Monumental is directed by Kurt Cameron, most people probably remember him for his role in the 1980′s show “Growing Pains.” He is a rare bird in Hollywood in that he openly preaches his Christian faith.
The movie begins with Cameron speaking of his personal struggle with our current national situation: massive debt, the economy, unemployment, people feeling frustrated about their future. However, he does not bring politics into his message at all and our political parties or leaders are never mentioned. Cameron talks about conversations he has had, how some people quote economic statistics to illustrate how bad things are, while others refer to scriptures and suggest that we are approaching the end of days. Cameron stresses that he does not want people to think that our future is bad or our of our control. Monumental was born out of Cameron’s desire to learn more about our beginnings as a nation in order to figure out how to secure its future. This 90-minute documentary takes viewers on a journey that starts in England.
London is the first of several cities that the film visits. The first topic is a discussion about the Puritans and their struggles to freely practice their faith under Queen Elizabeth and then King James. As the printing press led to distribution of the bible, rulers did not want their subjects to have access or to get any ideas other than those generated by royalty. Soldiers would find underground churches and printing presses and destroy them. A group of people we call Puritans worshiped four years in secret, the danger and stress elf them to the decision to leave England to truly be free. They chose Holland as their destination, but getting there proved to be very difficult. After much struggle, stress and separation 150 families under the religious leadership of John Robinson ended up in Leiden, Holland.
Cameron then travels to Leiden himself to learn more. Puritan life was hard, not being members of trade guilds meant that work was difficult to find. After 12 years the Puritans decided to try their luck in the new world, but in order to make the trip they first had to head back to England. The year was 1620.
Have you heard of the pilgrim ship Speed Well? I had not until this movie. It turns out that due to the number of pilgrims (150 families) two ships were hired to bring the pilgrims to the New World. The Mayflower and the Speed Well left together. but the latter suffered structural damage early and had to return to England bringing this journey to an end for half of the families.
Cameron returned to America to pick up the story at the Mayflower replica in Plymouth, Massachusetts. The trip across the Atlantic was supposed to take three weeks, it ended up taking eight weeks. Conditions were horrible, none of us alive today could probably tolerate the sickness, filth and trauma these people endured in order to be free to pray as they wanted. Keep in mind that they were not the only settlers heading to the New World. Businessmen from many countries were racing to take advantage of the resources available and many were greedy and violent. It is important to note that while business interests from many nations often led to negative consequences, the pilgrims traveled as families with the intent of living peacefully. They were not the violent white oppressors that many people today perceive thanks to inaccurate teaching.
At this point Cameron reflects on the strength and determination of the pilgrims and how they planted the seeds that grew into America. He wonders how the beliefs of the founding fathers compared to the Pilgrim forefathers. Were they the atheist, deist and non-religious men that built our nation with no connection to faith as a guiding principle, as generations have been taught for decades? Or, was there a connection with the Puritan past? Cameron then wishes aloud for a blueprint of how to rebuild our nation. His Plymouth history expert tells him that the answer is just a half-mile away in a public park.
Up until now I will admit that I thought the movie was interesting, but was moving along a little slowly. However, this walk through our historical timeline was a necessary foundation for the new information we were about to receive. I have to say that once the monument was introduced and discussed in great detail I was hooked.
The National Monument to the Forefathers does indeed specify the foundational elements needed to ensure a strong future. It is referred to as a “matrix of liberty,” below are some of the basics.
By far the largest figure is at the top of the statue and represents Faith. Faith is the most important trait expressed by the forefathers. A specific faith is not mentioned, just the concept. She rests on top of four pillars:
- Morality: This statue has no eyes because she is looking internally. She is holding the ten commandments in her left hand and the scroll of revelation in her right (the Bible).
- Law: The principles of God’s law are related into civil law. Civil law id in the left hand, the right hand is extended to deal Mercy and Justice.
- Education: The third pillar is represented by a woman sitting in victory. The word Youth is carved on one side of the education pillar and portrayed as a mother training a child. The other side of this portion shows Wisdom represented by an older man pointing to the bible and the ten commandments, plus a globe to represent how the world works from a biblical perspective.
- Liberty: The fourth pillar is represented by a strong warrior, the result of obeying the previous pillars. His left hand holds broken chains formerly attached to his legs. A lion claw is on his right shoulder, it is part of the lion skin draped over him, he has slain the lion which represents the tyranny of the king. His foot is on the head of the lion to symbolize his victory over tyranny.
This statue is impressive, my summary above does not do this scene justice. But it does show that religion was indeed a key element of the building of our nation. Cameron decides to learn more about why faith is being removed from our society and our schools, so he goes to Texas to meet with David Barton, a constitutional scholar and history expert that owns the largest collection in the country of original documents from our founding fathers. Barton’s comments about the first bibles printed in English in America and the farcical and sourceless college book “The Godless Constitution” are at the same time eye opening and maddening. He backs up his assertions with facts that will stun most people due to an overall lack in our country of accurate historical knowledge thanks to the willful altering of history by our schools and colleges. To prove this point Cameron visits Harvard University to validate some historical facts and shows more intentional destruction of faith in our culture.
The movie ends with a personal message from Cameron delivered in his own back yard. I will share with you a quote from him that is not a spoiler, but is a call to action: “The path to a better future does not begin in the White House. It begins in your house.” Cameron is telling us that we need to act like the pilgrims and the founding fathers by returning to the values that they practiced. Go see the movie while you can, it is a low-budget production with limited advertising dollars. During our 4:50pm Sunday afternoon showing there were 16 people in the audience. Please spread the word, this film deserves plenty of attention.
The Obama administration birth control mandate has truly struck a nerve, and rightly so. Many people are erroneously referring to this issue as a Catholic one. True, Catholics are staunchly pro-life, but so are many other faiths.
- Islam teaches that life begins at conception and is created by God. The unborn child has certain rights such as the right to care, protection and life. Abortion on any grounds is forbidden in the Islamic holy book Al’Quran
- Orthodox Churches forbid abortion as going against the commandment ‘Thou shalt not kill’.
- The Torah or Jewish law forbids the taking of innocent life and stresses that human beings are made in the image of God.
- Hindu scriptures refer to abortion as garha-batta (womb killing) and the Atharva Veda describes abortionists as the greatest of sinners.
If I had more time I could create a comprehensive list. However, we need to think bigger picture. In fact, whether or not you are pro-life or pro-choice is not the issue here. The problem we face here is blatant government overreach and direct defiance of the first amendment. If this administration so brazenly shreds the first amendment, should we sit back and believe that the other amendments are safe?
To put this into terms most people can understand, consider the following analogy. Who loves bacon? Imagine if the government issued a child-focused mandate requiring bacon to be added all school menus. Sounds great, right? We all love bacon. (I really do. In fact I recently won a cooking contest with my bacon toffee recipe). But wait a minute… Muslims don’t eat pork. Can you imagine the uproar from Muslims and the left if such a mandate were issued? I rest my case.
This administration is willingly attacking our religious freedoms. Can you imagine what other targets are on the agenda if Team Obama wins in November? Spread the word.
If you haven’t heard yet, a federal judge has ordered the Medina Valley I.S.D. to prohibit public prayer at the high school graduation ceremony for the Medina High School class of 2011 this weekend.
Castroville, Texas is a charming town a few miles west of San Antonio. Its 3,000 citizens embody everything you would expect from a stereotypical Texas town: a small but strong faith-based community surrounded by farmland and with a Texas Historic Landmark church at the center of town. In fact, the historic St. Louis Church is where I married my wife, and it is the same church where her mother, grandmother and great grandmother were married. The home of Henry Castro, founder of Castroville, is owned by my sister-in-law. There’s also a personal aspect to this story: my niece is graduating this weekend from this very school. This typical example of liberal intolerance has me pretty upset.
Judge Biery’s ruling banned students and other speakers from using religious language in their speeches. Among the banned words or phrases are: “join in prayer,” “bow their heads,” “amen,” and “prayer.”
“The ruling was in response to a lawsuit filed by Christa and Danny Schultz. Their son is among those scheduled to participate in Saturday’s graduation ceremony. The judge declared that the Schultz family and their son would “suffer irreparable harm” if anyone prayed at the ceremony.”
Irreparable harm? Seriously? Can the court please define “harm” your honor? Is sitting through a couple of speeches and perhaps even a benediction prayer that bad? Better yet, is the “harm” caused by doing so more harmful than removing the rights of free speech from the students that have earned the right to speak at the ceremony? Is the negative attention brought upon the school causing pain to far more students than the single student that claims to be suffering?
Chief U.S. District Judge Fred Biery was the ruling judge. I find it interesting that this anti-religion, anti-free speech decision was made by a man who’s undergraduate degree is from Texas Lutheran University and his law degree was earned at Southern Methodist University. Of course, he was appointed to the position in 1994 by Bill Clinton, a man who has his own definition of free speech.
The ruling bans students and other speakers at the event from using religious language including terms such as “join in prayer,” “bow their heads,” or even the words “amen” and “prayer.” Furthermore, he ordered the district to remove the terms “invocation” and “benediction” from the printed graduation program. The judges order states that the terms “shall be replaced with ‘opening remarks’ and ‘closing remarks.”
As reported by the San Antonio Express News:
“Ayesha N. Khan, legal director of Washington, D.C.-based Americans United for Separation of Church and State, said the school has forced prayer on the Schultzes’ sons and other students at other events. She noted Corwin Schultz quit band because he had been forced to stand at events for prayer, which also happens at athletic events.”
Christa and Danny Schultz followed by their son Corwin as they leave the courthouse with a victory. (Photo: Bob Owen/Express-News)
(Note: AUSCS has been run by the highly litigious Rev. Barry Lynn since 1992.)
If I was the judge on this case I would have asked the prosecutors to prove that Corwin was “forced” to stand. I would ask why Corwin chose not to sit. After all, if this is about expressing his atheist beliefs, shouldn’t he own it and remain seated during prayer? Another question I might have asked is whether or not he opens gifts on the morning of every December 25th.
Who filed the suit? Christa and Danny Schultz filed on behalf of their son. They moved from South Dakota to Texas. They claim to be agnostics, but I think they are saying that because it is easier than claiming that they are athiest. If they were truly agnostic, which means they claim neither faith nor disbelief in God, they would not be offended by the time honored tradition of benedictions at graduation ceremonies.
To me this whole situation is about someone making much ado about nothing, and enjoying the attention they are receiving because of it. This family moved from South Dakota to Texas and apparently packed their liberal intolerance with them. Liberals of this ilk are not tolerant, they only want what they want. They couldn’t care less about the majority, or about tradition, or about history. They care nothing about others, they care only about themselves.
What other alternatives did the Schultz family have? If they consider it so difficult to sit through a typical Texas graduation ceremony due to the painful religious content, perhaps they could have asked for a separate ceremony for Corwin and his family that was free of any religious references. But knowing how liberals think, they would have said this wasn’t an option because it would have denied Corwin the chance to walk the stage like the rest of the kids. Of course, if he and his parents had an ounce of tolerance they could have dealt with it.
The could also choose to not attend the ceremony. They could make a stand for their deeply felt beliefs. Why not just skip it? Wait, that might me too hard for them. Hard like remaining seated as a sign of your beliefs while others stand for a prayer. Either own your beliefs at all times, or shut the heck up.
In retrospect, perhaps they could have home schooled, or Corwin could have taken the GED exam and easily set free from the horrible religious torture the poor boy had to endure.
At the end of the day, the Schultz family has tainted one of the biggest days in the young lives of the MVH class of 2012. The beliefs of one family not even from Texas has trumped the beliefs and values of the hundreds of families that have lived here for generations and proudly celebrated their faith and traditions as the constitution allows them to do. If the lawsuit stands, it will be a sad indictment of the state of affairs in America.
UPDATE: VICTORY! Restraining Order Overturned by a three-judge panel on the US 5th Circuit Court Of Appeals.
