The Prince William-Manassas Family Alliance (See below for latest blog posts.)

Where they stand

We prepare voter guides for each election.  These voter guides show where public officials and candidates representing the citizens of Prince William County and Manassas stand on key issues affecting the family.  This year we are preparing voter guides for Virginia’s House of Delegates elections. See the 2013 ELECTIONS.

Supporting family values in Prince William County, Manassas, and Manassas Park

Welcome to the website of the Prince William and Manassas Family Alliance (PWMFA). We are a grassroots organization of citizens of Prince William County and the independent cities of Manassas and Manassas Park, Virginia, dedicated to supporting and promoting the values inherent in the concept of family. Learn more about us.

Some of our Achievements

  • Led the successful campaign for the Marriage Amendment in 2006, carrying Prince William Co.  and Manassas by a larger margin than statewide.
  • Led the successful fight against off-track betting in Manassas Park in 2004.
  • Distribute Voter Guides to Prince William County churches area during every election season.
  • Successfully promoted internet filtering in public libraries and abstinence-based family life education.

Affect Public Policy – Help Us Protect our Community

Support our efforts! Visit our “Get Involved” section to join the PWMFA or to make an “online” contribution.

Posted in Citizen Responsibilities


crossThe Prince William-Manassas Family Alliance mixes politics with religion, and that is difficult. Both subjects can easily anger people, and putting them together does not calm anyone. Nevertheless, politics involves moral choices, and we base our morality upon our religious beliefs. So we cannot — should not — separate our politics from what we believe about God. Nonetheless, many people say we must. Are they right? Here is an article by a gentleman who thinks otherwise.

Who’s Better on Uranium Mining in Virginia? 

By Austin Ruse (Friday, 01 November 20130

Every year on one particular Sunday, almost 2,000 Evangelical pastors get up in their pulpits and denounce and sometimes even endorse candidates for federal office. Isn’t this illegal? Doesn’t this violate the law that prohibits non-profit organizations from saying anything positive or negative about candidates for federal office? The pastors don’t think so, and they are waving the bloody flag right in the IRS’s face. Come and get us, if you dare.

Some pastors actually tape their sermons and send them to the IRS. The Reverend Barry Lynn, head of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, a group founded by anti-Catholic Protestants, has lodged formal complaints with the IRS. But after several years, the IRS still hasn’t moved. None have lost their tax-exempt status. None. And this has been going on since 2008.

“Pulpit Freedom Sunday” was the idea of Alliance Defending Freedom, the $30-million-a-year non-profit law firm that specializes in life, faith, and family issues. They are 37-0 before the Supreme Court. They are salivating over the prospect of the IRS going after one of these Evangelical churches. They believe they can bust down the façade whereby the IRS has bullied clergy into silence. (continued here)

Remember what Jesus said.

John 15:18-27 English Standard Version (ESV)

The Hatred of the World

18 “If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you. 19 If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you. 20 Remember the word that I said to you: ‘A servant is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you. If they kept my word, they will also keep yours. 21 But all these things they will do to you on account of my name, because they do not know him who sent me. 22 If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have been guilty of sin,[a] but now they have no excuse for their sin. 23 Whoever hates me hates my Father also. 24 If I had not done among them the works that no one else did, they would not be guilty of sin, but now they have seen and hated both me and my Father. 25 But the word that is written in their Law must be fulfilled: ‘They hated me without a cause.’

26 “But when the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness about me. 27 And you also will bear witness, because you have been with me from the beginning.

If as Christians we wish to obey the command of our Lord and carry our faith into the world, then we must risk rejection and fight for the right to do so.

Posted in 2013 Election, Citizen Responsibilities, Voter Guide | Tagged , , ,


vote for americaHere are voter guides prepared by Christian organizations relevant to Virginia’s 2013 election.

Do these voter guides have a Christian bias? I hope so.  :-)

Posted in 2013 Election, Citizen Responsibilities, Voter Guide | Tagged , , ,


Goebbels, German Federal Archive photo

Goebbels, German Federal Archive photo (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Supposedly, Adolf Hitler‘s infamous propagandist, Paul Joseph Goebbels said this.

If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” (from here, for example)

Ironically, an entry on Joseph Goebbels at Wikiquote cites our own government, Publications Relating to Various Aspects of Communism (1946), by United States Congress, House Committee on Un-American Activities, Issues 1-15, p.19, as the originating source. It is true that Hitler coined the term Big Lie. However, Hitler blamed the Jews for telling Big Lies, and Goebbels heaped more blame on the English.

That is of course rather painful for those involved. One should not as a rule reveal one’s secrets, since one does not know if and when one may need them again. The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous. (from here)

Do we see such stubborn devotion to lies in American politics? Perhaps. Consider something else Goebbels’ said.

To attract people, to win over people to that which I have realized as being true, that is called propaganda. In the beginning there is the understanding, this understanding uses propaganda as a tool to find those men, that shall turn understanding into politics. Success is the important thing. Propaganda is not a matter for average minds, but rather a matter for practitioners. It is not supposed to be lovely or theoretically correct. I do not care if I give wonderful, aesthetically elegant speeches, or speak so that women cry. The point of a political speech is to persuade people of what we think right. I speak differently in the provinces than I do in Berlin, and when I speak in Bayreuth, I say different things than I say in the Pharus Hall. That is a matter of practice, not of theory. We do not want to be a movement of a few straw brains, but rather a movement that can conquer the broad masses. Propaganda should be popular, not intellectually pleasing. It is not the task of propaganda to discover intellectual truths. Those are found in other circumstances, I find them when thinking at my desk, but not in the meeting hall.  –Speech by Joseph Goebbels on 9 January 1928 to an audience of party members at the “Hochschule für Politik”, a series of training talks for Nazi party members in Berlin (from here)

When men practice pragmatism without ethical considerations, then only the results matter. Thus, when an unethical person runs for political office, their election campaign quickly degenerates from a battle of ideas to information warfare. They publish propaganda rife with lies and misleading statements. That’s when we have what we more politely label negative campaigning.

What is propaganda? Wikipedia has an article on the subject, but you may find this article, Propaganda, more intriguing. Some thoughtful soul in SMU‘s Physics department apparently decided to do research in a different area. Their article begins with this quote.

Propaganda becomes ineffective the moment we are aware of it. –Joseph Goebbels (1897-1945)

Are you being effectively propagandized? With respect to the upcoming election, have you done any research? Have you checked and weighed the veracity of multiple sources, sources on both sides of the issues that matter to you?

Are you aware of the fact that Adolf Hitler came to power through the electoral process? Even though Hitler lost the presidential election to Paul von Hindenburg, because of his strong showing, Hindenburg appointed him as Chancellor of Germany.

Don’t allow our nation, state, or community to become victims of propaganda. Please check our voter guides (here and here), investigate multiple sources, and urge your family and friends to do the same.

Posted in 2013 Election, Citizen Responsibilities, Voter Guide | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,


English: Jesus entering Jerusalem on a donkey

English: Jesus entering Jerusalem on a donkey (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Here we continue from Part 1 of POLITICS, RELIGION, AND THE EXAMPLE OF CHRIST JESUS. In Part 1, we examined the political system. In Part 2, we will consider how Jesus threatened that system.

When modern Christians reflect upon the example of Christ Jesus, we usually don’t think of Him as a revolutionary. Even though Jesus entered Jerusalem as a king on a donkey, we accept the doctrine that Christ Jesus died upon cross in payment for our sins, that He had not come to establish a new government. We have the advantage of hindsight. Jesus’ executioners did not know that he planned to be sacrifice. What did they believe? In John 11, the Bible tells us of the death and the resurrection of man named Lazarus by Jesus. In the same chapter, the Bible also tells us how the  chief priests and the Pharisees reacted.

John 11:45-53 English Standard Version (ESV)

45 Many of the Jews therefore, who had come with Mary and had seen what he did, believed in him, 46 but some of them went to the Pharisees and told them what Jesus had done. 47 So the chief priests and the Pharisees gathered the council and said, “What are we to do? For this man performs many signs. 48 If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and the Romans will come and take away both our place and our nation.” 49 But one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said to them, “You know nothing at all. 50 Nor do you understand that it is better for you that one man should die for the people, not that the whole nation should perish.” 51 He did not say this of his own accord, but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation, 52 and not for the nation only, but also to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad. 53 So from that day on they made plans to put him to death.

John 7:40-43 describes the divisions Jesus created among the Jews. Some saw Him as the Messiah. Others did not, but it was not just about miracles. John 2:13-22 describes Jesus throwing the moneychangers and the merchants out of the temple. Similarly, Matthew 21:12-17, Mark 11:15-19, and Luke 19:45-48 describe Jesus entering the temple and driving out all those who were buying and selling. In fact, the differences between the timing of John’s Gospel from the others suggest Jesus threw the moneychangers and the merchants out of the temple more than once.  Why did He do that? There are several reasons.

  • The temple was the House of God. Even though the moneychangers and the merchants were helping people to pay their temple taxes and selling the people the animals they needed for their sacrifices, they were still using the temple inappropriately for personal gain (from here).
  • The moneychangers were robbing the people.

    The high priest ordered that only Tyrian shekels would be accepted for the annual half-shekel Temple tax because they contained a higher percentage of silver, so the money changers exchanged unacceptable coins for these shekels.  Of course, they extracted a profit, sometimes much more than the law allowed. (from here)

  • The merchants were robbing the people by charging excessively for animals suitable for sacrifice (from here).

In his Commentary, Matthew Henry supports all three reasons.

What was the consequence? Observe what Luke had to say about the incident as he describes it.

Luke 19:45-48 Good News Translation (GNT)

Jesus Goes to the Temple

45 Then Jesus went into the Temple and began to drive out the merchants, 46 saying to them, “It is written in the Scriptures that God said, ‘My Temple will be a house of prayer.’ But you have turned it into a hideout for thieves!”

47 Every day Jesus taught in the Temple. The chief priests, the teachers of the Law, and the leaders of the people wanted to kill him, 48 but they could not find a way to do it, because all the people kept listening to him, not wanting to miss a single word.

As we noted in Part 1, Rome allowed Judea to exist as a theocracy. Moreover, the Romans and the Sanhedrin worked closely together. Thus, when Jesus challenged the authority of the priests to operate the temple, He threatened the political system. Because those in authority wanted to retain their power, they considered Jesus a political threat. They wanted Him dead.

Because it was the right thing to do — because His Father wanted Him to do it — Jesus did the right thing. When He did so, Jesus challenged the political authorities. Therefore, if we are to follow the example of Jesus, when our rulers do wrong, we must be prepared to correct those who rule over us.

Posted in Citizen Responsibilities, Constitutional Government, culture, history, religion | Tagged , , , ,

2013 ALTERNATIVE VOTER GUIDES: The Washington Post

Note: We do not endorse alternative voter guides. In fact, in some cases we link to voter guides produced organizations with goals contrary to our own.  Nonetheless, we believe you may find considering an alternative voter guide (like the one that follows) helpful in validating our work.

Decision 2013: Virginia general election is The Washington Post‘s voter guide. This web page begins by describing the election.

Three statewide offices and 100 seats in the House of Delegates are up for grabs in Virginia this year. Republican Ken Cuccinelli and Democrat Terry McAuliffe, the two major-party candidates for governor, will lead the ballots on November 5, followed by candidates for lieutenant governor, attorney general and the legislature. The commonwealth’s 40 state Senate seats are not on the ballot this year.

Because The Washington Post is still a major publication, most of the candidates in northern Virginia responded to its questions. Moreover, the The Washington Post asked the candidates just a couple of relatively innocuous questions.  Apparently, the candidates saw replying as an easy opportunity to reach a relatively large audience.  So what’s the downside? The Washington Post has an reputation for supporting Liberal agenda. Here are some examples of criticism and a just plain silly report.

Is The Washington Post biased?  We all have our biases but no one knows how to accurately measure a bias. So ultimately the question of bias is a judgment call.

How is bias relevant to Decision 2013: Virginia general election? That webpage contains links to articles where The Washington Post profiles each race and each candidate. Since each of these profiles is news article written by a journalist who work for The Washington Post, each provides ample opportunity for journalistic bias.

Posted in 2013 Election, Local News, Pro Life, Voter Guide | Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,


English: Illustration in 1883 encyclopaedia of...

English: Illustration in 1883 encyclopaedia of the ancient Jewish Sanhedrin council (from Greek synedrion, synhedrion) Русский: Иллюстрация в старинной энциклопедии заседание Синедриона (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

One of the pages on this website is Citizenship by Pastor Tim Crater of Woodbridge Bible Church. In his article, Pastor Crater provides excellent and soundly biblical reasons why Christians should participate in the political process. Here I would like to do the same by appealing directly to the example of Christ Jesus, our savior.

As the four Gospels report, Jesus died by crucifixion as an enemy of the Roman Empire. Who executed him?

Pontius Pilate ordered Jesus’ execution. Pilate (see here and here too) served as procurator of Judea.

The administration of the fiscus or imperial treasury at Rome and of the finances in the imperial provinces, as well as the collection of fiscal revenues in the senatorial provinces, was in the hands of procurators. They occupied many positions which, on account of their intimate relationship with the person of the monarch, could be safely entrusted only to those whose limited prestige precluded inordinate ambition (Friedlaender, Sittengeschichte Roms 7th edition, Part I, 132-43). Finally, several provinces, where the conditions were unfavorable to the introduction of the ordinary administrative system and Roman public law, were governed as imperial domains by officials of the equestrian class as the emperor’s representatives. In Egypt the title prefect (praefectus) was employed permanently as the appellation of the viceroy, and while the same term may have been used originally to denote the governors of this class generally, when their military outweighed their civil functions, yet the designation procurator became at an early date the term of common usage to designate them (Hirschfeld, 382). (from here)

Essentially, Pilate made certain the people of Israel paid their taxes and otherwise behaved themselves as subjects of Rome. The Sanhedrin (see here and here too) took care of the more day-to-day matters in Judea.

In the time of Christ the Great Sanhedrin at Jerusalem enjoyed a very high measure of independence. It exercised not only civil jurisdiction, according to Jewish law, but also, in some degree, criminal. It had administrative authority and could order arrests by its own officers of justice (Matthew 26:47Mark 14:43Acts 4:3; Acts 5:17; 9:02; compare Sanhedrin 1 5). It was empowered to judge cases which did not involve capital punishment, which latter required the confirmation of the Roman procurator (John 18:31; compare the Jerusalem Sanhedrin 1 1; 7 2 (p. 24); Josephus, Ant, XX, ix, 1). But, as a rule, the procurator arranged his judgment in accordance with the demands of the Sanhedrin. (from here)

Because the Sanhedrin was a religious body, Rome allowed Judea to exist as a theocracy ruled by the Sanhedrin. Thus, when Jesus challenged the Jewish authorities, he simultaneously engaged in both a religious and a political dispute.

Why did the Sanhedrin want Jesus executed? Why did Pilate order Jesus crucified? In Part 2, we will consider what Jesus did that angered the Jewish authorities.

Posted in Citizen Responsibilities, Constitutional Government, culture, history, religion | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , ,