissioner of Probation showed that 52 percent of reported rape victims were age 14 and younger, but that study only considered cases in which the suspect had been convicted, Coakley said.

Her office prosecutes only about a third of substantiated child sex-abuse cases, often because the witnesses are too young or a parent decides not to go forward.

''This is very difficult, even for those of us in law enforcement,'' Coakley said. ''The last thing anyone wants to admit is that someone they love, someone they married or are dating [is molesting children]. There is more sex abuse in families than we want to admit.''

This story ran on page B01 of the Boston Globe. © Copyright 2000 Globe Newspaper Company.   

Gay rights activists embrace censorship by Jeff Jacoby Published Tuesday, May 30, 2000, in the San Jose Mercury News  

New Look at Realities of Divorce By JOHN TIERNEY - The New York Times - July 11, 2000

WHICH sex is mostly to blame for divorce? The answer seems obvious every time a mogul like Donald Trump or Ronald Perelman or Rupert Murdoch dumps his wife.

Conservative preachers and liberal feminists are united in their disdain for philandering men who abandon their children. Journalists (including this one) and politicians of all persuasions have righteously condemned "deadbeat dads." Even Hollywood professes to be appalled at the cads depicted in "The First Wives Club."

But there's a problem with the conventional wisdom. Across America, at least two-thirds of divorce suits are filed by women. Researchers who have interviewed divorcing couples have repeatedly found that, in cases where the divorce is not mutually desired, women are more than twice as likely to be the ones who want out. After the split, women are typically happier than their exes.

This trend has inspired what is probably the first paper in the American Journal of Law and Economics ever to be named after a Nancy Sinatra song. In "These Boots Are Made for Walking: Why Most Divorce Filers Are Women," Margaret F. Brinig and Douglas Allen, both economists, analyze all 46,000 divorces filed in one year, 1995, in four different states: Connecticut, Virginia, Montana and Oregon.

They looked for different reasons that would prompt a woman to file for divorce. One would be to escape an abusive husband -- like a man who is adulterous or violent. But in the state with the best records of grievances, Virginia, only 6 percent of divorces were granted on grounds of violence, and husbands were cited for adultery only slightly more often than wives.

"Some women file for divorce because they're exploited in really bad marriages," said Dr. Brinig, a professor of law at the University of Iowa. "But it seems to be a relatively small number, probably less than 20 percent of the cases."

Another impetus to divorce is the belief that your partner is no longer good enough for you. The classic example is the guy who takes a trophy wife after dumping the high-school sweetheart who sacrificed her own potential to put him through medical school, but a woman can be similarly tempted to leave a husband who is less successful than she is.

The researchers found that the better-educated partner, male or female, was indeed more likely to file for divorce. But again these types of divorces seemed to represent less than 20 percent of the cases. 

The solution to the mystery, the factor that determined most cases, turned out to be the question of child custody. Women are much more willing to split up because -- unlike men -- they typically do not fear losing custody of the children. Instead, a divorce often enables them to gain control over the children.

"The question of custody absolutely swamps all the other variables," Dr. Brinig said. "Children are the most important asset in a marriage, and the partner who expects to get sole custody is by far the most likely to file for divorce."

THE correlation with custody is so strong, Dr. Brinig said, that she has changed her view about the best way to preserve marriages and protect children. She previously advocated an end to quick no-fault divorces, but she now believes that the key is to rewrite custody laws. 

In most states, including New York, New Jersey and Connecticut, mothers can fight for and usually win sole custody. But some states have recently begun making joint custody the presumptive norm.

That change in the law seems to be keeping more couples together, according to this study and other work by Dr. Brinig. She and colleagues have noted a decline in divorce in states with joint-custody laws. And when couples do divorce, fathers who share custody are less likely to renege on their child-support payments.

Dr. Brinig favors a law like the one recently enacted in West Virginia, which typically awards each parent a share of custody according to how much time that parent spent with the child during the marriage. Besides eliminating some of the vicious court fights that now take place over custody, she said, such a law could lead to fewer divorces.

"Custody is now a way -- in some marriages the only way -- for women to achieve a real show of force over men," Dr. Brinig said. "If you remove that distortion, it's apt to change the way men and women relate to each other and to their kids. Fathers are likely to spend more time with kids if they can expect to still see them if the marriage doesn't work out. Women will be more likely to see men as parenting partners, and less likely to use divorce as a power play."  

ALARMING FACTS ON PRONOGRAPHY - JERRY FALWELL - July 20, 2000

* Today, 15 million children now use the Internet regularly and many are being hooked by Internet pornography;

* This year, adult entertainment on the Internet is expected to generate revenues of $51.5 million, the third largest sector of sales, surpassed only by computer products and travel; There are computer bulletin boards set up specifically for the seduction of children. They lure kids in with games and establish relationships with them on-line. Then they arrange to meet face-to-face;

* Child molesters are using the electronic superhighway to look for victims. They are going to the places where the kids of the '90s play; ?Illegal, hard-core pornography includes bestiality (sex with animals), incest, rape, sado-masochism, torture, mutilation, necrophilia (sex with the dead!) and "eroticized" urination and defecation. Most of the victims of such degrading themes are women and children and are depicted on the Internet;

* The Playboy Web site averages 4 million hits per day;

* One-in-three American girls and one-in-seven boys will be sexually molested by age 18.

* An amazing 87% of convicted molesters of girls and 77% of the convicted molesters of boys admit to use of pornography in the commission of their crimes;

* A primary "consumer group" of pornography is adolescent boys, aged 12-17;

* There are now many more hard-core pornography outlets in America than there are McDonald's restaurants;

* A staggering 86% of convicted rapists admit regular pornography use - 57% admit actually imitating pornography scenes in the commission of their crimes;

* It is estimated that hard-core pornography is available in 80% of the 26,000 neighborhood video stores in America;

* The pornography industry grosses $10-$12 billion per year and is primarily controlled by organized crime;  

Young Christians like living in sin - BY RUTH GLEDHILL, RELIGION CORRESPONDENT - TIMES SYNDICATE

A THIRD of young evangelical Christians believe in living together with a partner before marriage.

The finding, in research to be published today, has shocked church leaders, who expected fewer than 10 per cent to support cohabitation. In total, 33 per cent of Christians aged 18 to 35 supported living together, compared with 82 per cent of non-Christians. The survey also shows that Christians in the 18-35 age group are the most rapidly declining age group among churchgoers. About 330,000 regularly attend services — one in ten of all churchgoers. Only the over-80s represent a smaller proportion.

The figures present church leaders with a dilemma. Either they emphasize biblical teaching on sexual morality, which risks driving even more young people away, or they compromise their traditional teaching, which may alienate the older generations.

One Church of England report has already recommended that the phrase “living in sin” should be abandoned.

The survey also found that more than one in ten young Christians had taken illegal drugs, smoked and drunk excessive amounts of alcohol. The same number said it was acceptable to steal small items, such as stationery from work. One third said it was sometimes necessary to tell a lie.

The Evangelical Alliance commissioned the survey to find out why so few young people were attending church. 

 This site is:  free.

Last Revised July 02, 2006
Copyright 1998 - 2006 Silver &Gold Productions
Designed and Maintained by Silver &Gold Productions