During the sentencing portion of his trial, defense witnesses testified that Nichols had worn out four Bibles through prayer and research, and that he wrote an 83-page letter to a prayer partner in Michigan while trying to make a point about Christian faith.

"Terry Nichols' belief in God is so firm that he believes if the rapture occurred today he is going to heaven," defense attorney Creekmore Wallace told jurors.

There is no doubt that Democratic presidential candidates have to be quite liberal on social issues because of their various constituencies. But are a majority of Americans truly on their side or, even if so, would they be if Republicans did a better job of getting their message out?
Do a majority of Americans believe in abortion on demand -- because when you get right down to it, that's what the leftists to which the Democrats have to cater advocate. Do they believe in permitting partial-birth abortion? Or would even the most callous among them believe in it if they knew the health of the mother is almost never an issue in that procedure?

Do a majority of Americans embrace the radical homosexual agenda, which requires that its opponents sometimes be denied their free speech and that Boy Scouts be denied the freedom to exclude homosexuals from leadership positions over their young male children?

Do a majority of Americans believe that unelected, unaccountable judges should overrule the democratically elected legislative branch on issues, especially social ones? Does the majority believe that God should be completely removed from the public square?

While Democrats have tried to portray George W. Bush as an extreme conservative, the real extremists among us are those disparate radical groups that together constitute the base of the Democratic Party. Republicans shouldn't shy away from the social issues.

Americans saw death approach Ronald Reagan twice in a moment of violence and then in the years of departing light. He met both with courage and grace. In these trials, he showed how a man so enchanted by life can be at peace with life's end.

And where does that strength come from? Where is that courage learned? It is the faith of a boy who read the Bible with his mom. It is the faith of a man lying in an operating room who prayed for the one who shot him before he prayed for himself. It is the faith of a man with a fearful illness who waited on the Lord to call him home.

Now death has done all that death can do, and as Ronald Wilson Reagan goes his way, we are left with the joyful hope he shared.

In his last years he saw through a glass darkly. Now he sees his savior face to face.

What happens when the next "sexual lifestyle" gains civil rights status? Those who charge that even raising such a question is scare-mongering, must face the simple fact that the question is unavoidable. Intellectual honesty demands that we recognize the fact that acceptance of same-sex marriage implies--to anyone who has even the slightest commitment to intellectual integrity--the acceptance of any adult consensual sexual lifestyle as legitimate and ultimately deserving of legalized status.

The arguments presented by Caldwell and Boot reflect a deeper problem at the very heart of the conservative movement in America. In some sense, both writers--associated with a generally conservative perspective--actually celebrate the advent of same-sex marriage....

These developments indicate something of an ideological divide within American conservatism. Increasingly, neo-conservatives committed to conservative thought on political and economic matters are divided from traditional conservatives who refuse to accept same-sex marriage, or homosexuality in general, as worthy of legalization and normalization....The cost of losing this debate is too tragic to calculate, and the moral cost of surrender is too great to bear. Throwing in the towel is just not an option.

On Tuesday the United Nations Security Council unanimously passed a resolution supporting the end of the occupation of Iraq on June 30, transferring sovereignty to the Iraqi interim government, and authorizing the U.S.role providing security--a huge victory. This vote came on the heels of Monday’s announcement that nine of the independent Iraqi militias agreed to disband. This is good news, but just part of a pattern of good news that simply hasn’t been prominently reported.

But the infrequently voiced reality, stem cell experts confess, is that, of all the diseases that may someday be cured by embryonic stem cell treatments, Alzheimer's is among the least likely to benefit.

Ronald Reagan spoke eloquently in many ways. But the Great Communicator may be best remembered for his words of faith and the cultural changes that followed them. Faith was the wellspring of his optimism; it was the guiding star of his presidency. Mr. Reagan's faith was the foundation of all he did, and it remains the cornerstone of his legacy.

Mr. Reagan spoke from faith when he saw dawn beyond America's dark hours, when he saw freedom piercing the Iron Curtain. A committed Christian, Mr. Reagan was convinced that everything happened for a reason and that he had been chosen by God to play a part in America's great mission.

What we were watching, of course, was a love story, the real thing, starring a woman who didn't mind being "the woman behind the man," not because he was a great man (which he was), but because she truly adored him. He, in turn, was a man who, even when he had forgotten his many glory years, was still trying to pick a rose in a neighbor's garden for his beloved "lady."

"Nancy was Ronald Reagan's emotional caretaker" Laura Schlessinger says, and all Americans owe her so much. Because of the way she cared for him, he could remain optimistic and resolute and effective as he cared for us. Unlike so many wives who are always criticizing, always asking their husbands to change, she loved him just the way the he was. That may be the most important reason he had the confidence and courage to truly change our world.

To suggest that the phrase only harkens back to history ignores the fact that the recitation is personal and in the present tense, not to mention that there is nothing in the text of the Pledge itself to suggest that it refers to any element of American history. To say that the words have lost their meaning or that they are not religious undermines the very reason for saying them.

This leaves the Court with only two intellectually honest options.

If it insists on maintaining its precedents, it should strike down "under God" as an impermissible "endorsement" that "psychologically coerces" religious practices. The decision would create a political firestorm, but the Court has the duty to articulate a clear and consistent interpretation of the Constitution regardless of popular will.

Alternatively, the Court could "fess up" and admit that it has previously misconstrued the meaning of the First Amendment's ban on religious establishments. The Founders meant to prohibit things like the employment and appointment of clergy by the state, limiting public office to members of the established religion, and the licensing and regulation of dissenting religious ministers. Given this background, the Court could admit that its endorsement and coercion tests have long been off the mark. It then could adopt a more historically accurate test that would allow the Pledge.

Whatever it decides, the Court should be honest. Intellectual consistency demands that it either follow its precedents and strike down "under God," or abandon them in order to uphold the Pledge. Anything less would reveal the Court to be exercising arbitrary will, not judgment.

First in Arabic and then in English, Prime Minister Iyad Allawi said in his inaugural address to the Iraqi people last Tuesday that "I would like to record our profound gratitude and appreciation to the U.S.-led international coalition, which has made great sacrifices for the liberation of Iraq." In his own remarks, President Ghazi al-Yawer said: "Before I end my speech, I would like us to remember our martyrs who fell in defense of freedom and honor, as well as our friends who fell in the battle for the liberation of Iraq."

So enamored were Christian conservatives with Reagan that they could not bring themselves to criticize him when he was wrong. The first compromise came when Justice Potter Stewart announced his retirement from the Supreme Court in 1981. Reagan named Sandra Day O'Connor, a mostly unknown judge on the Arizona Court of Appeals, to replace him. That she was being promoted by Barry Goldwater--a staunchly pro-abortion Republican--should have raised a red flag about her leanings on what the "Religious Right" said was its top issue. Reagan worked the phones, calling Christian leaders and assuring them that she was "OK," that he had considered her views and the Christian community would be pleased with her....

After I made this argument in my book "Blinded by Might," many charged that I had given up politics as an avenue for change. I have not. I plan to continue to write about cultural and moral subjects. I plan to vote in the November election. I will pray for those in authority, as Paul has commanded all of us to do. But I am under no illusions. No politician, even ones I like, can save us from ourselves and the consequences of our sin.

Early human trials have commenced for conditions such as heart damage, multiple sclerosis, corneal injury, spinal injury, and Parkinson's disease, among others, generally with very encouraging results. For example, in Lisbon, Portugal, Dr. Carlos Lima has helped restore some muscle and bladder control in paralyzed human patients using their own olfactory tissues. At least one patient regained the ability to stand with the aid of braces. Meanwhile, mice at the end stage of juvenile diabetes were cured using human spleen cells, a feat that no embryonic-stem-cell experiment has come close to matching. And it was just announced that bone-marrow stem cells have successfully regenerated liver tissue. The list goes on and on. Thus, if our goal is to create effective treatments for degenerative conditions in the quickest possible time, pursuing non-embryonic approaches would seem to be our best bet.

What I will remember is a man that changed my life. He was always there for me when I needed him. He had a way of putting everything into perspective, and I believe that his determination and perseverance came from his relationship with the Lord. He played an important role in pointing me to God.

I am secure in the knowledge that he is with his Lord and Savior Jesus Christ in heaven. The greatest gift my father ever gave me was the simple knowledge that I would see him in heaven one day.

Anyone who believes that Ronald Reagan was the kindly dunce that the press often made him out to be needs to read the book Reagan In His Own Hand to comprehend the aptitude and vision of this man.

I will remember Mr. Reagan primarily for his relationship with the evangelical Christian values of our Founders. He respected the presidency....

In the back seat of the limo, he shared his vision for America with me. He told me how and when he had become a follower of Jesus Christ. He confirmed all my hopes that this was the man to save America.